The situation is the opposite for audit firms. They tend to prefer signaling
theory, as it allows them to charge higher fees with no increase in audit risk, whereas the logic of substitution
theory requires that they balance a decrease in fees and an increase in audit risk with a reduction in the number
of audit tests. Both auditees and auditors clearly need time to consider the economic consequences of signaling
good corporate governance and adopt audit plans that favor themselves when negotiating audit fees. Reaching
consensus may take a considerable amount of time. Our empirical evidence is largely in accord with the first
explanation, i.e., that audit fees are characterized by inertia, although its validity requires testing with data for
and beyond 2009.