101 © 2025 by the authors; licensee Eastern Centre of Science and Education, USA Asian Business Research Journal Vol. 10, No. 5, 101-105, 2025 ISSN: 2576-6759 DOI: 10.55220/25766759.450 © 2025 by the authors; licensee Eastern Centre of Science and Education, USA Institutional Ownership, External Auditor Reputation, and Income Smoothing: Evidence from Indonesia Sinta Setiana1  I Nyoman Agus Wijaya2 Hansel Octavius Rinaldy3 1,2,3Undergraduate Accounting Department, Law and Digital Business Faculty, Maranatha Christian University, Bandung, Indonesia. Email: sinta.setiana@eco.maranatha.edu Email: aguswijaya.inyoman@gmail.com Email: hanseloctavius88@gmail.com ( Corresponding Author) Abstract This study investigates how institutional ownership and external auditor reputation affect the income smoothing of the LQ45 index non-financial firms with firm size as the control variable. Because of the consistency of the companies shaping this index between 2017 and 2022, this study utilizes the population and samples of 18 and 15 as the total. Then, this investigation applies the multiple regression model to analyze the data. Based on the statistical testing outcome, this study infers the negative tendency of institutional ownership and external auditor reputation toward income smoothing. It indicates that institutions and reputable external auditors can cut this earning smoothing. Hence, it practially suggests that the company should utilize the Big Four auditor to overcome this smoothing, leading to the trust of public shareholders to buy the stocks. Also, these shareholders should select companies with a high share portion of institutions to obtain trusted earning reporting. Keywords: Earnings management, External auditor reputation, Income smoothing, Institutional possession. 1. Introduction For companies listed on the capital market, their managers focus no longer on achieving profits but on the value of the company they manage, i.e., the share price, which reflects shareholder welfare (Hanafi, 2016). However, several previous researchers believe that share prices are influenced by the firm ability to generate profits (Akhmadi & Januarsi, 2021; Al-Tamimi et al., 2011; Arisanty & Riyanto, 2022; Awalakki & H.N., 2021; Dang et al., 2018; Muniroh & Yuliati, 2021). Managers can manage profits using smoothing techniques (Abogun et al., 2021; Sumani et al., 2021) by deliberately cutting anomalous earning variation to suit accounting principles (Beidleman, 1973). Changing the time of purchase, production, investment, and revenue to the end period is a related effort (Raihi-Belkaoui, 2004). Thus, this earning management type will reduce public trust because managers do not report actual profits; hence, company value falls (Abogun et al., 2021). Moreover, institutional share ownership is effectively needed to overcome income smoothing, as shown by Purwanti and Nugrahanti (2016) and Chen et al. (2020). In contrast, other research shows that institutional ownership increases income smoothing (IS) (Trisanti, 2019; Yang et al., 2012) and does not influence IS (Agustina et al., 2021; Suyono, 2018). Apart from institutional ownership, external auditors affiliated with the Big 4 are believed to diminish income smoothing, as proven by Fauzan et al. (2020). In their study, Bala et al. (2022) confirm this situation when researching the companies hiring audit committee members dominated with accounting expertise. Nevertheless, several other studies, such as Yang et al. (2012) and Trisanti (2019), document positive influence. Meanwhile, Pinto et al. (2020) demonstrate no relationship. Based on research results that are still varied, this research intends to reexamine the influence of institutional possession and external auditor reputation on income smoothing of non-financial companies selected for the LQ45 Index from 2017 to 2022 by treating company size as a control variable [see Yang et al. (2012), Suyono (2018), Trisanti (2019), Pinto et al. (2020), and Abogun (2021)]. The LQ45 index companies are used because of their reputation in the Indonesian stock exchange, especially for market capitalization and transactions, and they are ranked 60th largest in the regular market (Hartono, 