近年來，由於國內外有著許多企業舞弊或是相關醜聞事件，這使得國內相關的主管機關開始增訂許多相關法規，也因此會計師的業務日益加重，但會計師的公費卻沒有因為這樣的情況而大幅度的增長。然而，要如何在審計市場中脫穎而出，以獲得較多的審計公費溢價，則為會計師事務所執業之重要議題。本研究參考Numan and Willekens (2012)之研究，希冀以會計師事務所市佔率、市佔率排名次於自身事務所市佔率之差距，以及客戶對於事務所的重要性，來探討與審計公費溢價間的關係，並藉此觀察是否能夠因上述之原因而使審計公費溢價上升。本研究以2007 年至2012 年國內上市公司為樣本，其實證結果顯示：首先，當事務所為特定產業市佔率的第一名時，審計公費之溢價確實會有一定幅度的正成長。再者，事務所與市佔率排名次於自身事務所之市佔率差距愈大，其審計公費溢價亦愈高。最後，當客戶對於事務所越重要時，其客戶給予事務所的審計公費溢價也會相對增加。本研究之主要貢獻在於以實證結果說明實行產業專業策略化後可能獲得之經濟效益，以供會計師事務所進行產業專業策略決策之參考，以及有助於提供未來審計公費溢價相關研究探討之方法與方向。

In recent years, a series of accounting frauds were reported in Taiwan and foreign countries. After these accounting scandals involving irregular accounting procedures and their accounting firms, it put the auditor in the public spotlight. Meanwhile, the regulatory authorities focus their attentions on updating and issuing regulations for audit industry. Although the auditor bears a heavy responsibility recently, the audit fee does not growth accordingly. Therefore, increasing audit fee premium becomes an important issue for auditors. Following Numan and Willekens (2012), we examine how CPA firm’s market share, the difference of market share between CPA firm and its closest competitor and the degree of auditor–client alignment related to audit fee premium.  By using data from Taiwanese listed companies during 2007 to 2012, our empirical results show that the audit fee premium is positively related to the top market share company, distance of market share relative to closest competitor and auditor–client alignment.This study contributes to the auditor by providing empirical evidence that the auditor benefits by adopting industry specialization strategy and also to the literature by exploring more audit fee premium related factors.

目錄
第壹章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景與動機 1
第二節 研究目的 5
第三節 論文架構與流程 7
第貳章 文獻探討 9
第一節 產業專家定義 9
第二節 產業專家、審計品質與審計公費 12
第三節 產業專家、市佔率與審計公費 14
第四節 客戶類型與審計公費 17
第五節 假說發展 19
第參章 研究設計 23
第一節 審計公費揭露之相關法規 23
第二節 模型研究與變數定義 25
第三節 研究樣本選取 36
第肆章 實證結果 39
第一節 敘述性統計量 39
第二節 多元迴歸模型分析 43
第三節 敏感性分析 49
第伍章 結論與建議 57
第一節 研究結論 57
第二節 研究限制 59
第三節 研究貢獻與建議 60
參考文獻 61

表目錄
表3-1 審計公費金額級距表 24
表3-2 變數彙總表 32
表3-3 樣本篩選狀況表 37
表3-4 各年度各產業公司數 38
表4-1 敘述統計分析表 40
表4-2 Pearson相關係數表 42
表4-3 迴歸結果 45
表4-4 VIF值 46
表4-5 揭露審計公費模型之迴歸結果 48
表4-6 納入自我選擇揭露審計公費後之迴歸結果 49
表4-7 刪除每年度個別產業為最後一名之事務所後之迴歸結果 51
表4-8 只留取大型事務所樣本後之迴歸結果 52

