Pengaruh Kompensasi, Kekayaan Partner, dan Moral terhadap Kualitas Audit dengan Moderasi Skeptisisme

Mutia  Kholisah; Imam Hidayat

doi:10.33395/owner.v10i3.3322

Authors

Mutia Kholisah
✉ Corresponding author: mutiaakholisah@gmail.com Universitas MuhammadiyahTangerang
Imam Hidayat Universitas Muhammadiyah Tangerang

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.33395/owner.v10i3.3322

Keywords:

Audit Quality, Audit Fee, Partner Net Wealth, Moral Reasoning, Infrastructure Sector

Abstract

This study aims to examine the influence of fee-based compensation, partner net worth, and moral reasoning on audit quality in infrastructure companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange during the 2021–2025 period. The population consists of all infrastructure sector companies, and purposive sampling was applied to select 18 companies, resulting in 90 firm-year observations. Secondary data were obtained from published annual reports. Data analysis employed multiple linear regression and Moderated Regression Analysis (MRA) to evaluate the moderating role of professional skepticism. Audit quality was proxied by Audit Report Lag. The results indicate that fee-based compensation, partner net worth, and moral reasoning, both partially and simultaneously, do not have a significant effect on audit quality. In addition, professional skepticism does not moderate the relationship between the independent variables and audit quality. These findings imply that audit timeliness in capital-intensive infrastructure companies is more likely influenced by operational complexity than by economic incentives or ethical considerations of auditors. This research contributes by integrating economic incentive theory and ethical decision-making perspectives within a comprehensive empirical model during a period of economic uncertainty, providing implications for regulators in assessing audit fee standards and reporting efficiency in Indonesia.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Badan Pemeriksa Keuangan Republik Indonesia. (2023). Ikhtisar hasil pemeriksaan semester I 2023. https://www.bpk.go.id

Berofsky, B. (1974). The counterfactual analysis of causation. The Journal of Philosophy, 70(17), 568–569. https://doi.org/10.2307/2025311

Carey, P., & Simnett, R. (2006). Audit partner tenure and audit quality. The Accounting Review, 81(3), 653–676. https://doi.org/10.2308/ACCR.2006.81.3.653

Elder, R. J., Beasley, M. S., & Hogan, C. E. (2017). Auditing and assurance services: An integrated approach. Pearson Education.

DeAngelo, L. E. (1981). Auditor size and audit quality. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 3(3), 183–199. https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-4101(81)90002-1

Dekeyser, S., Gaeremynck, A., Knechel, W. R., & Willekens, M. (2021). The impact of partners’ economic incentives on audit quality in Big 4 partnerships. The Accounting Review, 96(6), 129–152. https://doi.org/10.2308/TAR-2018-0109

Tlonaen, D. N., Oematan, H. M., & Nenabu, J. C. (2025). Pengaruh audit fee dan audit tenure terhadap kualitas audit. Jurnal Mahasiswa Manajemen dan Akuntansi, 4(2), 88–101. https://doi.org/10.30640/JUMMA45.V4I2.5010

Francis, J. R. (2011). A framework for understanding and researching audit quality. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 30(2), 125–152. https://doi.org/10.2308/AJPT-50006

Ghozali, I. (2021). Aplikasi analisis multivariate dengan program IBM SPSS (9th ed.). Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro.Gujarati, D. N., & Porter, D. C. (2009). Basic econometrics (5th ed.). McGraw-Hill.

Gul, F. A., Wu, D., & Yang, Z. (2013). Do individual auditors affect audit quality? Evidence from archival data. The Accounting Review, 88(6), 1993–2025. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr-50536

Hurtt, R. K. (2010). Development of a scale to measure professional skepticism. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 29(1), 149–171. https://doi.org/10.2308/AUD.2010.29.1.149

Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305–360. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-405X(76)90026-X

Jiang, J. X., He, S., & Wang, K. P. (2025). Partner wealth and audit quality: Evidence from the United States. Review of Accounting Studies, 30(1), 702–737. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11142-024-09828-6

Knechel, W. R., & Payne, J. L. (2001). Additional evidence on audit report lag. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 20(1), 137–146. https://doi.org/10.2308/AUD.2001.20.1.137

Otoritas Jasa Keuangan. (n.d.). Otoritas Jasa Keuangan. https://www.ojk.go.id

Pusat Pembinaan Profesi Keuangan. (2023). PPPK Kementerian Keuangan. https://pppk.kemenkeu.go.id

Ikatan Akuntan Indonesia. (n.d.). PSAK No. 1: Penyajian laporan keuangan. https://web.iaiglobal.or.id

Purwanti, D. F., & Handayani, N. (2025). The influence of auditor competence and moral reasoning on inspectorate audit quality with organizational commitment as a moderating variable. Eduvest – Journal of Universal Studies, 5(8), 10457–10470. https://doi.org/10.59188/EDUVEST.V5I8.52087

Rahayu, S., Azhari, I., Junaid, A., & Tjan, J. S. (2020). Pengaruh kompetensi, independensi, dan profesionalisme auditor terhadap kualitas audit dengan etika auditor sebagai variabel moderasi. Invoice, 2(2), 139–184. https://doi.org/10.26618/INV.V2I2.4116

Rahayuningsih, E. R., & Widhiyani, N. L. S. (2019). Moral reasoning dan skeptisisme profesional memoderasi pengaruh independensi terhadap kualitas audit. E-Jurnal Akuntansi, 29(3), 972–986. https://doi.org/10.24843/EJA.2019.V29.I03.P05

Simunic, D. A. (1980). The pricing of audit services: Theory and evidence. Journal of Accounting Research, 18(1), 161–190.. https://doi.org/10.2307/2490397

Sugiyono. (2013). Metode penelitian manajemen. Alfabeta.

Yanti, A. R., & Mediawati, E. (2023). The influence of audit fees on audit quality. Mutiara: Jurnal Ilmiah Multidisiplin Indonesia, 1(2), 154–163. https://doi.org/10.61404/JIMI.V1I2.62

Yunus, R. A. (2025). Pengaruh pengalaman auditor dan fee audit terhadap kualitas audit (Undergraduate thesis). Universitas Widyatama.