2017). Besides, the risk of the LQ45 index share is lower than that of the non-LQ45 index (Polakitan, 2015). Ideally, these reputable companies do not want to manage their earnings; therefore, they use governance mechanisms (Putri & Prasetyo, 2020). Following Putri and Prasetyo (2020), this investigation employs non-financial enterprises. mailto:sinta.setiana@eco.maranatha.edu mailto:aguswijaya.inyoman@gmail.com mailto:hanseloctavius88@gmail.com https://doi.org/10.55220/25766759.450 Asian Business Research Journal, 2025, 10(5): 101-105 102 © 2025 by the authors; licensee Eastern Centre of Science and Education, USA 2. Literature Review and Hypothesis Development 2.1. The Relationship between Institutional Ownership and Income Smoothing In the stock exchange, institutions such as insurance firms, investment enterprises, and banks have a significant ownership portion in the company (Solikhah et al., 2022). Thus, they have substantial power to monitor and control top managers, leading to cutting earnings smoothing (Chen et al., 2020; Purwanti & Nugrahanti, 2016). This circumstance is affirmed by Purwanti and Nugrahanti (2016) and Chen et al. (2020), declaring the negative propensity between institutional possession and income smoothing. Based on this description, the first hypothesis is: H1: The institutional ownership negatively affects income smoothing. 2.2. The Relationship Between External Auditors with Reputation and Income Smoothing The external auditors are the parties giving opinions to the company's financial report, and their opinion affects market reaction (Guimarães et al., 2022). Related to income smoothing, this tendency can be minimized when companies hire auditors affiliated with the Big 4, as Fauzan (2020) and Bala et al. (2022) demonstrate. According to Purwanti and Nugrahanti (2016), it occurs because the Big Four auditors have better competency and experience in auditing financial reports than the Non-Big Four auditors. Based on this description, the second hypothesis is: H2: The reputable external auditor negatively affects income smoothing. 2.3. The Research Model By mentioning hypotheses one and two in part 2.1. and 2.2, the research model is visible in Picture 1. According to Ghozali (2017), the rectangle for institutional ownership, reputable external auditor, and income smoothing indicates the directly observed variable. Figure 1. Research Model. 3. Research Methods This study utilizes the Eckel index as the proxy of earnings smoothing based on Yang et al. (2012). This index divides the coefficient variation (CV) of the change in income with the CV of the change in revenue. Income smoothing exists when this index is below one. Therefore, we inverse it to support the direction of the hypotheses. Following Yang et al. (2012), Purwanti and Nugrahanti (2016), Suyono (2018), Trisanti (2019), Chen et al. (2020), and Agustina et al. (2021), this study uses the share portion belonging to the institutions. Tracing Fauzan et al. (2020), Yang et al. (2012), Trisanti (2019), and Pinto et al. (2020), this study employs the dummy variable to measure external auditor reputation: 1, 0 is for the companies using big-four auditors and non-big-four auditors, correspondingly. As the control variable, this study utilizes company size, measured by the logarithm of total assets by referring to Yang et al. (2012), Suyono (2018), Trisanti (2019), Pinto et al. (2020), and Abogun (2021). Furthermore, this research uses archival techniques in collecting secondary data, as Hartono (2014) explains, and a multiple regression model to analyze the data, considering that the dependent variable data scale is the ratio for earnings management. The independent variable scale is the ratio for institutional ownership and nominal for external auditor reputation and the industry type, as Hartono (2014) enlightens. Next, the classical assumption tests must be carried out: multicollinearity, heteroscedasticity, autocorrelation, and normality (Ghozali, 2021). Regarding the research sample, researchers used 18 non-financial companies selected as shares, forming the LQ45 index from 2017 to 2022, and their names are as follows. (1) Adaro Energy Tbk (ADRO) (2) Aneka Tambang (Persero) Tbk (ANTM) (3) Astra International Tbk (ASII) (4) XL Axiata Tbk (EXCL) (5) HM. Sampoerna Tbk. (HMSP) (6) Indofood CBP Sukses Makmur Tbk. (ICBP) (7) International Nickel Indonesia, Tbk. (INCO) (8) Indofood Sukses Makmur Tbk. (INDF) (9) Indocement Tunggal Prakasa Tbk. (INTP) (10) Kalbe Farma Tbk. (KLBF) (11) Media Nusantara Citra, Tbk. (MNCN) (12) Perusahaan Gas Negara (Persero) Tbk (PGAS) (13) Tambang Batubara Bukit Asam Tbk. (PTBA) (14) Semen Indonesia (Persero) Tbk. (SMGR) (15) Telekomunikasi Indonesia Tbk (TLKM) Asian Business Research Journal, 2025, 10(5): 101-105 103 © 2025 by the authors; licensee Eastern Centre of Science and Education, USA (16) United Tractors Tbk. (UNTR) (17) Unilever Indonesia Tbk. (UNVR) (18) Wijaya Karya Tbk. (WIKA) Additionally, this study uses the Slovin formula, cited in Firdaus (2021), with a border of error of 10% to determine the number of samples. By mentioning this formula, the total representative samples of 18 companies are 15.25 = 15 (rounded), and the companies are taken randomly. Based on this random process and the irrelevant situation causing the insignificant impact of the main determinants of income smoothing, as conducted by Erna et al. (2024), this study only uses 14 companies, such as ADRO, ASII, EXCL, INCO, INDF, INTP, KLBF, MNCN, PGAS, PTBA, SMGR, TLKM, UNTR, and UNVR. Moreover, this investigation employs the regression model to analyze the data, where the model is in the first equation (Note: IS = income smoothing, IO = institutional ownership, EAR = external auditor reputation, and LN(TA) = natural logarithm of total assets to measure firm size). IS = β0 + β1.IO + β2.EAR + β3.LN(TA) + ε (Equation 1) This model adopts the ordinary least square to estimate the regression coefficient. Therefore, it must meet the classical assumptions, like normality, non-heteroskedasticity, non-autocorrelation, and non-multicollinearity (Gujarati et al., 2019). Furthermore, to detect them respectively, this study uses Jarque-Bera (Gujarati et al., 2019), White (Ghozali, 2021; Gujarati et al., 2019), runs (Ghozali, 2021), and variance inflation factor (Ghozali, 2021; Gujarati et al., 2019). 4. Results 4.1. Descriptive Statistics Table 1A displays the descriptive statistics of income smoothing, institutional ownership, and company size based on 84 firm-year observations: 14 companies for six years. a. The smallest, the largest, average, and standard deviation are -8.76, 10.53, 0.8041, and 1.98709. for income smoothing (IS). b. The smallest, most prominent, average, and standard deviation are 43.91%, 85.00%, 59.4170%, and 11.19063 for institutional ownership (IO). c. The minimum, maximum, mean, and standard deviation are 15.95, 19.84, 17.9124, and 0.96393 for the natural logarithm of total assets, LN(TA). Table 1A. Descriptive Statistics with 84 observations Variable The smallest The largest Average Standard Deviation IS -8.76 10.53 0.8041 1.98709 IO 43.91 85.00 59.4170 11.19063 LN(TA) 15.95 19.84 17.9124 0.96393 Table 1B exhibits the number of companies hiring external auditors affiliated with the Big Four and non-Big Four from 2017 to 2022: 13 firms utilize the Big Four auditors yearly (92.86%). Only one firm, MNCN, uses non- Big Four consistently (7.14%). Table 1B. The total companies utilizing big-four and non-big-four auditors. Time 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Total firms hiring Big-Four auditors. 13 13 13 13 13 13 Total firm hiring non-Big Four auditors. 1 1 1 1 1 1 Total firms becoming the samples 14 14 14 14 14 14 4.2. Classical Assumption Examination Result After processing data statistically, this study presents the classical assumption test results, i.e., heteroskedasticity, autocorrelation, multicollinearity, and normality: • For heteroskedasticity, this study cannot prove it based on the White test, which is informed by the probability of Chi-square above 5%: 0.1164 (see Table 2). • For autocorrelation, this study cannot prove it based on a run test with a mode cut-off point noticed by the two-tailed asymptotic significance of 0.876 (see Table 2). • For multicollinearity, this study cannot detect it, reflected by a variance inflation factor (VIF) below 10: 1.323 for IO, 1.185 for