We propose two explanations for the previously documented relation between aggregate earnings growth and future inflation: one based on firms changing their investment in response to earnings growth, and the other based on consumers varying their consumption in response to wealth effects of profitability growth. As the supply of goods and services is relatively inelastic in the short run, our arguments imply that changes to near-term demand for investment (consumption) will affect the prices of investment (consumption) goods and services. Consistent with the investment-based argument, we find that profitability changes predict investment and Producer Price Index (PPI) shifts in subsequent quarters. Our analyses also reveal that aggregate earnings growth predicts future investment and PPI forecast errors. We find, at best, weak evidence for the consumption-based link between aggregate earnings growth and future inflation.

Prior research has examined audit pricing for publicly held firms and provided some evidence of a Big 8 premium in pricing. We investigate audit pricing among private firms, and provide evidence that private firms do not pay such a premium on average. The relatively greater degree of dispersion in auditor choice (between Big 5 and non-Big 5 auditors) in our large sample of privately held audit clients allows us to predict the auditor choice for each firm and to control for potential self-selection. We reject the null hypothesis that clients are randomly allocated across Big 5 and non-Big 5 auditors. Using standard OLS regressions, we document a Big 5 premium; however this premium vanishes once we control for self-selection bias. Moreover, we find that client firms choosing Big 5 auditors generally would have faced higher fees had they chosen non-Big 5 auditors, given their firm-specific characteristics. Our results are consistent with audit markets for private firms being segmented along cost-effective lines. Further, our results suggest that auditees in our setting do not, on average, view Big 5 auditors as superior in terms of the perceived quality of the services provided to a degree significant enough to warrant a fee premium.