Assessing Risk & Response Flashcards
Generally Accepted Auditing Standards (GAAS)
Historically, the AICPA identified 10 standards comprising GAAS that used to serve as a framework for U.S. auditing standards. The AICPA replaced these 10 standards with seven principles in connection with its Clarified Auditing Standards.
Responsibilities under GAAS
Auditors are responsible for having appropriate competence and capabilities to perform the audit; complying with relevant ethical requirements; and maintaining professional skepticism and exercising professional judgment, throughout the planning and performance of the audit.
Performance under GAAS
To express an opinion, the auditor obtains reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements as a whole are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error.
Reporting under GAAS
Based on an evaluation of the audit evidence obtained, the auditor expresses, in the form of a written report, an opinion in accordance with the auditor’s findings, or states that an opinion cannot be expressed. The opinion states whether the financial statements are presented fairly, in all material respects, in accordance with the applicable financial reporting framework.
In AICPA professional standards, the word should indicates an (a)
Presumptively mandatory requirement from which the CPA may depart in rare circumstances.
Statements on Auditing Standards (SASs)
Under the clarified auditing standards, any reference to GAAS now specifically means this authoritative body of professional standards (SASs) issued by the Auditing Standards Board.
Interpretive Publications
Consist of the appendices to the SASs, auditing interpretations of the SASs, auditing guidance included in AICPA Audit and Accounting Guides, and AICPA auditing Statements of Position.
Interpretive publications are not considered to be auditing standards
Categories of Professional Requirements
- Unconditional requirements—Must comply with the requirement without exception (indicated by “must” in applicable standards);
- Presumptively mandatory requirements—In rare circumstances, the practitioner may depart from such a requirement, but must document the justification
Which of the following actions should a CPA firm take to comply with the AICPA’s quality control standards?
Establish policies to ensure that the audit work meets applicable professional standards.
The AICPA’s quality control standards are applicable to the CPA firm’s portfolio of audit (and other financial statement related) services
A CPA firm would be reasonably assured of meeting its responsibility to provide services that conform with professional standards by
Having an appropriate system of quality control.
The primary purpose of establishing quality control policies and procedures for deciding whether to accept a new client is to
Minimize the likelihood of association with clients whose management lacks integrity.
Which of the following activities would be most helpful to a CPA in deciding whether to accept a new audit client?
Evaluating the CPA’s ability to properly service the client.
The AICPA’s Statements on Quality Control Standards emphasize four specific issues in making client acceptance/continuance decisions: (1) the integrity of management and those charged with governance; (2) the competence of the engagement team (including time and resources); (3) compliance with relevant ethical requirements (such as independence); and (4) significant issues from prior engagements that affect the continuing relationship. Evaluating the CPA’s ability to properly service the client is associated with the competence of the engagement team, which is identified as an important consideration.
How should differences of opinion between the engagement partner and the quality control reviewer be resolved?
By following the firm’s policies and procedures.
Relationship of GAAS to the SQCS
An individual audit engagement is governed by GAAS, whereas a CPA firm’s collective portfolio of accounting and auditing services is governed by the AICPA’s SQCS
Six Elements of a Quality Control System
- Leadership Responsibilities for Quality
- Relevant Ethical Requirements
- Acceptance and Continuance of Client-Relationships and Engagements
- Human resources
- Engagement performance- compliance with all firm and policy standards
- Monitoring
Engagement Quality Control Review
A process designed to provide an objective evaluation, before the report is released, of the significant judgments the engagement team made and the conclusions it reached in formulating the auditor’s report.
Principles Underlying an Audit Conducted in Accordance with GAAS state that sufficient appropriate audit evidence is to be obtained through designing and implementing appropriate responses, i.e., by performing audit procedures, to afford a reasonable basis for an opinion regarding the financial statements under audit. The substantive evidential matter required by this standard may be obtained, in part, through
Substantive evidential matter required by the Principles may include evidence obtained through the performance of substantive analytical procedures (as well as that obtained through inspection, observation, inquiries, and confirmation).
The audit work performed by each assistant should be reviewed to determine whether it was adequately performed and to evaluate whether the
Results are consistent with the conclusions to be presented in the auditor’s report.