圖目錄
圖1-1 研究流程架構圖 8

參考文獻
吳碧娥，經濟日報，2008，「會計師收費標準-金管會不買單」，5月6日。
徐谷楨，經濟日報，2011，「台灣會計師公費-吊車尾」，2月23日。	
張文瀞與吳幸螢，2005，「品牌聲譽、產業專業化與審計人員市場佔有率之關連性：取消審計公費下限影響分析」，會計評論，第40期：91-118
張哲銘，2004，「資訊揭露與公司價值之研究」，台北大學會計學研究所未出版碩士論文。
張閔凱，2002，「會計師事務所產業專業化之決定因素台灣審計市場之實證研究」，國立成功大學會計學研究所未出版碩士論文。
戚務君，2011，「高等審計學-實證視野下的審計研究」，初版，指南書局有限公司。
陳耀宗、劉若蘭、林坤霖，2003，「產業專家、客戶滿意度與審計公費關聯性之研究」，會計評論，第37期：31-52。
陳耀宗與吳姍穎，2004，「審計產業專家、審計公費與會計師事務所規模：臺灣審計公費下限分析，會計評論，第40期:91-118。審計市場之實證」，中華會計學刊，第5 卷（1 期）：41-69 。
廖秀梅，王貞靜，戚務君，2012，「一套臺灣完整的審計公費資訊告訴我們什麼?」 中華會計教育學會，第8卷第1期。 
維基百科，2013，新古典主義經濟學，引用自http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%96%B0%E5%8F%A4%E5%85%B8%E4%B8%BB%E7%BE%A9%E7%B6%93%E6%BF%9F%E5%AD%B8。
蔡淑芬，工商時報，2012，「收費合理化-會計師公會擬定計算標準」，6月27日。
賴春田，2000，「會計師的業務、責任及會計師事務所組織之演變」，國立臺灣大學會計研究所未出版碩士論文。
薛敏正、張瑀珊、高君慈，2008，「公司自我選擇聘任會計師與審計公費」，當代會計，第9卷第2期：p.167-200。
Balsam, S., J. Krishnan, and J. Yang. 2003. Auditor industry specialization and earnings quality. Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory 22 (2): 71-97.
Bandyopadhyay, S., and J. Kao. 2004. Market structure and audit fees: A local analysis. Contemporary Accounting Research 21 (3), 529-561.
Blankley, A. I., D. N. Hurtt., and J. E. MacGregor., 2012. Abnormal audit fees and restatements. Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory 31 (1), 79-96.
Bonner, S. E., and B. L. Lewis., 1990. Determinants of auditor expertise. Journal of Accounting Research 28 (Supplement), 1-20.
Carcello, J. V., and A. L. Nagy., 2004. Client size auditor specialization and fraudulent financial reporting. Managerial Auditing Journal 19 (5), 651-68.
Chan, D. 1999. ‘‘Low-balling’’ and efficiency in a two-period specialization model of auditing competition. Contemporary Accounting Research 16 (4), 609-642.
Chow, C. W. 1982. “The demand for external auditing: Size, debt and ownership influences,” The Accounting Journal (April), 272-291
Craswell, A. T. and S. L. Taylor. 1991. The market structure of auditing in Australia: The role of industry specialization. Research in Accounting Regulation 5: 55-77.
Craswell, A., Francis, J., Taylor, S., 1995. Auditor brand name reputations and industry specializations. Journal of Accounting and Economics 20 (3), 291-322.
DeFond, M. L. 1992. The association between changes in client firm agency costs and auditor switching. Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory 11 (Spring), 16-31.
DeFond, M.L., F.R. Francis, and T.J. Wong. 2000. Auditor industry specialization and market segmentation: Evidence from Hong Kong. Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory 19 (Spring), 49-66.
Degryse, H., Ongena, S., 2005. Distance, lending relationships, and competition. Journal of Finance 60 (1), 231–266.
Dopuch, N., and D. Simunic. 1982. The competition in auditing: An assessment. Fourth Symposium on auditing Research, Urbana: University of Illinois, 401-450. 
Douph, N., and D. A. Simunic. 1980. The nature of competiton in the audit profession: A descriptive and normative view . In Regulation and the Accounting Profession, edited by J. W. Buckly and J.F. Weston (Lifetime Learing, 77-94).
Eichenseher, J. W. and Danos, P. 1981. The analysis of industry-specific auditor concentration: Towards an explanation Model. The Accounting Review, 479-492.
Feldman, E. R., 2006. A basic quantification of the competitive implications of the demise of Arthur Anderson. Review of Industrial Organization 29 (3), 193-212.
Ferguson, A., J. Francis, and D. Stokes. 2003. The effect of firm wide and office level expertise on pricing. The Accounting Review 78 (2), 429-448.
Francis, J. R., and E. R. Wilson. 1988. Auditor changes: A joint test of theories relating to agency costs and auditor differentiation. The Accounting Review, 63 (October), 663-682.
Francis, J., K. Reichelt, and D. Wang. 2005. The pricing of national and city-Sspecific reputations for industry expertise in the U.S. audit market. The Accounting Review 80 (1), 113-136.
Glaser, R., and M. Bassok. 1989. Learning theory and the study of instruction. Annual Review of Psychology 40 (1), 636-666.
