Susanti

JURA : JURNAL RISET AKUNTANSI
Vol.1, No.2 Mei 2023

e-ISSN: 2985-7651; p-ISSN: 2985-6264, Hal 11-35
DOI: https://doi.org/10.54066/jura-itb.v1i2
EFFECT OF AUDIT FEE, AUDIT TENURE AND COMPANY

SIZE ON AUDIT QUALITY IN MINING COMPANIES
Yuniar Susanti
Sekolah Tinggi Ilmu Ekonomi KBP
Email :yuniarsusanti26@gmail.com
Annisa Annisa
Sekolah Tingga Ilmu Ekonomi KBP
Email :annisa@akbpstie.ac.id
Alamat : Jl. Khatib Sulaiman No. 61 Lolong Belanti Padang Utara 25136 Sumatera Barat
Abstract , The purpose of this study is to analyze the effect of audit fees, audit tenure and company
size on audit quality in mining companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange in 2018-2021
with a research sample of 44 mining companies that meet the criteria. In analyzing the data using
SPSS 22 software, and the method used was purposive sampling, the data analysis technique used
was logistic regression analysis. Based on the results of logistic regression analysis, it shows that
Audit Fee has no effect on audit quality, Tenure Audit has no effect on Audit Quality, Firm Size
has no effect on Audit Quality.
Keywords:Audit Fee, Tenure Audit, Company Size, Audit Quality
Abstrak , Tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah untuk menganalisis pengaruh audit fee, audit tenure
dan ukuran perusahaan terhadap kualitas audit pada perusahaan pertambangan yang terdaftar di
Bursa Efek Indonesia tahun 2018-2021 dengan sampel penelitian sebanyak 44 perusahaan
pertambangan yang memenuhi kriteria. Dalam menganalisis data menggunakan software SPSS
22, dan metode yang digunakan adalah purposive sampling, teknik analisis data yang digunakan
adalah analisis regresi logistik. Berdasarkan hasil analisis regresi logistik menunjukkan bahwa
Audit Fee tidak berpengaruh terhadap kualitas audit, Tenure Audit tidak berpengaruh terhadap
Kualitas Audit, Firm Size tidak berpengaruh terhadap Kualitas Audit.
Kata Kunci: Audit Fee, Tenure Audit, Ukuran Perusahaan, Kualitas Audit
Received April 30, 2023; Revised Mei 30, 2023; Accepted Juni 13, 2023
Yuniar Susanti, yuniarsusanti26@gmail.com
e-ISSN: 2985-7651; p-ISSN: 2985-6264, Hal 11-35
INTRODUCTION
Quality information can develop in improving audit quality. The prospect of an auditor
discovering and notifying conventionally a fraud in the accounting system for a client. A quality
audit can be carried out by an autonomous and experienced auditor (Salsabila 2018).
In the service inspection, the auditor is distributed to verify and test the financial statements
presented by the company. An audit of the financial statements has been planned for fair value
based on correct accounting principles in Indonesia. Financial reports investigated by public
accountants are expected to be judged that will not be influenced by other parties and do not
contain information that is concealed so that it can be trusted by clients (Purnomo and Aulia 2019).
Audit quality is the embodiment of an audit carried out according to standards so that it is
able to say and complain if an error occurs which is carried out to the user. The audit determines
in the standards agreed with the implementation and objectives achieved in carrying out the
procedures involved (Rinanda and Nurbaiti 2018).
With a case example, the Supreme Audit Agency forwarded an unqualified opinion on the
financial statements of the Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources for 2021. In this case, the
State Financial Audit IV named Haerul Saleh provided two audit reports by the Ministry of Energy
and Mineral Resources named Arifin Tasrif. The financial report as a result of this inspection in
2021 explains the portion of the transaction budget in upstream oil and gas activities.
Based on the report on the inspection results of the Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources
in 2021, said the conflicts involved in Non-Tax State Revenue which stopped for the period
December 31, 2021 amounted to IDR 84,399 M, Non-Tax State Revenue obtained from mine sales
and royalties. In calculating and depositing Non-Tax State Revenue, it determines two methods,
namely the first and second versions of the electronic application of Non-Tax State Revenue. The
first version states that transactions that are reported as underpaid are not prioritized for
verification, while the second version says that the verification process for transactions is only
emphasized for transactions that are reported to have overpaid and paid off values.
On non-tax receivables at the Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources for the period ending
December 31, 2021 amounting to IDR 24,398 B. In transactions for sales of coal and minerals for
2018 - 2020 which have been issued in a billing code. However, a billing letter has not yet been
issued to the obligator in the amount of IDR 487 billion and $ 29 million and it is stated that the
billing code that failed to issue was IDR 46 billion and $ 12 million. This causes transactions to
not be reported as accounts receivable.
According to an audit of the financial reports for the Special Transaction Budget for Upstream
Oil and Gas Activities in 2021, the Financial Audit Agency stated that there were 10,509 state-
owned agency line units valued at IDR 6.6 billion and $ 46 billion that were not found. million
with the recording of the State Owned Agency not in accordance with the actual conditions of $
3.3 million.
In this case, the fundamental follow-up on the considerations of the Financial Audit Board is
made in article 20 of Law Number 15 of 2004 that officials must follow up on the reference to the
audit results report. Officials must forward answers and descriptions to the Financial Audit Board
regarding follow-up on the consideration of the audit results report. The answer to the explanation
given to the Financial Audit Board no later than 60 days after the audit report is received. The
Financial Audit Board wants the active role of the Inspectorate General of the Ministry of Energy
and Mineral Resources for the follow-up implementation system contained in accordance with its
powers by using an information system (Hidayat 2022).
Audit fees is income provided by the client to the auditor as a fee for services in conducting
an audit. The amount of compensation that will be given by the client to the auditor depends on
the ability and expertise possessed by the auditor and the rates determined by the auditor (Kurniati,
Yuliusman, and Yustien 2021).
Based on previous research related to audit fees according to(Salsabila 2018)that the audit fee
has a positive effect on audit quality. It is explained that an auditor will work optimally in receiving
high audit fees.(Purnomo and Aulia 2019)explained that audit fees affect audit quality. This proves
that the greater the audit fee that is paid by the company, the better one's profession will be. (Siregar
and Agustini 2020)states that audit fees have no effect on audit quality. This is because the audit
fee cannot assess whether an audit quality is good or not.(Rinanda and Nurbaiti 2018)explains that
the audit fee has no effect on audit quality. The amount of the fee received by the auditor is not
13 JURA - Volume.1, No.2 MEI 2023

