SavedAdd your journal

Journals / İşletme Bilimi Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 14 Sayı: 2

The Impact of Corporate Governance and Audit Quality on the Cost of Debt: A Study on BIST Firms

Kurumsal Yönetim ve Denetim Kalitesinin Borçlanma Maliyeti Üzerindeki Etkisi: BIST Firmaları Üzerine Bir Araştırma

Gülhan Suadiye(HATAY MUSTAFA KEMAL UNIVERSITY)0000-0003-2619-2146
Pages
409–425
Publication Date
2026-06-23
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The results indicate that in countries where reliance on external financing is high, it would be a strategic step for firms to invest more in corporate governance reforms and auditing quality both in reducing cost of debt and building credibility in financial markets, thereby facilitating sustainable financing.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The literature suggests that corporate governance mechanisms play a significant role in resolving firms’ challenges in accessing external financing sources and reducing the cost of debts.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this context, this study investigates whether corporate governance and audit quality have an impact on the cost of debt.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The results indicate that in countries where reliance on external financing is high, it would be a strategic step for firms to invest more in corporate governance reforms and auditing quality both in reducing cost of debt and building credibility in financial markets, thereby facilitating sustainable financing.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:2008-2022 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Kurumsal Yönetim · Denetim Kalitesi · Borçlanma Maliyeti

Abstract

The literature suggests that corporate governance mechanisms play a significant role in resolving firms’ challenges in accessing external financing sources and reducing the cost of debts. In this context, this study investigates whether corporate governance and audit quality have an impact on the cost of debt. Within this scope, the data of 190 companies listed on Borsa Istanbul (BIST) for the years 2008-2022 were analyzed by using panel data analysis and the Panel EGLS method. According to the analysis results, board independence, ownership concentration, and external audit quality reduce the cost of debt at a statistically significant level. In contrast, board size and audit committee independence have a statistically significant increasing effect on the cost of debt. Another significant finding of the study is that CEO duality and managerial ownership, which are often associated with unfavorable effects in the literature, to have a reducing and statistically significant effect on the cost of debt. The main contribution of this study is to reveal empirical findings on the extent to which corporate governance and auditing practices provide confidence to external financiers and influence their risk perception, and risk premiums in environment of macroeconomic instability. The results indicate that in countries where reliance on external financing is high, it would be a strategic step for firms to invest more in corporate governance reforms and auditing quality both in reducing cost of debt and building credibility in financial markets, thereby facilitating sustainable financing.

Özet

Literatürde, kurumsal yönetim mekanizmalarının firmaların dış finansman kaynaklarına erişim sorunlarının çözümünde ve borçlanma maliyetini düşürmede önemli bir rol oynadığı belirtilmektedir. Bu bağlamda çalışmada, firmaların kurumsal yönetim ve denetim kalitesinin borçlanma maliyeti üzerinde bir etkisi olup olmadığı araştırılmıştır. Bu kapsamda, Borsa İstanbul’da (BIST) işlem gören 190 firmanın 2008-2022 yıllarına ait verileri panel veri analizi ve Panel EGLS yöntemi kullanılarak analize tabi tutulmuştur. Analiz sonuçlarına göre, yönetim kurulu bağımsızlığı, sahiplik yoğunlaşması ve dış denetim kalitesi, borçlanma maliyetini istatistiksel olarak anlamlı düzeyde azaltmaktadır. Buna karşın, yönetim kurulu büyüklüğü ve denetim komitesi bağımsızlığı borçlanma maliyetini istatistiksel olarak anlamlı düzeyde artırmaktadır. Çalışmanın diğer önemli bulgusu ise literatürde, genellikle olumsuz etkilerle ilişkilendirilen CEO ikiliğinin ve yönetici sahipliğinin borçlanma maliyeti üzerinde istatistiksel olarak anlamlı düzeyde azaltıcı bir etkisinin ortaya çıkmasıdır. Çalışmanın temel katkısı, kurumsal yönetim ve denetim uygulamalarının makroekonomik istikrarsızlık ortamında dış finansman sağlayıcılarına ne ölçüde güven verdiği, risk algısına ve risk primlerine etkilerini ampirik bulgularla ortaya koymasıdır. Çalışma sonuçları, dış finansman kaynaklarına ihtiyacın yüksek olduğu ülkelerde firmaların hem borçlanma maliyetini azaltmak hem de finansal piyasalarda itibar oluşturmak ve böylece sürdürülebilir finansmanı kolaylaştırmak için kurumsal yönetim reformlarına ve denetim kalitesine daha fazla yatırım yapılmasının stratejik bir adım olacağını göstermektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Suadiye, G. (2026). The Impact of Corporate Governance and Audit Quality on the Cost of Debt: A Study on BIST Firms. İşletme Bilimi Dergisi, Cilt: 14 Sayı: 2, 409–425. https://doi.org/10.22139/jobs.1704058