DBIG4, and 1.498 for LN(TA) (see Table 2). • For normality, this study cannot prove it because the probability of Jarque-Bera is lower than 5%: 0.000 (see Table 2). According to the central limit theorem, this situation can be allowed when the number of observations is large: greater than 30 (Islam, 2018), and this study confirms it, reflected by total observations of 84 (see Table 1). Table 2. Classical assumption examination result. Classical Assumption Statistical information White Heteroskedasticity RES^2 = f[IO, DBIG4, LN(TA)] The probability of Chi-Square of R-square observation is = 0.1183 Run autocorrelation based on the mode. The two-tailed asymptotic significance of the Z-statistic is 0.876. Multicollinearity detection VIF for IO, DBIG4, and LN(TA) is partially 1.323, 1.185, and 1.498. Normality The probability of the Jarque-Bera statistic is 0.0000. 4.3. Regression model estimation result Table 3 displays the regression model estimation result of the statistical probability to examine the influence of institutional possession, reputable external auditor (DBIG4), and firm size on earning smoothing, i.e., Asian Business Research Journal, 2025, 10(5): 101-105 104 © 2025 by the authors; licensee Eastern Centre of Science and Education, USA 0.0931, 0.0722, and 0.3713, respectively. For main determinants, the probability is still lower than the loosen significance level of 10%; therefore, the negative sign is meaningful, indicating that institutional ownership and reputable external auditors can diminish the earning smoothing. Table 3. The estimation result of the regression model. Determining factor Coefficient Std. Error t-Statistic Probability C 8.810583 5.288557 1.665971 0.0996 IO -0.036865 0.021693 -1.699387 0.0931 DBIG4 -1.615706 0.886808 -1.821936 0.0722 LN_TA -0.240938 0.267982 -0.899083 0.3713 5. Discussion Based on the first hypothesis testing result, the greater the institutional ownership (IO), the lower the earnings management. It indicates that institutions are responsible to the public by disallowing managers to manage earnings. Based on this tendency, this study result aligns with Purwanti dan Nugrahanti (2016), disclosing that, in total, the income smoothing (IS) for the companies with high IO is lesser than those with low IO, happening when investigating 70 manufacturing firms from 2011 to 2013 in the Indonesian capital market. Furthermore, this evidence supports Chen et al. (2020), declaring that high institutional ownership reduces the informativeness of earnings for firms with income smoothing in Taiwan between 2001 and 2009. Based on the second hypothesis testing result, the greater the tendency of companies to use reputable auditors, the lower the earnings management. It indicates the effectiveness of external auditors; although they burden the company more, they can reduce earnings smoothing. Based on this tendency, this study confirms Fauzan et al. (2020), investigating 62 Indonesian companies becoming the Kompas 100 index from 2015 to 2018 as the sample. This positive propensity also exists when Bala et al. (2022) researched Nigerian companies appointing audit committee members dominated with accounting expertise. 6. Conclusion Under the stated research objectives, this study concludes that institutional possession and reputable external auditors can reduce earnings management in non-financial corporations establishing the LQ45 index on the Indonesian Capital Market from 2017 to 2022. Based on this inclination, this study recommends that the ownership structure remains concentrated on controlling shareholders, considering that they can be trusted to reduce earnings management, and reputable auditors are used to reduce this earnings management. Theoretically, it is recommended for subsequent researchers to add determinants of earnings management based on governance mechanisms such as the supervisory board based on size and independence, the gender-based supervisory board diversity, and audit committees. The use of cross-country companies also aims to enrich further research outcomes. Practially, this study recommends that the companies utilize the Big Four auditor to overcome this income smoothing, leading to the trust of