e-ISSN: 2985-7651; p-ISSN: 2985-6264, Hal 11-35
affected by audit quality. Based on previous research regarding audit fees, researchers state that
audit fees have a positive effect on auditor performance.Tenure audits is an activity for a long time
causing excessive closeness between the client and the auditor so that the auditor's independence
will decrease. A short engagement period will make the fraud auditor to understand the client's
environment so that he is less able to assess information better (Kurniati et al. 2021).
According to previous research related to tenure audits (Harianja and Sudjiman 2022) that
tenure audit has a significant positive effect on audit quality. This is done to reduce incidents that
are closely related between the auditor and the client.(Andriani et al. 2020)states that tenure audits
have a significant effect on audit quality. audit tenure is the audit engagement period of a public
accounting firm and the client involved in audit services that have been agreed
beforehand.(Purnomo and Aulia 2019)states that tenure audits have an effect on audit quality. This
proves that the longer the audit engagement period can allow an auditor.(Siregar and Agustini
2020)explained that the tenure audit has no effect on audit quality. This is because the longer the
engagement period, the clearer the quality of the audit will be. Based on the opinion on tenure
audit above, the researcher argues that tenure audit has a positive influence on audit quality.
Company size is a value that shows the size of a company. In this case, there are three
categories, namely large companies, medium companies and small companies (Darya and
Puspitasari 2017).
According to previous research,(Harianja and Sudjiman 2022) said that firm size is
significantly positive on audit quality. It is stated that companies that have a large scale are thought
to have a lot of experience and understanding in presenting financial statements.(Andriani et al.
2020)states that company size has no significant effect on audit quality. It can be seen that the
company has good management in fighting for the size of the company.(Trisnawati and Nurbaiti
2019)Explains that company size has a positive effect on audit quality. This shows the size of a
company.(Hasanah and Putri 2018)states that firm size has no significant effect on audit quality.
This is because the size of the total assets held by the company does not affect audit quality. The
researcher's view of company size above the researcher describes that company size has a positive
effect on audit quality.
THEORITICAL REVIEW
Audit Fees
Audit fees is the amount of member fees can vary such as assignment risk, level of expertise,
consulting services, related fee structures and professional monitoring. Members are not justified
in having consumers who propose fees that can undermine the image of the profession. In fulfilling
the offer regarding the specified services, the executor can submit the amount of fee for
professional services seen in accordance with SPAP section 240. Determination of fees for fees
for audit services, explained by the Indonesian Institute of Certified Public Accountants issued a
decision letter regarding Management Regulation Number 2 of 2016 concerning Policy for
Determining fees for services that are contains: "Tariffs of compensation that must realize the
salary given to members and staff by looking at the conditions and skills". In this case, the rates
are calculated on the salaries of those who have expertise and competence, expenses for staff
training and advancement and research, number of hours over a period to total profit margins.
Audit fees are proffered to professional fees or professional services contained in the notes to the
financial statements recorded in the operating expense account or general and administrative
expenses of financial sector companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange (Salsabila 2018).
Fees audit scarried out by a public accountant who has been registered with the Capital
Market and Financial Institution Supervisory Agency in knowing the financial position of the
mutual funds to be issued. The amount of this audit fee is influenced by the audit market price in
Indonesia (Manurung and Rizky 2009).
Audit Fees calculated by considering the factors that affect the implementation of the audit
(Murwanto, Budiarso, and Ramdhana 2005). These factors are : audit objectives, audit objectives,
constraints encountered, the distance to the location of the audit object, the number of auditor team
personnel