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (38)

  1. Adam, M., Mukhtaruddin, M., Soraya, N. ve Yusrianti, H. (2015). Good corporate governance and cost of debt: Listed companies on Indonesian institute for corporate governance. Asian Social Science, 11, 58-77. https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v11n25p58
  2. Aksoy, M. ve Yılmaz, M. K. (2023). Does board diversity affect the cost of debt financing? Empirical evidence from Turkey. Gender in Management, 38(4), 504-524. https://doi.org/10.1108/GM-01-2022-0021
  3. Amir, E., Guan, Y. ve Livne, G. (2010). Auditor independence and the cost of capital before and after Sarbanes-Oxley: The case of newly public issued debt. European Accounting Review, 19(4), 633-664. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638180903503986
  4. Anderson, R. C., Mansi, S. A. ve Reeb, D. M. (2004). Board characteristics, accounting report integrity, and the cost of debt. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 37(3), 315-342. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacceco.2004.01.004
  5. Ashbaugh, H., Collins, D. W. ve La Fond, R. (2006). The effects of corporate governance on firms’ credit ratings. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 42(1-2), 203-243. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacceco.2006.02.003
  6. Atasel, O. Y. ve Güneysu, Y. (2023). ESG performansı ile borç maliyeti arasındaki ilişki üzerine bir araştırma. Muhasebe ve Vergi Uygulamaları Dergisi, 16(2), 185-202. https://doi.org/10.29067/muvu.1196945
  7. Atkin, M. ve Glen, J. (1992). Comparing capital structures around the globe. The International Executive, 34(5), 369–387. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/tie.5060340502
  8. Bacha, S. (2019). Corporate governance practices and audit quality: Do they matter for the cost of debt? Theoretical Economics Letters, 9, 2262-2282. https://doi.org/10.4236/tel.2019.97143
  9. Bhojraj, P. ve Sengupta, S. (2003). Effect of corporate governance on bond ratings and yields: The role of institutional investors and outside directors. The Journal of Business, 76(3), 455-475. https://doi.org/10.1086/344114
  10. Booth, L., Aivazian, V., Demirguc-Kunt, A. ve Maksimovic, V. (2001). Capital structure in developing countries. Journal of Finance, 56(1), 87-130. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-1082.00320
  11. Boubakri, N. ve Ghouma, H. (2010). Control/ownership structure, creditor rights protection and the cost of debt financing: International evidence. Journal of Banking and Finance, 34, 2481–2499. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2010.04.006
  12. Bradley, M. ve Chen, D. (2011). Corporate governance and the cost of debt: Evidence from director limited liability and indemnification provisions. Journal of Corporate Finance, 17(1), 83-107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2010.08.001
  13. Cadbury Committee. (1992). Report of the committee on the financial aspects of corporate governance. Gee. https://www.ecgi.global/sites/default/files/codes/documents/cadbury.pdf
  14. Demırguc-Kunt, A. ve Maksimovic, V. (1996). Stock market development and financing choice of firms. World Bank Economic Review, 10(2), 341– 369. https://doi.org/10.1093/wber/10.2.341
  15. Demirguç-Kunt, A. ve Maksimovic, V. (1999). Institutions, financial markets, and firm debt maturity. Journal of Financial Economics, 54(3), 295-336.
  16. Derbali, A., Jamel, L., Chenguel, M. B., Lamouchi, A., Elnagar, A. K. ve Ltaifa, M. B. (2020). Governance structure and cost of debt. Corporate Governance and Organizational Behavior Review, 4(1), 41-53. https://doi.org/10.22495/cgobrv4i1p4
  17. Doğan Başar, B. (2021). Corporate governance, cost of capital and tobin’s Q: Empirical evidence from Turkey listed companies. South-Eastern Europe Journal of Economics, 19(1), 51-78. https://www.asecu.gr/old_files/Seeje/issue36/issue36-basar.pdf
  18. Ertugrul, M. ve Hegde, S. (2008). Board compensation practices and agency costs of debt. Journal of Corporate Finance, 14(5), 512-531. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2008.09.004
