Looks like no one added any tags here yet for you.
audit documentation facets
sufficient audit documentation
defensible audit documentation
sufficient audit documentation
experienced auditor can pickup workpapers and understand/ reperform (should be no questions about how you did it or where the info came from)
indicated who prepared, reviewed, and signed-off
source documents should tie to the face of the financials (no ghost ticking)
ghost ticking
auditor says they tied a transaction out to an invoice but they really didn’t (fraudulent and unethical)
defensible audit documentation
alerts supervisors to high-risk areas
litigation protection: subpoena is possible
PCAOB Auditing Standard #3: “not documented, not done”
types of services/ attestation
examination
review
agreed-upon procedures
compliance
operational
ESG
examination as a type of attestation
examination (non-financial information) or audit (financials)
high assurance- “reasonable assurance”
risk of material misstatement (ROMM) is low
“in our opinion…”
all procedures that are available
review as a type of attestation
moderate assurance (i.e., less in scope than exam/ audit)
ROMM: moderate
“we are not aware…”
mainly analytical procedures
Would commonly see M&A within a review procedure bcs when merging or acquiring you might want to have one of your own auditors go in and check to make sure everything is okay
agreed-upon procedures as a type of attestation
low assurance
ROMM: varies
summary of outcome
agreed upon procedures
compliance as a type of attestation
IRS audits for tax compliance
regulations (ex. EPA)
safety laws (ex. FDA)
loan covenants for bank debt
operations audits as a type of attestation
for effectiveness and efficiency of operations, processes, and benchmarks
generally carried out by internal auditors
ESG reporting as a type of attestation
Environmental, social, and corporate governance reporting
generally limited assurance for a company’s reports
what type(s) of attestation don’t you need to be independent for?
operational audits- it’s actually better if you’re not because it's usually about improving a process
audit risk (AR)
the risk that the auditor may unknowingly fail to appropriately modify the opinion on F/Ss that are materially misstated- risk that the auditor issues the wrong opinion
want this risk to be as low as possible
risk of material misstatement (RMM)
not directly influenced by auditor
both component risks are assessed/ evaluated by the auditors
client risks
risk that f/ss are materially misstated
factors that determines what level of audit risk is acceptable for a given client
distribution of ownership
business risk to audit firm
client size
litigation environment
audit risk model (ARM)
AR= RMM x DR
detection risk (DR)
risk that auditor fails to detect a material misstatement
residual risk
directly influenced by the auditor
auditors reduce DR by increasing the quantity and quality of their testing
auditors control AR through DR
audit risk comprises the risk that:
the F/Ss are materially misstated (RMM); and
the auditor will not detect such misstatements (DR)
RMM formula
IR x CR
inherent risk (IR)
susceptibility of an assertion to material misstatement aka the risk that an account is more likely to have numbers wrong
assumes no related internal controls
How risky is this company if they don’t have internal controls
How risky are they– how risky are they as a company, how risky is their management team themSELVES not just the industry (not a credit card company, but more like Tesla because we know their CEO is a nut)
important factors:
client’s business
management’s integrity
client competence
rush to produce F/Ss
pressure to hit key metrics
number and nature of related parties
routineness of transactions
control risk (CR)
risk that internal control won’t prevent or detect and correct a material misstatement
assessment based on understanding of client and testing of internal control
important factors
control environment (tone at the top)
board of directors and audit committee
internal audit
effectiveness of accounting system
strength of internal control system
an auditor assesses CR as low when:
internal controls are good, the auditor plans to rely on the controls (design and implementation of control appear to be operating effectively)
auditor will need to test controls to support low CR (to prove that they are working effectively and they can sufficiently rely on them)
RMM= IR x CR
relationship between IR and need for evidence
direct, the higher the IR, the more evidence required
relationship between CR and need for substantive evidence
direct, the higher the CR, the more substantive evidence needed
relationship between AR and need for evidence
inverse, the higher the AR, the less audit evidence necessary
can this about this in a tolerance way how he described it “more tolerance for doing bad (more audit risk) so we need less evidence”
relationship between DR and need for evidence
inverse, the lower the DR, the more evidence required
low DR means we need higher quality testing (more tests of details) because we have to PROVE why we have low DR
high DR means tests of controls and analytical evidence sufficient
relationship of RMM and DR
inverse, the higher the RMM, the lower the DR
(high rmm, low DR) more assurance required from substantive testing (DR is lower the more testing we do)
we cannot control RMM as the auditor, but we can control our testing, so if there is a high RMM, then we have to do MORE testing which would mean there is a lower DR.
what is the ARM used for
determining the NET of audit testing
business risk auditing
low DR is needed for accounts impacted by processes with high residual risk
the ultimate goal
achieved audit risk ≤ acceptable audit risk
typical size of AR associated with size of company
lower AR bigger company, higher AR with smaller company
fundamental to resource allocation:
perform more tests related to aspects of the client presenting the highest risk
knowledge of client risks
assess how clients react or fail to react to rapidly changing business risks
profitability, liquidity, marketability
employee morale & retention, stakeholder comfort
definition of internal control
a control is a process that “comprises those elements of an organization (including its resources, systems, processes, culture, structure, and tasks) that, taken together, support people in the achievement of the organization’s objectives”
objectives of internal controls
to improve the effectiveness of decision making and the efficiency of business processes
to increase the reliability of information
to comply with laws, regulations, and contractual obligations
internal controls are a(n) _____ process
ongoing (annual, quarterly, monthly, weekly, daily, more than daily)
who’s responsibility are internal controls?