e-ISSN: 2985-7651; p-ISSN: 2985-6264, Hal 11-35
Tenure audits
Audits tenure is about the length of time the engagement between the auditor and the client
is estimated by the number of years. Tenure audits are involved with preparedness for auditor
engagement with clients. If the quality of the auditor is getting better then the engagement will be
continued. Tenure audits can create an economic boost for auditors as a result of being less
independent. Independence is a fair attitude and soul that an auditor has. An auditor cannot be
controlled by another party in conducting an audit, the auditor makes audit decisions based on
investigations and prepares audit reports in accordance with professional rules and standards
(Sayuti and Anissa 2023) The period of engagement between the auditor and the client is measured
by calculating the number of years the public accounting firm audits the company's financial
statements continuously. The measurement is the number of years in which the public accounting
firm has conducted an audit engagement period for the auditee (Hasanah and Putri 2018).
The audit engagement period is the agreement of two parties to make a contract. During the
audit engagement, the client prioritizes auditing services by executing a letter of agreement with
the auditor. In the stated contract, the client provides audit work on financial statements for the
auditor and carries out the audit work listed based on his professional competence. Accepted or
not audit engagements go through a process consisting of testing the integrity of management,
determining risky situations, determining competence in conducting audits, checking autonomy,
demonstrating ability to use skills and drafting audit engagement letters (Koerniawan 2021).
In conducting an audit engagement, the auditor needs to obtain knowledge about the client's
business, this is used to identify and capture events, business transactions so that in the auditor's
judgment it may have an important effect on the audit engagement and financial reporting (Sari,
Hastuti, and Ratnawati 2020).
Company Size
Company size is a value that determines the size of the company. In this case, a proxy is used
to represent company size in the form of number of employees, total net sales, total assets and
market capitalization. Large company sizes have good internal control. Company size is assessed
by the natural log of the company's total assets (Trisnawati and Nurbaiti 2019). Company size is a
scale for determining the size of a corporate entity which can be expressed through total assets,
total revenue, total sales in one year, stock market value and so on which explains the company's
wealth (Annisa and Sartika 2021).
Measurement means as a method of giving identity to approved instructions to convey the
direction being measured. Measurement is an activity of designating nominal objects in a
structured manner. Companies in organizations are formed by companies whose activities fulfill
the application and circulation of benefits in meeting the many needs of the company. The size of
the company in determining the average sales results in the current period up to several years to
come. Sales results minus costs spent in each month of the current year and the coming year. If the
number of sales is greater than the costs incurred, the income will be greater and if the sales results
are less than the costs incurred, the company will experience a loss. Thus, every company must try
to make the work carried out profitable (Hasanah and Putri 2018).
The size of a company can be measured by the total assets, income or capital of the company.
One of the benchmarks that shows the size of the company is the size of the company's assets.
Companies with high total assets indicate that the company has reached the maturity stage,
currently the company's cash flow is positive and the prospects are good in a relatively stable and
more profitable period than companies with low total assets. Measurement of company size in
general is usually size prorated to total assets (Sudarno et al. 2022).

e-ISSN: 2985-7651; p-ISSN: 2985-6264, Hal 11-35
Audit Quality
Quality is a skill that must really be considered by a professional public accountant. The
audit carried out by the auditor determines the quality of auditing standards met. Auditing
standards contain field work standards, reporting standards and general standards. Audit quality is
the prospect of an auditor who obtains and discloses to users of financial statements. Audit quality
is proxied by the size of the Public Accounting Firm. Quality describes the auditor's ability to act
independently and carry out audits professionally, because the Big-4 Public Accounting Firms are
less economically dependent on clients. Large Public Accounting Firms also tend not to
compromise on audit quality, so they can provide better audit quality than small, non-Big-4 Public
Accounting Firms.
The term "audit quality" has various meanings. Users of financial statements say that audit
quality occurs in auditors who provide assurance that there is no material misstatement or fraud in
the audited financial statements. The auditor himself sees that audit quality occurs when working
according to predetermined professional standards, can assess risks with the aim of reducing
litigation risk, can minimize auditee dissatisfaction and prevent the destruction of auditor quality
(Umar 2021).
Audit quality describes how well the audit detects and reports material misstatements in
financial statements, reducing information asymmetry between management and shareholders
because it will shape the interests of shareholders. Good audit quality is generally associated with
high quality financial statement information, considering that financial statements audited by high-
quality auditors can reduce the possibility of containing material misstatements (Feriyanto and
Ananda 2015).
RESEARCH METHODS
Data and Samples
The author uses a type of research that is quantitative. Quantitative methods are used for data
collection by means of research, separation of data in the form of quantitative by realizing and
testing predetermined hypotheses. This study uses the dependent variables, namely audit fees,
audit tenure and company size as well as independent variables, namely audit fees, audit tenure
and firm size.
This study uses panel data with nominal scale measurements using dummy variables. Source
of data in this research is secondary data. In using secondary data taken through intermediaries,
namely books and financial reports published on the Indonesian Stock Exchange via
http://www.idx.co.id.
The population that was carried out in the population sorting in the study was mining
companies in 2018-2021 which were listed on the Indonesian Stock Exchange as many as 46
companies. The sampling technique used is a purposive sampling technique with the selection of
company samples that can be described as follows:
Table 1 Description of the Research Sample Selection Stage

No Sample Selection Criteria Company Totals
1. Mining companies listed on the Indonesian stock 46
exchange in 2018-2021.
2. Companies that do not complete and publish full (4)
annual financial reports for 2018-2021.
3. Companies that have been delisted on the (4)
Indonesian stock exchange in 2018-2021.
4. Companies that present financial reports in dollars (22)
in 2018-2021.
5. Companies that do not include professional fees (5)
accounts in their annual financial reports for 2018-
2021.
Total Sample 11
Number of Years of Research 4
Observation Data (11×4) 44
Variable Operational Definition

The operational definition of the research variable is in the form of something that has been
determined by the researcher to be understood so that the researcher is able to review more deeply
to draw conclusions from the study. The measurements are as follows:

e-ISSN: 2985-7651; p-ISSN: 2985-6264, Hal 11-35
Table 2 Variables and their Measurements