public shareholders to buy the stocks. Also, these shareholders should choice companies with a high share portion of institutions to obtain trustworthy earning reporting. References Abogun, S., Adigbole, E. A., & Olorede, T. E. (2021). Income smoothing and firm value in a regulated market: The moderating effect of market risk. Asian Journal of Accounting Research, 6(3), 296–308. https://doi.org/10.1108/AJAR-08-2020-0072 Agustina, G. D., Novitasari, M., & Taufiq, A. R. (2021). The impact of institutional ownership on income smoothing with profitability as a mediating variable. SIMBA: Seminar Inovasi Manajemen, Bisnis, & Akuntansi, 3, 1–16. http://prosiding.unipma.ac.id/index.php/SIMBA/article/view/2185 Akhmadi, A., & Januarsi, Y. (2021). Profitability and firm value: Does dividend policy matter for Indonesian sustainable and responsible investment (SRI)-KEHATI listed firms? Economies, 9, 163. https://doi.org/10.3390/economies9040163 Al-Tamimi, H. A. H., Alwan, A. A., & Rahman, A. A. A. (2011). Factors affecting stock prices in the UAE financial markets. Journal of Transnational Management, 16, 3–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/15475778.2011.549441 Arisanty, R. A. N., & Riyanto, F. D. (2022). The role of stock price to moderate the influence of profitability, solvency, and firm size on firm value in consumer goods companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange between 2015 and 2020. Jurnal Ekbis: Analisis, Prediksi, & Informasi, 23(2), 294–307. https://jurnalekonomi.unisla.ac.id/index.php/ekbis/article/view/1070 Awalakki, M., & H.N., A. (2021). Impact of financial performance ratios on stock returns - A study with reference to National Stock Exchange. International Journal of Aquatic Science, 12(3), 2151–2167. http://www.journal-aquaticscience.com/article_136359.html Bala, H., Ahmad, W., Kathoon, G., & Karaye, A. B. (2022). Audit firm attributes and income smoothing: The moderating influence of audit committee accounting expertise. Cogent Business and Management, 9(1), 2127194. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2022.2127194 Beidleman, C. R. (1973). Income smoothing: The role of management. The Accounting Review, 48(4), 653–667. http://www.jstor.org/stable/245289 Chen, C. L., Weng, P. Y., & Lin, Y. C. (2020). The global financial crisis, institutional ownership, and the earnings informativeness of income smoothing. Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance, 35(1), 53–78. https://doi.org/10.1177/0148558X17696759 Dang, N. H., Tran, M. D., & Nguyen, T. L. A. (2018). Investigation of the impact of financial information on stock prices: The case of Vietnam. Academy of Accounting and Financial Studies Journal, 22(2), 1–12. https://www.abacademies.org/articles/investigation-of- the-impact-of-financial-information-on-stock-prices-the-case-of-vietnam-7223.html Erna, E., Murwaningsari, E., & Murtanto, M. (2024). Institutional possession, supervisory board size, external auditor quality, and profit quality. Economics and Business Quarterly Reviews, 7(3), 182–190. https://doi.org/10.31014/aior.1992.07.03.603 Fauzan, M., Islahuddin, I., & Nuraini, N. (2020). Good corporate governance and income smoothing practice: Studies on companies listed in the Kompas100 Index in Indonesia. East African Scholars Journal of Economics, Business and Management, 3(6), 563–571. https://doi.org/10.36349/EASJEBM.2020.v03i06.013 Firdaus, F. (2021). Quantitative Research Methodology. CV. DOTPLUS Publisher. Ghozali, I. (2017). Structural Equation Modelling: Concepts and Their Application by AMOS 24 (7th ed.). Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro. Ghozali, I. (2021). Multivariate Analysis Application by IBM SPSS 26 (10th ed.). Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro. Guimarães, G. V. B., Nossa, S. N., Moreira, N. C., & Nossa, V. (2022). Brazilian market reaction to auditor’s opinions. Revista de Educação e Pesquisa Em Contabilidade, 16(4), 466–483. https://doi.org/10.17524/repec.v16i4.3100 Gujarati, D. N., Porter, D. C., & Pal, M. (2019). Basic Econometrics (6th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education. Hanafi, M. M. (2016). Financial Management (2nd ed.). Badan Penerbit Fakultas Ekonomi Universitas Gadjah Mada. Hartono, J. (2014). Business Research Methodology: Misunderstandings and Experiences (6th ed.). Badan Penerbit Fakultas Ekonomi Universitas Gadjah Mada. https://doi.org/10.1108/AJAR-08-2020-0072 http://prosiding.unipma.ac.id/index.php/SIMBA/article/view/2185 https://doi.org/10.3390/economies9040163 https://doi.org/10.1080/15475778.2011.549441 https://jurnalekonomi.unisla.ac.id/index.php/ekbis/article/view/1070 http://www.journal-aquaticscience.com/article_136359.html https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2022.2127194 http://www.jstor.org/stable/245289 https://doi.org/10.1177/0148558X17696759 https://www.abacademies.org/articles/investigation-of-the-impact-of-financial-information-on-stock-prices-the-case-of-vietnam-7223.html https://www.abacademies.org/articles/investigation-of-the-impact-of-financial-information-on-stock-prices-the-case-of-vietnam-7223.html https://doi.org/10.31014/aior.1992.07.03.603 https://doi.org/10.36349/EASJEBM.2020.v03i06.013 https://doi.org/10.17524/repec.v16i4.3100 Asian Business Research Journal, 2025, 10(5): 101-105 105 © 2025 by the authors; licensee Eastern Centre of Science and Education, USA Hartono, J. (2017). Portfolio Theory and Investment Analysis (11th ed.). Badan Penerbit Fakultas Ekonomi Universitas Gadjah Mada. Islam, M. R. (2018). Sample size and its role in central limit theorem (CLT). International Journal of Physics & Mathematics, 1(1), 37–47. https://doi.org/10.31295/ijpm.v1n1.42 Muniroh, I., & Yuliati, A. (2021). Do cash flow and accounting profit affect stock price? Journal of Accounting and Strategic Finance, 4(1), 108– 121. https://doi.org/10.33005/jasf.v4i1.199 Pinto, I., Gaio, C., & Gonçalves, T. (2020). Corporate governance, foreign direct investment, and bank income smoothing in African countries. International Journal of Emerging Markets, 15(4), 670–690. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOEM-04-2019-0297 Polakitan, C. D. (2015). The comparative risk analysis between the LQ45 and non-LQ-45 shares. Jurnal Riset Bisnis Dan Manajemen, 3(1), 61– 72. Purwanti, R., & Nugrahanti, Y. W. (2016). Prevention strategy of income smoothing practices with good corporate governance mechanism. Jurnal Dinamika Akuntansi, 8(1), 60–72. https://doi.org/10.15294/jda.v8i1.9142 Putri, A. V., & Prasetyo, K. (2020). The effect of good corporate governance mechanism on earnings management of the LQ45 companies. Contemporary Economics, 14(4), 545–554. https://doi.org/10.5709/ce.1897-9254.426 Raihi-Belkaoui, A. (2004). Accounting Theory (5th ed.). Cengage Learning EMEA. Solikhah, B., Wahyudin, A., Al-Faryan, M. A. S., Iranda, N. N., Hajawiyah, A., & Sun, C.-M. (2022). Corporate governance mechanisms and earnings quality: Is firm size a moderation variable? Journal of Governance and Regulation, 11(1), 200–210. https://doi.org/10.22495/jgrv11i1siart1 Sumani, S., Roziq, A., & Annisa, W. (2021). Income smoothing in the agricultural firms listed on the Indonesian stock exchange. EKUITAS (Jurnal Ekonomi & Keuangan), 5(1), 118–137. https://doi.org/10.24034/j25485024.y2021.v5.i1.4801 Suyono, E. (2018). Institutional ownership, types of industry, and income smoothing: Empirical evidence from Indonesia. Journal of Auditing, Finance, & Forensic Accounting (JAFFA), 6(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.21107/jaffa.v6i1.4128 Trisanti, T. (2019). Discretionary accounting choice and management opportunistic behavior to manage income. Jurnal Akuntansi Dan Keuangan, 21(1), 21–29. https://doi.org/10.9744/jak.21.1.21-29 Yang, C., Tan, B. L., & Ding, X. (2012). Corporate governance and income smoothing in China. Journal of Financial Reporting and Accounting, 10(2), 120–139. https://doi.org/10.1108/19852511211273688 https://doi.org/10.31295/ijpm.v1n1.42 https://doi.org/10.33005/jasf.v4i1.199 https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOEM-04-2019-0297 https://doi.org/10.15294/jda.v8i1.9142 https://doi.org/10.5709/ce.1897-9254.426 https://doi.org/10.22495/jgrv11i1siart1 https://doi.org/10.24034/j25485024.y2021.v5.i1.4801 https://doi.org/10.21107/jaffa.v6i1.4128 https://doi.org/10.9744/jak.21.1.21-29 https://doi.org/10.1108/19852511211273688