GAAS require the auditor’s report to contain either an expression of opinion regarding the financial statements or an assertion to the effect that an opinion cannot be expressed. The objective of this requirement is to prevent
Misinterpretations regarding the degree of responsibility the auditor is assuming.
An auditor’s responsibility to express an opinion on the financial statements is
Explicitly represented in the responsibility paragraphs of the auditor’s unmodified report.
GAAS require an auditor to express an opinion on the financial statements. That responsibility is EXPLICITLY represented in the Auditor’s Responsibility paragraphs of the auditor’s unmodified report which states that the auditor’s responsibility is to express an opinion.
Auditor’s report AICPA Clarified Standards
- The first section has no label, but it identifies the nature of the engagement and the entity’s financial statements involved (consists of one sentence).
- Management’s Responsibility for the Financial Statements—(1 sentence) it states that management is responsible for the fair presentation of the financial statements and the implementation of internal control.
- Auditor’s Responsibility,
- Opinion—(one sentence) it expresses the auditor’s opinion (in the same wording as that used in the previous AICPA standards).
Auditor’s Responsibility
- The first consists of three sentences:
- Responsibility to express an opinion
- Conducted the audit in accordance with (GAAS)
- Plan and perform the audit to provide reasonable assurance. - The second consists of five sentences:
- Perform procedures to obtain audit evidence about the amounts and disclosures.
- The procedures depend on the auditor’s judgment, including assessment of risks of material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error.
- In making those risk assessments, the auditor considers internal control.
- The auditor expresses no such opinion (on interna l control, when not eng aged to report on inte rnal control in an “integ rated audit” ).
- An audit includes evaluating the appropriateness of accounting policies used and the reasonableness of significant accounting estimates. - The third consists of one sentence—expressing the auditor’s belief that the audit evidence is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for the opinion.
AICPA’s Statements on Standards for Accounting and Review Services (SSARSs)
These are applicable when the CPA is associated with the financial statements of a private company, but that association is something less than a full-scope audit engagement.
Compilation- no assurance, compiles F/S with available information
Review- lower level of assurance than audit
AICPA’s Statements on Standards for Attestation Engagements (SSAEs)
These are applicable when the CPA provides assurance about written representations or subject matter other than historical financial statements
A written engagement letter must be obtained for engagements to audit, review, or compile an entity’s financial statements under AICPA Professional Standards.
This should not be surprising, since the “public interest” is associated with such financial statement subject matter.
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 imposes a mandatory rotation applicable to both the audit engagement partner and the quality control (also called review) partner. How long in total is the partner allowed to serve as the engagement partner or review partner before someone else must serve in that capacity?
5 years
The Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) is charged with all of the following responsibilities except:
Establishing accounting standards for public companies.
The FASB establishes accounting standards. PCAOB establishes auditing standards.
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB)—Five primary responsibilities
- Registration of public accounting firms
- Inspections of registered public accounting firms (annually if audit at least 100 issuers)
- Standard setting for attestation, quality control and ethics and independence in preparation of audits
- Enforcement
- Funding
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
Title I—Established the PCAOB, gave standard-setting authority to the PCAOB
Title II—Established independence requirements for external auditors
Title III—Established requirements related to corporate re sponsibility to make executives take responsibility for the accuracy
Which of the following statements is correct regarding characteristics required of an engagement quality reviewer under PCAOB auditing standards?
An individual outside of the registered public accounting firm becomes an “associated person” of the registered public accounting firm when receiving compensation from the firm for performing the engagement quality review.
The PCAOB (specifically, AS Section 1220) identifies the following as “significant engagement deficiencies”
(1) the engagement team failed to obtain sufficient appropriate evidence; (2) the engagement team reached an inappropriate overall conclusion; (3) the engagement report is not appropriate; or (4) the firm is not independent of its client.
Which of the following is a correct statement regarding differences between PCAOB auditing standards on engagement quality review and AICPA Statements on Quality Control Standards (SQCS)?
PCAOB auditing standards require a concurring approval of issuance before the engagement report is released, whereas the SQCS have no such requirement.
PCAOB auditing standards require a cooling-off period of at least two years before an engagement partner can serve as an engagement quality reviewer, whereas the SQCS have no such requirement.