Variable Understanding Measurement Source
Audit Fees Audit feesis the Using the natural logarithm of the (Salsabila 2018)
(X1) amount of member data on professional fees accounts
fees can vary such as
assignment risk,
level of expertise,
consulting services,
related fee structures
and professional
monitoring.
Tenure tenure auditsis about The number of years at the same (Hasanah and
audits the length of time the public accounting firm has carried Putri 2018)
(X2) engagement between out an audit engagement with the
the auditor and the auditee. The first year of the
client is estimated by engagement starts with number 1
the number of years. and is added to number 1 in the
following year.
Company Company size is a Size = Log Natural total Assets (Trisnawati and
Size value that Nurbaiti 2019)
(X3) determines the size
of the company.
Audit Audit quality is a Using a dummy variable that is (Salsabila 2018)
Quality (Y) skill that must really measured with a value of 1 for
be considered by a companies audited by Big-4 Public
professional public Accounting Firms and a value of 0
accountant for non-Big-4 Public Accounting
Firms.
Information:
The Big-4 Public Accounting Firm
consists of:
Variable Understanding Measurement Source

a. Deloitte
b. PwC
c. Ey
d. KPMG
Data Analysis Technique

Descriptive Statistics Test
Descriptive statistics provide an overview or description of a data seen from the average
value (mean), standard deviation, variance, maximum, minimum, sum, range, kurtosis and
skewness (distribution skewedness)(Ghozali 2016).
Logistic Regression Test
The analytical tool used in this study is logistic regression because the assessment of the
dependent variable uses a dummy variable with a value of (1) for high audit quality and (0) for
low audit quality. Logistic Regression is actually similar to discriminant analysis, namely we want
to test whether the probability of occurrence of the dependent variable can be predicted with the
independent variable(Ghozali 2016).
The logistic regression model used in this study is as follows:(Hasanah and Putri 2018).
1 = α+1FA+2AT+3UP+€it
Information :
1 = Audit Quality
α = Constant
FE = Audit Fees
AT = Tenure audits
UP = Firm Size
123 = The coefficient of each variable
€ = company error in year i

e-ISSN: 2985-7651; p-ISSN: 2985-6264, Hal 11-35
Assessing Model Fit

In the stage of assessing Overall Model Fit, the hypothesis is as follows:
H0 : The hypothesized model is fit with the data.
Ha : The hypothesized model does not fit the data
Statistics performed based on the likelihood function. The likelihood L of the model is the
probability that the hypothesized model describes the input data. To test the null and alternative
hypotheses, L is transformed into -2Log L. The test is carried out by comparing the initial -2LL -
2LL values in the next step. If the value of -2LL block number = 0 is greater than the value of -
2LL block number = 1. Then the decrease (-2LogL) indicates that the regression model is better
Testing Determination
Nagelkerke R Squareis a modification of the Cox and Snell coefficient to ensure that its value
varies from 0 (zero) to 1 (one). It is used by dividing the value of Cox and Snell's R2 by the
maximum value. The value of Nagelkerke's R2 can be interpreted like the value of R2 in multiple
regression.
Testing the Feasibility of the Regression Model
Testing the feasibility of the logistic regression model was assessed using Hosmer and
Lemeshow's Goodness of Fit Test as measured by the Chi-Square value. The hypothesis for
assessing the feasibility of the regression model is:
H0 : There is no difference between the model and the data
Ha : There is a difference between the model and the data
The basis for decision making is:
a) If probability > 0.05 H0 is accepted, Ha is rejected.
b) If probability < 0.05 H0 is rejected, Ha is accepted
If the Statistics Hosmer and Lemeshow's Goodness-of-fit value is greater than 0.05, then the
null hypothesis cannot be rejected and it means that the model is able to predict the observed value
or it can be said that the model can be accepted because it matches the observation data (Ghozali
2016).
Classification Matrix
The classification matrix shows the predictive power of the regression model to predict the
possibility of a company making decisions regarding audit quality using ROA (Return On Assets)
with a value of (1) for high quality ROA and (0) for low quality ROA. The 2 X 2 classification
table calculates the correct (correct) and incorrect (incorrect) estimated values. In a perfect model,
all cases will be on the diagonal with 100% forecasting accuracy. If the logistic model has
homoscedasticity, then the correct percentage will be the same for both rows (Ghozali 2016).
Hypothesis Testing
Persian Test
The t statistical test basically shows how far the influence of one independent variable
individually explains the variation of the dependent variable (Ghozali 2016). How to do the t test
is as follows:
a. Quick look: if the number of degrees of freedom (df) is 20 or more, and the degree
of confidence is 5%, then Ho which states bi = 0 can be rejected if the value of t is
greater than 2 (in absolute value). In other words we accept the alternative
hypothesis, which states that an independent variable individually affects the
independent variable.
b. Comparing the value of the t statistic with the critical point according to the table. If
the calculated t statistical value is higher than the t table value, we accept the
alternative hypothesis which states that an independent variable individually affects
the independent variable.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Data Analysis Technique Testing
Descriptive Analysis
This study aims to determine or test between Audit Fee, Audit Tenure, Company Size on
Audit Quality. Sources of data that were directly retrieved through intermediaries, namely
financial reports published on the Indonesia Stock Exchange for mining companies that were
accessed through http://www.idx.co.id in the 2018-2021 period there were 11 companies. The total
data is 44 consisting of the dependent variable Audit Quality and the independent variables Audit
Fee, Audit Tenure and Company Size.