management’s
how do internal control affect risk
not effective in eliminating all risks but reduces its potential
how do internal controls affect the organization
increases their ability to achieve its objectives
internal control requirements for public companies
AS 2201 requires audits to include an opinion on F/Ss and internal control over financial reporting (ICFR) (based on SOX 404)— this is essentially just saying that they have to give an integrated audit
internal control requirements for private companies
GAAS requires auditors to obtain an understanding of the company’s controls but does not require testing or an opinion— just a F/S opinion essentially
reliance on internal controls means what kind of testing
indirect, maximum reliance— lots of control testing, less substantive testing
indirectly getting comfort if they have good controls, doesn’t directly tell us that their information is correct though
reliance on substantive is what kind of testing
direct, minimum reliance— no control testing, lots of substantive testing
automated control push you further towards minimum reliance because you can test for way more, so a lot more substantive testing occurs
maximum internal control reliance
digital audit
interim testing
minimum internal control reliance
audit effort devoted to evaluating the output of the internal control structure (i.e. substantive)
not possible with the controls testing still required for ICFR opinion
characteristics of good internal controls
separation of duties (ex. operations, authorizationin, custody, recordkeeping)
proper authorization
adequate documents and records
physical control over assets and records
independent checks on performance
internal controls limitations
failure due to human error
do not understand or properly follow instructions
judgment errors
fatigue
collusion could allow employees to circumvent segregation of duties
management override
overtime, the may be a breakdown or deterioration in compliance
what does ICFR stand for
internal controls over financial reporting
ICFR
controls that reduce the risk of errors in the financial reporting process:
accurately record routine transactions (ex. sales transactions)
conformity with GAAP
prevent fraud
serve as IT general control (ITGC)
facilitate estimation process for non-routine transactions
facilitate period-end close and preparation of F/Ss
top-down approach for ICFR
test and evaluate design
test and evaluate operating effectiveness
ICFR opinion (unqualified or adverse) based on control framework (i.e. COSO)
COSO framework components
control environment
risk assessment
information and communication system
control activities
monitoring
control environment
the foundation of the COSO framework, an organization’s integrity, general competence, and ethics. attitudes and incentives (i.e. tone at the top)
entity level controls (what are they, what do they do, what sections in COSO, and examples)
controls located at the top of an organization
mitigate strategic risks to the org and promote effectiveness of decision making and business activities
COSO sections: control environment or monitoring
examples:
audit committee
fraud controls
period-end financial reporting process controls
code of conduct, code of ethics
management level control examples
top-level reviews
performance indicators (i.e. KPIs) and benchmarking
independent evaluations
example of a top-level review
senior management reviews the results of operations against forecasts and budgets and follow up on potential problems
example of a performance indicator (i.e. KPIs)/ benchmarking
potential inventory valuation problems are arising from competition or new entrants may be indicated by looking at the rate at which inventory is being sold, disaggregated by product line and geographic region
example of an independent evaluation
unfavorable budget variances followed up on when brought to the attention of someone who is independent of the process creating the variances
limitations of entity-level controls
failure to link to organizational objectives
no accountability
communication breakdowns
top management circumvention/override
process level control examples
process performance reviews
processing controls
application controls
physical controls
segregation of duties
three categories of controls
preventive
detective
corrective
preventive controls
controls that are put in place to avoid material misstatements
ex. segregation of duties, approval
detective controls
controls that are put in place to discover material misstatements
ex. reconciliations, reviews, inventory counts
corrective controls
controls put in place to respond to material misstatements that were discovered by detective controls
ex. backups of master file, corrective JEs, updating password access after firings
control types
complementary
redundant
compensating
complementary control
controls that function together
detective and corrective controls for example
redundant control
controls that cover the same F/S assertion or control objective
lock and security camera for example
compensating control
controls that can be relied upon to reduce the risk that an existing material weakness results in a material misstatement
if one redundant control fails, the other becomes a compensating control, say the lock fails
manual controls
do not use information technology
ex. bank reconciliation, budget reviews, etc.
automated controls
system-based controls that are programmed procedures
ex. system report when inventory levels fluctuate
manual controls with an automated component
manual controls that rely on a report from the system
ex. supervisor signs-off on inventory report
types of error and fraud for automated controls
frauds can be built into design and difficult to detect
errors might not surface for a lagged period
unauthorized access to information a significant risk
threat of management override for automated controls
those who design or program can have a significant impact on risk of fraud if they are able to circumvent controls
additional risks for automated controls
fewer people with expertise to supervise/ evaluate
power failure
concentration of data- lower probability of loss but higher magnitude of loss if problem occurs
hacking by external parties
viruses
ITGCs
IT general control: controls that are indirect to the actual system application (“wall” built around the application)
development of systems- designed, tested, and placed in operations
changes to systems- modified once put in place
operations- contingency planning
access to programs and data- security issues
automated controls
aka application controls: controls built into place with the front end of an application (often prepackaged and documented)
input controls
process controls
output controls
input controls
the key objective associated with the front end of an application
process controls
what are the key objective associated with the actual transaction processing and master file maintenance?
output controls
what are the key objectives associated with the results of transactions and systems performance?
implications of residual risk
influences expectations about account balances
suggests potential financial misstatements
raises concerns about viability
indicates potential threats to the control environment
highlights potential comments for client
auditor communication requirements
management- control deficiencies
audit committee- material weaknesses and significant deficiencies
board of directors- if negative 404 opinion