Gul, F. A., and J. Tsui. 1997. A test of the free cash flow and debt monitoring hypotheses: Evidence from audit pricing. Journal of Accounting and Economics 24 (2): 219-237.
Gul, F. A., S. Y. K. Fung, and B. Jaggi. 2009. Earnings quality: Some evidence on the role of auditor tenure and auditors’ industry expertise. Journal of Accounting and Economics 47 (3), 265-87.
Hay, D., and D.C. Jeter. 2011. The pricing of industry specialization by auditors in New Zealand. Accounting and Business Research 41(2), 171-195.
Heckman, J. J. 1979. Sample selection bias as a specification error. Econometrica 47 (1): 153-162.
Hotelling, H. 1929. Stability in competition. The Economic Journal 39 (153), 41-57.
Jensen, M., and W. Meckling. 1976. Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics 3 (4), 305-360.
Jones, T. O., and W. E. Sasser, Jr. 1995. Why satisfied customers defect. Harvard Business Review 73 (November-December), 88-99
Krishnan, G. V. 2003. Does Big 6 auditor industry expertise constrain earnings management? Accounting Horizons 17 (Supplement), 1–16.
Krishnan, G. V. 2005. The association between Big 6 auditor industry expertise and the asymmetric timeliness of earnings. Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Finance 20 (3), 209–28.
Lapre, M. A., A. S. Mukherjee, and L. N. V. Wassenhove. 2000. Behind the learning curve: linking learning activites to waste reduction. Management Science 46(5), 597-611.
Li, K .,K . 2012. Study of market reaction to auditor switches: Effects of industry specialist. National Taiwan University Master Thesis.
Libby, R., and H. Tan. 1994. Modeling the determinants of auditing expertise. Accounting, Organizations and Society 19 (8), 701-16.
Liu, X., and D. A. Simunic. 2005. Profit sharing in an auditing oligopoly. The Accounting Review 80 (2), 677-702.
Low K. Y. 2004. The effects of industry specialization on audit risk assessments and audit-planning decisions. The Accounting Review 79(1), 201-219 
Menon, K., and J. D. Williams. 1994. The use of audit committees for monitoring. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy 13, 121-139.
Neal, T.L., Riley, R.R., 2004. Auditor industry specialist research design.Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory 23(2), 169-177. 
Numan, W., and Marleen W., 2012. An empirical test of spatial competition in the audit market. Journal of Accounting and Economics 53(2012), 450-465.
O’Reilly, D. M., and J. T. Reisch. 2002. Industry specialization by audit firms : What does academic research tell us? Ohio CPA Journal 61(3), 42-44.
Owhoso, V. E., Messier, W. F., Jr., and Lynch, J. G., Jr.  2002.  Error detection by industry-specialized teams during sequential audit review. Journal of Accounting Research 40 (3), 883-900.
Pearson, T.,and Trompeter, G., 1994. Competition in the market for audit services: the effect of supplier concentration on audit fees. Contemporary Accounting Research 11 (1), 115-135.
Reichelt, K. J. and D. Wang. 2010. National and office-specific measures of auditor industry expertise and effects on audit quality. Journal of Accounting Research 48 (3), 647-686.
Shockley, R. A., and R. N. Holt. 1983. A behavioral investigation of supplier differentiation in the market for audit services. Journal of Accounting Research 21(2), 545-564.
Simunic, D., 1980. The pricing of audit services: theory and evidence. Journal of Accounting Research 18 (1), 161-190.
Solomon, I., M. D. Shields, and O. R. Whittington. 1999. What do industry-specialist auditors know? Journal of Accounting Research 37(1), 191-208.
Su, Y. H. 2000. Auditor fees and auditor size: A study of audit market in Taiwan. Taiwan Accounting Review (October), 59-78.
Willekens, M., Achmadi, C., 2003. Pricing and supplier concentration in the private client segment of the audit market: market power or competition? The International Journal of Accounting 38 (4), 431-455.
Zerni, M . 2011. Audit Partner Specialization and Audit Fees: Some Evidence From Sweden. Contemporary Accounting Research Vol. 29 No. 1 (Spring 2012), 312-340.