e-ISSN: 2985-7651; p-ISSN: 2985-6264, Hal 11-35
Descriptive Statistics
This descriptive statistic aims to convey a reference to the data in the research variables
used in the study. Descriptive analysis is used to explain about the summary of the research sample
such as maximum, minimum, mean and standard deviation. Based on statistical tests that have
been carried out by researchers, data processing is obtained descriptively in the following table:
Table 3 Descriptive Statistics
Information N Minimum Maximum Means std. Deviation
Audit Quality 44 0.00 1.00 0.0909 0.29080
Audit Fees 44 18.51 25,46 22.0322 1.50530
Tenure audits 44 1.00 4.00 2.2273 1.09680
Company Size 44 24.04 30,64 27.6100 1.52572
Source: Results of Data Processing with SPSS 22, (2023)
Based on the descriptive statistical test table above, it shows that each dependent variable,
namely Audit Quality, has a minimum value of 0.00 with 40 samples, a maximum value of 1.00
with 4 samples, a mean value of 0.0909. This average is smaller than the standard deviation of
0.29080.
The Audit Fee variable has a minimum value of 18.51, a maximum value of 25.46, a mean
value of 22.0322. This average is greater than the standard deviation of 1.50530. For the Audit
Tenure variable, it has a minimum value of 1.00, a maximum value of 4.00, a mean value of
2.2273. This average is greater than the standard deviation of 1.09680. Then, the variable Firm
Size has a minimum value of 24.02, a maximum value of 30.64, a mean value of 27.6100. the
average is greater than the standard deviation of 1.52572.
Descriptive statistics on the Tenure Audit variable are explained using categorical
frequency because it is a variable that is measured using an interval scale and Audit Quality is
described with categorical frequency because it is a variable that is measured using a dummy
variable.
Table 4 Frequency Test Results for Tenure Audit Categories
frequency percent
One Year Client
Engagement Period and 15 34,1
Cap
Two Years of
Engagement Client and 11 25
Cap
Valid Three Years of
Engagement Client and 11 25
Cap
Four Years of
Engagement Client and 7 15,9
Cap
Total 44 100
Based on the table above, it can be seen that the Audit Tenure variable is an interval scale
whose indicator counts the number of years of engagement for clients and KAPs in auditing
companies sequentially, where the tenure starts in 2018 and is traced to the year the company
moved to another KAP until 2019. Variables it has valid because the data can be processed. The
number of samples with a 1-year tenure is 15 companies or 34.1%, a sample with a 2-year tenure
is 11 companies or 25%, a sample with a 3-year tenure is 11 companies or 25%, a sample with a
4-year tenure is 7 companies or 15, 9% of the total sample.

e-ISSN: 2985-7651; p-ISSN: 2985-6264, Hal 11-35
Table 5 Frequency Test Results for Audit Quality Categories

frequency percent
Kap Non Big-4 40 90.9

Valid Big-4 hood 4 9,1
Total 44 100
Based on the table above, it can be seen that the dependent variable is Audit Quality, which
means the nominal scale measured by Big-4 or non-Big-4 KAP indicators in auditing the
company's annual financial statements. The number of samples audited by Big-4 KAPs was 40
companies or 90.9% while those audited by non-Big-4 KAPs were 4 companies or 9.1% of the
total sample.
Logistic Regression Analysis
Assessing Model Fit
Table 6 Iteration History (Output Beginning Block Number 0)
Iterations -2 Log Likelihoods Coefficients
Constant
Step 0 1 28,745 -1,636
2 26,880 -2.165
3 26,808 -2.295
4 26,808 -2,303
5 26,808 -2,303
Table 7 Iteration History (Output Beginning Block Number 1)

Iterations -2 Log Coefficients
Likelihoods
Constant X1 X2 X3
Step 1 1 18,524 -14,138 0.500 0.016 0.052
2 8,300 -29,036 1,099 -0.078 0.083
3 3,753 -44,712 1,726 -0.243 0.116
4 1,664 -62,336 2,417 -0.428 0.164
5 0.702 -82,716 3,196 -0.609 -0.230
6 0.281 -105,562 4,060 -0.780 -0.309
7 0.108 -129,972 4,988 -0.945 -0.388
8 0.041 -155,192 5,964 -1,110 0.455
9 0.015 -180,821 6,977 -1.279 0.504
10 0.006 -206,673 8,023 -1.453 0.535
11 0.002 -232,659 9,099 -1,632 0.546
12 0.001 -258,732 10,200 -1,817 0.540
13 0.000 -284,864 11.325 -2.007 0.517
14 0.000 -311,035 12,468 -2.199 0.480
15 0.000 -337,232 13,628 -2.395 0.431
16 0.000 -363,447 14,800 -2,592 0.372
17 0.000 -389,673 15,984 -2,790 0.305
18 0.000 -415,905 17.175 -2,988 0.230
19 0.000 -442,141 18,374 -3.186 0.151
20 0.000 -468,380 19,578 -3,383 0.067
Table 7 provides information that the value of -2 Log likelihood (Block Number 0) which
only includes constants has a value of (26.808) while Table 8 shows that the final -2 Log likelihood
value (Block number 1) by including constants and independent variables has a value of (0.000).
This means that there is a decrease in value which makes -2 Log Likelihood Block Number 0 > -
2 Log Likelihood Block Number 1 = 1, so it can be concluded that the regression model is good
and fits the data.

e-ISSN: 2985-7651; p-ISSN: 2985-6264, Hal 11-35
Coefficient of Determination (Nagelkerke R.Square)

Table 8 Model Summary
Step -2 Log Likelihoods Cox & Snell R Negelkerke R Square
Square
1 0.000a 0.456 1,000
Based on the table it can be seen that the Cox & Snell R Square is 0.456 and the Nagelkerke
R Square value is 1.000. So in this case Negelkerke R Square is bigger than Cox & Snell R Square
which means that the combination of the independent variables used audit fees, audit tenure and
firm size is only able to influence the dependent variable by 100%.
Testing the Feasibility of the Regression Model