PCAOB auditing standards require an engagement quality review before an audit report is released, whereas SQCS do not require an engagement quality review.
To evaluate the significant judgments and conclusions of the engagement team under PCAOB auditing standards, the engagement quality reviewer should
(1) holding discussions with the engagement partner and other members of the engagement team and (2) reviewing the engagement’s audit documentation
Engagement Quality Review
Requires an engagement quality review (and concurring approval of issuance) for engagements conducted under PCAOB standards (1) for an audit; (2) for a review of interim financial information; and (3) for an attestation engagement regarding compliance reports of brokers and dealers
“Cooling-off” restriction
The person serving as engagement partner during either of the two audits preceding the audit subject to engagement quality review is not permitted to serve as engagement quality reviewer
Qualifications of an Engagement Quality Reviewer
(1) Must be an associated person of a registered public accounting firm; and (2) must have competence, independence, integrity, and objectivity
PCAOB Standards Have Several Differences Relative to AICPA’s Statements on Quality Control Standards (SQCS)
- Engagement Quality Review—SQCS do not require an engagement quality review for any type of engagement, whereas the PCAOB establishes such a requirement.
- Cooling-off Restriction—SQCS do not impose a “cooling-off” restriction or a requirement that the reviewer must be an associated person of a registered public accounting firm.
- Concurring Approval of Issuance —SQCS require any engagement quality review performed be completed before the engagement report is released without requiring a concurring approval of issuance.
- Documentation Retention and Changes—SQCS do not specifically require that engagement quality review documentation must be retained with other engagement documentation and be subject to specific policies regarding retention and changes.
The GAAS requirement states that due care is to be exercised in the performance of an audit is ordinarily interpreted to require
Critical review of the judgment exercised at every level of supervision.
While due care imposes the general responsibility of following the applicable GAAS standards, the professional standards specifically address the need for critical review.
A CPA firm evaluates its personnel advancement experience to ascertain whether individuals meeting stated criteria are assigned increased degrees of responsibility.
This is evidence of the firm’s adherence to which of the following prescribed standards
Professional standards on quality control (not supervision and review) require that a firm establish policies and procedures to ensure that personnel selected for advancement have the qualifications necessary for the work they will be required to perform.
Would the following factors ordinarily be considered in planning an audit engagement’s personnel requirements?
Opportunities for on-the-job training
Continuity and periodic rotation of personnel
After field work audit procedures are completed, a partner of the CPA firm who has not been involved in the audit performs a second or wrap-up working paper review. This second review usually focuses on
The fair presentation of the financial statements in conformity with GAAP.
The auditor’s standard report on financial statements should refer to generally accepted auditing standards (GAAS) and generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP).
Explicitly for BOTH
Before accepting an audit engagement, a successor auditor should make specific inquiries of the predecessor auditor regarding the predecessor’s
A successor auditor should communicate with the predecessor auditor about matters that will assist the successor auditor in deciding whether to accept the engagement. These would include the integrity of management, disagreements with management, and the predecessor’s understanding of the reason for the change in auditors.
Hill, CPA, has been retained to audit the financial statements of Monday Co. Monday’s predecessor auditor was Post, CPA, who has been notified by Monday that Post’s services have been terminated.
Under these circumstances, which party should initiate the communications between Hill and Post?
Hill, the successor auditor.
Ordinarily, the predecessor auditor permits the successor auditor to review the predecessor’s working paper analyses relating to
The successor auditor normally reviews the predecessor’s audit documentation relating to planning, internal control, audit results, balance sheet accounts, and contingencies.
An auditor is required to establish an understanding with a client regarding the services to be performed for each engagement. This understanding generally includes
- the objective of the audit;
- management’s responsibilities with regard to the financial statements, internal control, compliance with laws and regulations, availability of records, and the management representation letter;
- the auditor’s responsibilities for GAAS and reportable conditions;
- a description of an audit; and
- management’s responsibilities regarding correction of material misstatements and evaluation of immaterial adjustments.
In assessing whether to accept a client for an audit engagement, a CPA should consider the
Client’s business risk
CPA’s business risk
The client’s business risk is the risk that the client will fail to meet its objectives, particularly with regard to survival and profitability. The CPA’s business risk is the risk that the CPA’s business will suffer due to association with the client.
