|Abstract: ||會計師產業競爭度之分析，尤其由特定管制事件的施行及不同事務所規模視角，來 進行會計師產業競爭度之變動比較時，除可提供會計師事務所管理階層重要之參考資訊 外，尚能給予政府當局對此產業進行管制或輔導政策之參酌，具相當重要之理論與實用 價值，然而過去文獻對此議題甚少著墨。 除了結構法外，本文使用可直接測度產業競爭度的非結構法中兩個模型-PR model 與Lerner index，來分析我國會計師產業之整體競爭度，取消審計公費下限及通過記帳 士法等管制措施前後產業競爭度及競爭型態之變化，以及前述變化在大中小型規模事 務所是否具不同之影響。 本研究預期主要的貢獻如下，首先，採可直接測度產業競爭度的非結構方法，伴隨 使用切齊隨機邊界法對PR model 實證法的改良，可獲致更為精準的產業競爭度實證結 果，突破現有會計師產業績效評估研究的範疇。其次，可瞭解我國會計師產業在取消審 計公費下限及通過記帳士法前後，其競爭度及競爭型態之變化程度。最後，事務所規模 通常是影響實證結果的關鍵變數，本研究分析不同規模的會計師事務所群組，在取消審 計公費下限及通過記帳士法等重大管制措施前後，其競爭度及競爭型態之變化程度是否 有所不同。前述分析成果，或可促使此類文獻之研究發現更為豐富。 綜合而言，預期本研究之發現，除能彌補以前採結構法分析會計師產業競爭度及競 爭型態之不足外，本研究之研究方法與設計概念，對後續研究者進行會計師產業的其他 重要課題 (如競爭度與業務策略，或人力資本之關係等) 之探討或整合，應具有高度之 參考與應用價值。|
Analysis of the degree of competition in public accounting industry, particularly from the perspectives of implementing specific regulated events and varying firm scales, not only provides public accounting firm management vital reference information, but provides a source of essential reference for governmental authorities that set controls or regulatory policy for such industry. As such, it significantly possesses theoretical as well as practical value. However, there is little in the previous literature that dwells on this topic. In addition to the structure approach, in analyzing the overall degree of competition in public accounting industry, this study adopts two non-structure models that directly measure industry competition degree, namely, the PR model and Lerner Index. The study also investigates changes in both degree and pattern of industry competition before and after cancellation of audit fees lower limit and passage of the Certified Public Bookkeepers (CPB) Act, and whether or not such changes have different effects on larger-scale, middle-scale and small-scale firms. This study’s major expected contributions are threefold: first, by adopting the non-structure approach that directly measures degree of competition, combined with the censored stochastic frontier model which improves over PR model, more precise empirical results can be obtained on industry competition degree, and current research into performance evaluation of public accounting industry can be extended in scope; secondly, this study provides an understanding of the extent to which degree and patterns of competition have changed before and after the cancellation of audit fee lower limit and passage of CPB Act; lastly, as the firm scale is often the key variable affecting empirical results, this study analyzes changes in both degree and patterns of competition among accounting firm groups of varying in scales both before and after cancellation of audit fee lower limit and passage of CPB Act. The aforementioned research efforts serve to promote and enrich empirical findings in the literature concerned. In sum, in addition to filling inadequacies of the conventional structure approach in analyzing the degree and patterns of competition of the public accounting industry, it is expected that, to future researchers who wish to investigate or synthesis other important issues of the public accounting industry (i.e., competition degree and business strategy, or relationship of human capital, etc.), the research methodology and design of this study will serve as a highly valuable reference and application.