This paper examines how managers in New Zealand allocate the cost of firms' investments in subsidiaries between net tangible assets and acquired goodwill. We find a negative relation between acquired goodwill and leverage. This could be interpreted as the result of managers of highly leveraged acquiring firms opportunistically allocating a lower portion of the acquisition price to acquired goodwill. However, this analysis, like much of the research on accounting choice, suffers from an omitted variables problem. We present evidence that the observed negative relation between acquired goodwill and leverage may stem from each variable's relation to the investment opportunity set. Further, we find no evidence that acquired goodwill is related to the existence of debt covenants. Together, these results suggest an endogenous relation between the firm's asset structure, its financing policy, and the allocation of acquisition price to acquired goodwill.

This paper examines how managers in New Zealand allocate the cost of firms' investments in subsidiaries between net tangible assets and acquired goodwill. We find a negative relation between acquired goodwill and leverage. This could be interpreted as the result of managers of highly leveraged acquiring firms opportunistically allocating a lower portion of the acquisition price to acquired goodwill. However, this analysis, like much of the research on accounting choice, suffers from an omitted variables problem. We present evidence that the observed negative relation between acquired goodwill and leverage may stem from each variable's relation to the investment opportunity set. Further, we find no evidence that acquired goodwill is related to the existence of debt covenants. Together, these results suggest an endogenous relation between the firm's asset structure, its financing policy, and the allocation of acquisition price to acquired goodwill.

We evaluate and summarize the large body of audit fee research and use meta‐analysis to test the combined effect of the most commonly used independent variables. The perspective provided by the meta‐analysis allows us to reconsider the anomalies, mixed results, and gaps in audit fee research. We find that, although many independent variables have consistent results, several show no clear pattern to the results and others only show significant results in certain periods or particular countries. These variables include a loss by the client and leverage, which have become significant in comparatively recent studies; internal auditing and governance, both of which have mixed results; auditor specialization, regarding which there is still some uncertainty; and the audit opinion, which was a significant variable before 1990 but not in more recent studies.