MCQs Flashcards
Quality Control - Definition & PCAOB/AICPA
Quality control is a process to provide the firm with reasonable assurance that its personnel comply with the applicable professional standards.
The PCAOB has adopted the AICPA’s quality control standards.
5 quality control elements of a system of quality control
- independence, integrity and objectivity
- personnel management
- acceptance and continuation of clients
- engagement performance
- monitoring
Supervision and Review is a Component of
engagement performance
Basic fundamental concept that underlies the audit process
Risk:
The acceptance by auditors that there is some level of uncertainty in performing the audit function.
Which elements underlie the application of generally accepted auditing standards (particularly the standards of fieldwork and reporting)?
Materiality and Audit Risk
Audit planning involves developing an overall strategy related to collecting and evaluating the Evidence to be obtained.
By testing and understanding Internal Control, the auditors can assess whether it offers assurance that the financial statements will be free from Material errors and fraud.
These assessments enable the auditors to evaluate the Risks of material misstatement of the financial statements.
Three General Standards
TIP
(1) adequate Training and proficiency
(2) Independence of mental attitude
(3) due Professional care
Three Fieldwork Standards
PIE
(1) adequate Planning and supervision
(2) understanding entity/environment incl. Internal control
(3) sufficient appropriate audit Evidence
The auditor’s judgment concerning the overall fairness of the presentation of financial position, results of operations, and changes in cash flow is applied within the framework of
GAAP
Generally Accepted Accounting Principles.
Independence problems - Covered Member, Immediate Family & Close Relatives
The covered member as well as a member of the person’s immediate family (person’s spouse and any dependents):
- cannot have financial interest in the audit client
- can work for the audit client as long as the position is not in a position (such as management) that influences the financial statements
A close relative (parent, sibling, nondependent child) can:
- have a financial interest in an audit client as long as that interest is immaterial to the person
- work for the audit client as long as the position is not in accounting or financial reporting (such as head of payroll accounting)
If the close relative works for the audit firm, the person is not a covered member unless:
- the person works on the engagement team or
- is in a position to influence the members of the engagement team or the audit
Illustration of a liability to clients under common law
client sues auditor for not discovering a theft of assets by an employee
CPA had a duty to perform, which require him/her to exercise ‘due professional care’
the misappropriation of assets by one employee should have been uncovered through an audit program which revealed the lack of separation of duties with regard to the employee
Unmodified audit report for a non-public company
Introductory, paragraph simply identifies the financial statements that were examined.
Other paragraphs outline:
Responsibilities of the parties
Standards that were followed
Nature and scope of an audit
When those charged with governance do not take appropriate remedial action
may consider withdrawal from the engagement, if possible under applicable law/regulation
suspected or identified noncompliance with laws and regulations (initial steps and subsequent procedures)
- understand act/circumstance (consult with mgmt one level above the act, if unsatisfactory info then client arranged consultation with client’s legal counsel)
- evaluate effect on FS
Procedures:
- compare supporting docs with acctg records
- confirm info with third parties
- confirm proper authorization
- apply procedures to identify occurrence of similar transactions
NOT personal misconduct by employees unrelated to business ops
suspected or identified illegal acts (opinion modification, disclosure)
Qualitative - immaterial amount could lead to material
Quantitative - contingencies per noncompliance
Adequacy of disclosure
Implications on reliability of mgmt representations (material)
If material:
- issue qualifiled or adverse depending on materiality
- disclaim if materiality cannot be ascertained due to insufficiency of evidence
- if modifications aren’t accepted, withdraw and communicate reason for w/d in writing to those charged with governance
If immaterial:
- disclose to senior mgmt and those charge with governance
- if no remediation, withdraw
Possible disclosure to third third parties (confidentiality generally precludes, consult with legal counsel):
- under 8K to sec
- under inquires from successor auditor
- under subpoena
- under requirements to funding (governmental) agency
work or findings of specialist
- accept unless determined unreasonable
- additional procedures if materially different than FS assertions
- unresolved, than seek another opinion (still not resolved then issue qualified or disclaimer of opinion)
- only mention specialist if issuing a qualified or adverse opinion AND doing so will assist in understanding the reason for the qualification
Why must opinion pertain to FS taken as a WHOLE?
to prevent misinterpretations regarding degree of auditor’s assumption of responsibility
Client’s rights to working papers (versus work products or or member-prepared records)
Working Papers - belong to member and need not be provided to client unless imposed by state/federal statute, regulations or contractual agreement
Member-prepared records - may only be withheld for fees
Work Products - may be withheld for fees, incompletion, compliance with professional standards, or in light of outstanding litigation (once provided only required to provide again if natural disaster or act of war)
Records and products may be provided in any usable format (if requested exists then provide) and additional fees may be charged.
Requests to change (audit to review/review to compilation)
Reasons:
- change in circumstances
- misunderstanding regarding nature of each engagement type
- restriction on scope (imposed by client or due to circumstances)
Consider:
- reason given, particularly scope limitation implications
- additional effort require to complete original request
- estimated additional cost to complete original request
Do not address change in resulting report
Effect on Ratio of equal decrease in numerator and denominator
If ratio is greater than 1:1, ratio is increased
If ratio is less than 1:1, ratio is decreased
Includes “objective of the engagement”
Auditor’s engagement letter
Negative Assurance
nothing came to our attention that specified matters do not meet specified standards
limited to negative assurance when FS have not been audited
generally not used in opinion on financial statements (never in audit opinion)
used for: comfort letters, special reports, agreed-upon procedures, compliance (laws/regs/contracts)
Procedures required regarding subsequent events (SE)
- read & review interim FS
- inquiries of mgmt/governance re:
a. current status of tentative, preliminary, inconclusive data and
b. any unusual adj since BS date
c. changes in stock, debt, working capital
d. substantial contingent liabilities/commitments - read meeting minutes (SH, BOD, OFF)
- inquiries of legal counsel
- observe SE
- scan records for unusual transactions
- obtain letter of rep on SE
Considerations for Design and Performance of
Further Audit Procedures (responsive to assessed risks of material misstatement RMM at the relevant assertion level)
- significance of risk
- likelihood of material misstatement (MM)
- characteristics of relevant transactions, balance, disclosure
- nature of entity’s specific controls
- whether evidence is expected to determine effectivity of entity controls regarding MM
Restrictions not allowed for Review
Restrictions are not allowed on:
Scope of the Inquiry
Analytical Procedures
Review may be restricted to a single FS like BS
When client presents photocopies in light of misplaced originals
Reevaluate risk of fraud
Design alternative tests for related transactions
Must determine reliability of the internally generated evidence in light of entity controls