Which of the following factors most likely would cause a CPA to not accept a new audit engagement?
The prospective client is unwilling to make all financial records available to the CPA.
Access to all financial records would be a minimum requirement for the audit, and management is required to state in the management representation letter that all financial records and data have been made available to the auditors.
Which of the following matters does an auditor usually include in the engagement letter?
Arrangements regarding fees and billing.
The engagement letter identifies the respective responsibilities of the entity and the auditor, and essentially constitutes the contract between the parties.
Before accepting an engagement to audit a new client, a CPA is required to obtain
The prospective client’s consent to make inquiries of the predecessor, if any.
AICPA standards addressing required communications between successor and predecessor auditors state that an auditor should not accept an engagement until the successor auditor’s required communications with the predecessor auditor have been evaluated.
An auditor’s engagement letter most likely would include
- “The objective and scope of the audit of the financial statements.
- The responsibilities of the auditor.
- The responsibilities of management. (“for the design, implementation, and maintenance of internal control relevant to the preparation and fair presentation of financial statements that are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error”)
- A statement that because of the inherent limitations of an audit, together with the inherent limitations of internal control, an unavoidable risk exists that some material misstatements may not be detected, even though the audit is properly planned and performed in accordance with GAAS.
- Identification of the applicable financial reporting framework for the preparation of the financial statements.
- Reference to the expected form and content of any reports to be issued by the auditor and a statement that circumstances may arise in which a report may differ from its expected form and content.”
Which of the following could be difficult to determine because electronic evidence may not be retrievable after a specific period?
The timing of control and substantive tests.
When it might be best (or even possible) to perform tests of control and substantive tests could be affected by the availability of underlying evidence.
The audit plan usually cannot be finalized until the
Consideration of the entity’s internal control structure has been completed.
The audit plan (sometimes referred to as the “audit program”) documents the auditing procedures to be performed. It cannot be finalized until consideration of the entity and its environment, including internal control, has been completed.
Which of the following factors is most likely to affect the extent of the documentation of the auditor’s understanding of a client’s system of internal controls?
The use of information technology in the accounting system greatly impacts the auditor’s documentation of that system. For example, a highly automated system will result in very different documentation than a manual system.
In planning a new engagement, which of the following is a factor that affects the auditor’s judgment as to the quantity, type, and content of audit documentation?
- the nature of the engagement;
- the type of report to be issued;
- the nature of the financial statements, schedules, or other information on which the auditor is reporting;
- the nature and condition of the client’s records;
- the assessed level of control risk (including the estimated occurrence rate of attributes); and
- the needs in the particular circumstances for supervision and review of the work.
Because of the risk of material misstatement, an audit of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards should be planned and performed with an attitude of
Professional skepticism.
In planning an audit, an auditor would
- coordinate client assistance to be rendered
- discuss matters that may affect the audit with consulting and tax staff
- read the current year’s interim financial statements
The in-charge auditor most likely would have a supervisory responsibility to explain to the staff assistants
How the results of various auditing procedures performed by the assistants should be evaluated.
To obtain an understanding of a continuing client’s business in planning an audit, an auditor most likely would
Review prior-year audit documentation and the permanent file for the client.
Knowledge of a client’s business is generally obtained though experience with the client or the industry and inquiry of client personnel.
When issuing an unqualified opinion, the auditor who evaluates the audit findings should be satisfied that the
Estimate of the total likely misstatement is less than a material amount.
In order to issue an unqualified opinion, the auditor must be confident that no material misstatements exist in the financial statements. While misstatements may exist, in total they must be believed to be less than a material amount.
When planning a sample for a substantive test of details, an auditor should consider tolerable misstatement for the sample. This consideration should
Be related to preliminary judgments about materiality levels.
Based on new information gained during an audit of a nonissuer, an auditor determines that it is necessary to modify materiality for the financial statements as a whole. In this circumstance, which of the following statements is accurate?
Materiality levels for particular classes of transactions, account balances, or disclosures might also need to be revised.
Materiality
The magnitude of an omission or misstatement of accounting information that, in the light of surrounding circumstances, makes it probable that the judgment of a reasonable person relying on the information would have been changed or influenced by the omission or misstatement.