Table 9 Hosmer and Lemeshow Test
Step Chi-square Df Sig
0.000 8 1,000
The table above shows that the Chi-Square value in this test is 0.000 and the significant
value is 1.000 which is greater than 0.05, so that H0 is accepted and Ha is rejected. It can be
concluded that there is no difference between the model and the data. This means that the model
is able to predict the value of observation or it can be said that the model is acceptable because it
fits the data.
Classification Matrix
Table 10 Classification Table

predicted
Audit Quality
Observed
Kap Non Big- Percent
Big-4 hood
4 Correct
Audit Kap Non Big-4 40 0 100
Step 1 Quality Big-4 hood 0 4 100
Overall Percentage 100

The table above results from the classification table explaining zero Cap Non Big-4 and
one as Cap Big-4. The number of audit quality samples for Kap Non Big-4 is 40 samples while
the audit quality for Kap Big-4 is 4 samples. The number of samples is 44 samples. So that the
overall percentage value before the independent variable is included in the model is 4/44 = 100%,
which means that the accuracy of this research model is 100%.
Hypothesis testing
T test
Table 11 a Variables In The Equation
B SE Wald Df Sig. Exp(B)
X1 19,578 8586,147 0.000 1 0.998 318018411,144
Step X2 -3,383 5395,939 0.000 1 0.999 0.034
1a X3 0.067 8861,856 0.000 1 1,000 1,069
Constant -468,380 113713,905 0.000 1 0.997 0.000

e-ISSN: 2985-7651; p-ISSN: 2985-6264, Hal 11-35
Based on the results of the regression test, the following equation is obtained:
Information:
1= -468.380 + 19.578 FE – 3.383 AT + 0.067 UP +€it
1 = Audit Quality
α = Constant
FE = Audit Fees
AT = Tenure audits
UP = Firm Size
€ = Company error in year i
Description of the regression equation:
1. The constant value of -468,380 indicates that if the independent variables in the regression,
namely Audit Fee, Audit Tenure and Company Size, are zero, then the Audit Quality of
mining companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange in 2018-2021 is -468,380 units.
This shows that if there are no Audit Fees, Audit Tenure and Company Size, mining
companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange in 2018-2021 will still get an Audit
Quality of -384,412.
2. Audit Fee regression coefficient (X1) of19,578 is positive indicating that every time there
is an increase of one unit in the Audit Fee assuming other variables are zero, then the audit
quality of mining companies will increase by 19,578 units. This shows that when the audit
fee increases, the audit quality increases.
3. Tenure Audit regression coefficient (X2) of– 3.383 with a negative sign indicating that
every time there is an increase by one unit of Audit Tenure assuming the other variables
are zero, then the audit quality of mining companies will decrease by – 3.383 units. This
shows that when audit tenure increases, audit quality decreases.
4. The regression coefficient of Firm Size (X3) is0.067 is positive, indicating that every time
there is an increase of one unit in Company Size with other assumptions being zero, then
the audit quality of mining companies will increase by 0.067 units. This shows that when
company size increases, audit quality decreases.
DISCUSSION
a) Effect of Audit Fee on Audit Quality
Based on the results of the research, it can be concluded that the Audit Fee has no effect on
the audit quality of mining companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange during the 2018-
2021 period. This is because the Audit Fee cannot judge whether an audit quality is good or bad.
Audit quality can be felt from the attitude of an auditor who has a professional, independent and
competent attitude.
The results of this study are in accordance with the research put forward(Rinanda and
Nurbaiti 2018),(Siregar and Agustini 2020)And(Kurniati et al. 2021)who said that Fee Audit has
no effect on Audit Quality. This explains that the amount of fee obtained by the auditor cannot
affect the quality of the auditor, because the auditor works based on the capabilities and standards
that have been set.
Based on these results, it can be interpreted that the Audit Fee is too large, this can affect
the independence of an auditor and cause the auditor to be an acknowledgment of violations
produced by the company.
b) Effect of Tenure Audit on Audit Quality
Based on these results, it can be concluded that the Tenure Audit has no influence on the
audit quality of mining companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange during the 2018-2021
period. This happens because the longer the engagement period will lead to lower audit quality.
The longer the engagement period, the closer the relationship between the auditor and the client,
so that the auditor's autonomy decreases.
The results of this study support the results of research conducted by(Rahmi et al.
2019),(Cahyati et al. 2021)And(Fauziyyah and Praptiningsih 2020)which states that Audit Tenure
has no influence on audit quality. Because the auditor will experience obstacles in understanding
the complex customer business in a short time.
Based on these results, it can be interpreted that Audit Tenure is seen in the tenure of the
auditor working at the Public Accounting Firm in providing audit services to its customers. audits.

e-ISSN: 2985-7651; p-ISSN: 2985-6264, Hal 11-35
c) The Effect of Company Size on Audit Quality