  19. Fields, L. P., Fraser, D. R. ve Subrahmanyam, A. (2012). Board quality and the cost of debt capital: The case of bank loans. Journal of Banking and Finance, 36(5), 1536–1547. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2011.12.016
  20. Ghouma, H., Ben-Nasr, H. ve Yan, R. (2018). Corporate governance and cost of debt financing: Empirical evidence from Canada. The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 67(2), 138-148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.qref.2017.06.004
  21. Gujarati, D. N. ve Porter, D. C. (2009). Basic econometrics (5th ed.). McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
  22. Gürbüz, A. O. ve Ergincan, Y. (2004). Kurumsal yönetim: Türkiye’deki durumu ve geliştirilmesine yönelik öneriler. Literatür Yayıncılık.
  23. Jensen, M. C. ve Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305-360.
  24. Khan, M. Y., Javeed, A., Cuong, L. K. ve Pham, H. (2020). Corporate governance and cost of capital: Evidence from emerging market. Risks, 8(4), 104. https://doi.org/10.3390/risks8040104
  25. Klapper, L. ve Love, I. (2004). Corporate governance, investor protection and performance in emerging markets. Journal of Corporate Finance, 10(5), 703-728.
  26. Lorca, C., Sánchez-Ballesta, J. P. ve García-Meca, E. (2011). Board effectiveness and cost of debt. Journal of Business Ethics, 100(4), 613-631. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-010-0699-3
  27. Mansi, S. A., Maxwell, W. F. ve Miller, D. P. (2004). Does auditor quality and tenure matter to investors? Evidence from the bond market. Journal of Accounting Research, 42(4), 755-793. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-679X.2004.00156.x
  28. Millstein, I. M., Albert, M., Cadbury, A., Denham, R. E., Feddersen, D., ve Tateisi, N. (1998). Corporate governance: Improving competitiveness and access to capital in global markets: A report to the OECD by the Business Sector Advisory Group on Corporate Governance. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/corporate-governance-improving-competitiveness-and-access-to-capital-in-global-markets_9789264162709-en.html
  29. Modigliani, F. ve Miller, M. (1958). The cost of capital, corporation finance and the theory of investment. American Economic Review, 48(3), 261-297. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1809766?seq=1
  30. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2023). G20/OECD Principles of Corporate Governance 2023. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/ed750b30-en
  31. Özer, G., Çam, İ. ve Çerez, S. (2023). Kurumsal yönetimin borç maliyetine etkisi: Borsa İstanbul’da bir uygulama, Business and Economics Research Journal, 14(2), 217-226. https://doi.org/10.20409/berj.2023.412
  32. Özşahin Koç, F. ve Deran, A. (2025). The impact of board structure on cost of debt: A research on BIST manufacturing sector companies. Trakya Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 27 (IERFM 2025 Özel Sayı), 205-226. https://doi.org/10.26468/trakyasobed.1515405
  33. Palmieri, E., Geretto, E. F., Polato, M. ve Miani, S. (2025). Alternative finance in bank-firm relationship: How does board structure affect the cost of debt? Journal of Management and Governance, 9(1), 111–143. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-024-09700-4
  34. Schauten, M. ve van Dijk, D. J. C. (2010). Corporate governance and the cost of debt of large European firms (ERIM Report Series No. ERS-2010-025-F&A). https://ssrn.com/abstract=1620719
  35. Sengupta, P. (1998). Corporate disclosure quality and the cost of debt. Accounting Review, 73(4), 459-475. https://www.jstor.org/stable/248186
  36. Sarbanes- Oxley Act (2002). Sarbanes- Oxley Act of 2002. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/COMPS-1883/pdf/COMPS-1883.pdf
  37. Sermaye Piyasası Kurulu (2011). Kurumsal yönetim ilkelerinin belirlenmesine ve uygulanmasına ilişkin tebliğ, [30/12/2011 tarihli ve 28158 sayılı Resmi Gazete, Seri: IV, No: 56]. https://spk.gov.tr/data/61e87f0b1b41c611a4c53a90/2fb4947cb75a159d431a0ed205cdbc7c.pdf
  38. Wahyuni, P. D. (2019). Good corporate governance and firm size on cost of debt: Evidence from Indonesian listed companies. International Journal of Academic Research in Accounting, Finance and Management Sciences, 9(2), 257-265.