Based on the results of the research that has been described, company size has no effect on
audit quality in mining companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange during the 2018-2021
period. This is a company that has good management in managing and internal control and does
not make company size one of the elements that adversely affects audit quality.
The results of this study support the results of research conducted by(Rahmi et al.
2019),(Siregar and Agustini 2020)And(Rinanda and Nurbaiti 2018)which states that company size
has no effect on audit quality. This is because if the size of the company which shows the size of
the total assets owned by the company has no impact on audit quality.
Based on these results, it can be concluded that audit quality can be seen in small companies
that have a supervisory system that is not strong and does not pay enough attention to its
shareholders. However, for large companies, expert and competent management is an important
factor in creating good audit quality.
CONCLUSION
Based on the results of the analysis and discussion of research regarding the effect of audit
fees, audit tenure and company size on audit quality in mining companies, the following
conclusions can be drawn:
1. Audit Fees does not affect audit quality of mining companies listed on the Indonesia Stock
Exchange during the 2018-2021 period. This is because the Audit Fee cannot judge
whether an audit quality is good or bad. Audit quality can be felt from the attitude of an
auditor who has a professional, independent and competent attitude.
2. Tenure Audits have no effect on Audit Quality in mining companies listed on the Indonesia
Stock Exchange during the 2018-2021 period. This happens because the longer the
engagement period will lead to lower audit quality. The longer the engagement period, the
closer the relationship between the auditor and the client, so that the auditor's autonomy
decreases.
3. Company Size has no effect on Audit Quality in mining companies listed on the Indonesia
Stock Exchange during the 2018-2021 period. This is a company that has good
management in managing and internal control and does not make company size one of the
elements that adversely affects audit quality.
SUGGESTION
This research is expected to add references regarding material considerations for future
researchers who will carry out research in the future. The author suggests expanding the sample
coverage, adding research observation periods and adding relevant variables because auditor
performance is still heavily influenced by other variables.
THANK-YOU NOTE
Research can be carried out properly thanks to the help of various parties and colleagues from the
STIE KBP Padang campus who have participated in helping so that we can publish this article and
be useful for readers.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Andriani, Fitri, Rindi Meilani, Chandra Evendi Pardede, and Wenny Anggeresia Ginting. 2020.
“Pengaruh Audit Tenure, Ukuran KAP, Ukuran Perusahaan Klien Terhadap Kualitas Audit
Perusahaan Di Bursa Efek Indonesia.” Journal of Economic, Bussines and Accounting
(COSTING) 4(1):117–26. doi: 10.31539/costing.v4i1.1432.
Annisa, and Sisi Sartika. 2021. “Pengaruh Ukuran Perusahaan, Pro Fitabilitas Dan Opini Audit
Terhadap Audit Delay Pada Sektor Pertambangan Dan Mineral Di BEI 2013-2019.” Jurnal
Ilmiah Pendidikan Scholastic 5(1):106–15. doi: 10.36057/jips.v5i1.458.
Cahyati, Wulan Nada, Eko Hariyanto, Edi Joko Setyadi, and Nur Isna Inayati. 2021. “Pengaruh
Rotasi Audit, Audit Tenure, Fee Audit, Dan Komite Audit Terhadap Kualitas Audit (Studi
Pada Perusahaan Food And Beverage Yang Terdaftar Di Bursa Efek Indonesia Tahun 2014-
2019).” Ratio : Reviu Akuntansi Kontemporer Indonesia 2(1):51–62. doi:
10.30595/ratio.v2i1.10372.
Darya, Komar, and Swasti Ayu Puspitasari. 2017. “Reputasi KAP, Audit Tenure, Ukuran
Perusahaan Klien Dan Kualitas Audit(Studi Pada Perusahaan LQ 45 Indonesia).” Jurnal
Keuangan Dan Perbankan 13:97–109.
Fauziyyah, Zahra Ismi, and Praptiningsih. 2020. “Pengaruh Audit Fee, Audit Tenure Dan Rotasi
Audit Terhadap Kualitas Audit.” Jurnal Monex 9(1):1–17.
Feriyanto, O., and Febryandhie Ananda. 2015. Accounting Grand Theory Kompilasi Teori
Akuntansi. Thabi’ Pre. edited by T. Press. Bandung: Thabi’ Press.
Ghozali, H. Imam. 2016. Aplikasi Analisis Multivariete Dengan Program IBM SPSS 23. Edisi 8.
edited by P. P. Harto. Semarang: Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro.
Harianja, Ellen Kristin, and Paul Eduard Sudjiman. 2022. “Pengaruh Ukuran Perusahaan, Audit

e-ISSN: 2985-7651; p-ISSN: 2985-6264, Hal 11-35
Tenure Dan Komite Audit Terhadap Kualitas Audit Pada Perusahaan Sektor Properti Yang
Terdaftar Di Bei Tahun 2017 – 2020.” Journal Of Cahaya Mandalika 2(1):146–56.
Hasanah, Ade Nahdiatul, and Maya Sari Putri. 2018. “Pengaruh Ukuran Perusahaan, Audit Tenure
Terhadap Kualitas Audit.” Jurnal Akuntansi, Vol 5 No. 1 Januari 2018 5(1):11–21.
Hidayat, Ali akhmad Noor. 2022. “Laporan Keuangan ESDM Tahun 2021, BPK Beri Opini Wajar
Tanpa Pengecualian.” Retrieved (https://bisnis.tempo.co/read/1616115/laporan-keuangan-
esdm-tahun-2021-bpk-beri-opini-wajar-tanpa-pengecualian).
Koerniawan, Iwan. 2021. Auditing Konsep Dan Teori Pemeriksaan Akuntansi.
Kurniati, Lia, Yuliusman, and Reni Yustien. 2021. “Pengaruh Fee Audit Dan Audit Tenure
Terhadap Kualitas Audit (Studi Empiris Pada Perusahaan Pertambangan Yang Terdaftar Di
Bursa Efek ….” … Accounting Review (JAR … 2:353–64.
Manurung, Adler H., and Lutfi T. Rizky. 2009. Successful Financial Planner A Complete Guide.
Jakarta: PT Gramedia Widiasarana Indonesia.
Murwanto, Rahmadi, Adi Budiarso, and Fajar Asri Ramdhana. 2005. Audit Sektor Publik (Suatu
Pengantar Bagi Pembangunan Akuntabilitas Instansi Pemerintah. Salemba Empat.
Purnomo, Listiya Ike, and Jihan Aulia. 2019. “Pengaruh Fee Audit, Audit Tenure, Rotasi Audit
Dan Reputasi Auditor Terhadap Kualitas Audit.” EkoPreneur 1(1):50. doi:
10.32493/ekop.v1i1.3668.
Rahmi, Namira Ufrida, Hengky Setiawan, Jane Evelyn, and Yuni Utami. 2019. “Pengaruh Audit
Tenure, Spesialisasi Audit, Ukuran Perusahaan, Dan Auditor Switching Terhadap Kualitas
Audit Pada Perusahaan Manufaktur Sektor Barang Konsumsi Yang Terdaftar Di Bursa Efek
Indonesia.” JIMEA: Jurnal Ilmiah MEA (Manajemen, Ekonomi, & Akuntansi 3(3):40–52.
doi: 10.31955/mea.vol4.iss1.pp40.
Rinanda, Nida, and Annisa Nurbaiti. 2018. “Pengaruh Audit Tenure, Fee Audit, Ukuran Kantor
Akuntan Publik Dan Spesialisasi Auditor Terhadap Kualitas Audit (Studi Pada Perusahaan
Manufaktur Subsektor Aneka Industri Yang Terdaftar Di Bursa Efek Indonesia Tahun
Periode 2012-2016).” E-Proceeding of Management 5(2):2108–16.
Salsabila, Maisyarah. 2018. “Pengaruh Rotasi Kap Dan Fee Audit Terhadap Kualitas Audit Pada
Perusahaan Sektor Keuangan Yang Terdaftar Di Bursa Efek Indonesia (BEI).” Jurnal Riset
Akuntansi Dan Bisnis 18(1):51–66. doi: 10.30596/jrab.v18i1.2050.
Sari, Rida Perwita, Sri Hastuti, and Dyah Ratnawati. 2020. Pemeriksaan Akuntansi Berbasis
International Standards On Auditing (ISA). Surabaya: Scopindo Media Pustaka.
Sayuti, Askolani Al, and Annisa Anissa. 2023. “Dampak Independensi , Struktur Audit Dan
Konflik Peran Terhadap Kinerja Auditor.” Jurnal Mahasiswa Manajemen Dan Akuntansi
2828–7207:31–50.
Siregar, Dian Lestari, and Tri Agustini. 2020. “Pengaruh Fee Audit, Audit Tenure Dan Rotasi
Audit Terhadap Kualitas Audit Di Bursa Efek Indonesia.” Jurnal EMBA: Jurnal Riset
Ekonomi, Manajemen, Bisnis Dan Akuntansi 8(1):637–46.
Sudarno, Nicholas Renaldo, Merice Br Hutauruk, and Achmad Tavip Junaedi. 2022. Teori
Penelitian Keuangan. Kota Malang: CV Literasi Nusantara Abadi.
Trisnawati, Riska, and Annisa Nurbaiti. 2019. “Pengaruh Ukuran Perusahaan, Rotasi KAP,
Kepemilikan Asing, Dan Pertemuan Komite Audit Terhadap Kualitas Audit (Studi Pada
Perusahaan Jasa Subsektor Infrastruktur, Utilitas, & Transportasi Yang Terdaftar Di Bursa
Efek Indonesia Tahun 2013-2017).” E-Proceeding of Management 6(2):3675–82.
Umar, Rahima Br. Purba &. Haryono. 2021. Kualitas Audit & Deteksi Korupsi.

Susanti

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Susanti

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

JURA : JURNAL RISET AKUNTANSI

Vol.1, No.2 Mei 2023

EFFECT OF AUDIT FEE, AUDIT TENURE AND COMPANY

Keywords:Audit Fee, Tenure Audit, Company Size, Audit Quality

13 JURA - Volume.1, No.2 MEI 2023

15 JURA - Volume.1, No.2 MEI 2023

17 JURA - Volume.1, No.2 MEI 2023

Table 1 Description of the Research Sample Selection Stage

Variable Operational Definition

19 JURA - Volume.1, No.2 MEI 2023

Table 2 Variables and their Measurements

Variable Understanding Measurement Source

Data Analysis Technique

21 JURA - Volume.1, No.2 MEI 2023

Assessing Model Fit

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

23 JURA - Volume.1, No.2 MEI 2023

Table 4 Frequency Test Results for Tenure Audit Categories

25 JURA - Volume.1, No.2 MEI 2023

Table 5 Frequency Test Results for Audit Quality Categories

Kap Non Big-4 40 90.9

Table 7 Iteration History (Output Beginning Block Number 1)

27 JURA - Volume.1, No.2 MEI 2023

Coefficient of Determination (Nagelkerke R.Square)

Testing the Feasibility of the Regression Model

Table 10 Classification Table

Audit Kap Non Big-4 40 0 100

Step 1 Quality Big-4 hood 0 4 100

Overall Percentage 100

Source: Results of Data Processing with SPSS 22, (2023)

X1 19,578 8586,147 0.000 1 0.998 318018411,144

Step X2 -3,383 5395,939 0.000 1 0.999 0.034

1a X3 0.067 8861,856 0.000 1 1,000 1,069

Constant -468,380 113713,905 0.000 1 0.997 0.000

Source: Results of Data Processing with SPSS 22, (2023)

29 JURA - Volume.1, No.2 MEI 2023

1= -468.380 + 19.578 FE – 3.383 AT + 0.067 UP +€it

31 JURA - Volume.1, No.2 MEI 2023

c) The Effect of Company Size on Audit Quality

33 JURA - Volume.1, No.2 MEI 2023

35 JURA - Volume.1, No.2 MEI 2023

You might also like