Auditing

AIM 6334 Auditing and Assurance Service Research Project [pic] Li-chung Lee Kung Ya Cheng Jui-Ping Lin Table of Contents I. Introduction:……………………………………………………………………………………. P. 3~4 II. Ch 1: The client acceptance/continuation process, including establishing an understanding with the client……………………………………………………………………………………P. 4~5 III. Ch2: Obtaining an understanding of the entity and its environment, including internal control. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………P. 5~6 IV. Ch3: Preliminary Engagement Activities……………………………………………………… P. 6 V. Ch4: Assess Risk and Establish Materiality………………………………………………….. P. 7~8 VI.

Ch5: Consider Internal Control………………………………………………………………P. 9~11 VII. Ch6: Plan the Audit………………………………………………………………………….. P. 11~14 VIII. Ch7: Complete the Audit…………………………………………………………………….. P. 15 IX. Ch8: Evaluate results and issue an audit report………………………………………………. P. 16 X. Reference…………………………………………………………………………………………P. 17 XI. Attachments………………………………………………………………………………….. P. 18~23 I. Introduction: The Coca-Cola Company (Symbol: KO) was incorporated in September 1919 under the laws of the State of Delaware and succeeded to the business of a Georgia corporation with the same name that had been organized in 1892.

The Company is the manufacturer, distributor and marketer of nonalcoholic beverage concentrates and syrups in the world. Finished beverage products bearing its trademarks, sold in the United States since 1886, are now sold in more than 200 countries. Along with Coca-Cola, the Company markets nonalcoholic sparkling brands, including Diet Coke, Fanta and Sprite. It manufacture beverage concentrates and syrups, which the Company sells to bottling and canning operations, fountain wholesalers and some fountain retailers, as well as finished beverages, which the Company sells to distributors.

The Company owns or licenses more than 450 brands, including diet and light beverages, waters, enhanced waters, juices and juice drinks, teas, coffees, and energy and sports drinks. The Company is one of numerous competitors in the commercial beverages market. Of the approximately 53 billion beverage servings of all types consumed worldwide every day, beverages bearing trademarks owned by or licensed to the Company account for approximately 1. 5 billion. [1]The reason we chose this company is because it has enormous market share in countries around the world.

In order to expand its market share, The Coca-Cola Company cooperated with the major fast food chain company. Today, The Coca-Cola Company become a well known and globalization company. We want to know how it can be sustainability and venerability company in the world. From its reports, we also found out it has tremendous benefit from its advertising. In this paper, we concern that how the auditors build a good audit plan in such large company and such complex business. II. Ch1: Understanding of the client There are five major reasons that we consider to accept The Coca Cola Company to be out client. 2] Management Integrity Based upon assertions of management ranging from the existence of an element in the financial statements to disclosures of information regarding that element, we examines The Coca Cola Company financial statements that are no responsible practitioner would knowingly place reliance on assertions of a client’s management which had questionable integrity. Relationships with Other Professionals We will follow the requirement to communicate with the predecessor auditor prior to committing to provide audit services to The Coca Cola Company.

Matters of interest include the opinions issued by the predecessor auditor, resignation of the prior auditor or the refusal to stand for reelection, disagreements between the prior auditor and management regarding accounting principles or auditing procedures and any “opinion shopping” issues. Inquiry of other professionals having dealings with the client should, however, not be limited to the predecessor auditors. Furthermore, we will ask bankers, lawyers, and other professionals can provide important valuable information about The Coca Cola Company and its management.

Risk of Association The Coca Cola Company engaged in legitimate business activities that do not violate the laws of the jurisdiction where the company is headquartered or carries on its business. After reviewing its financial statement, we believed that its financial is stability and liquidity. Technical Competence The auditors who will perform the auditing are well trained due to the complexities of the modern business world. And also, the auditors have the necessary technical competence to perform the required work or risk potential liability or damage to reputation.

Professional Fees Audit fees charged to The Coca Cola Company will base on commensurate with the risks to the providing the services requested. The fees will cover adequately the cost of the services provided. III. Ch2: Obtaining an understanding of the entity and its environment In the 21st century, the beverage industry has been become one of the fastest developing industries and the competition in this industry become significantly. Even in this market share campaign, The Coca Cola Company still remains its leader position in the beverage industry.

The Coca-Cola Company and six of their largest bottling partners developed a strategy for sustainability in 2002. That plan focuses on the role and impact of the Coca-Cola system in four key areas: workplace, marketplace, environment and community. Furthermore, The Coca-Cola Company uses this strategy to guide the approach to sustainability issues and to report the progress. [3] In last year, when lots of companies in the industry are going down, The Coca-Cola Company still delivering consistent performance.

For its internal control, the company follows the independent and experience requirement of NYSE and SEC for many years. And the audit committee has been composed entirely of non-management directors. [4] IV. Ch3: Preliminary Engagement Activities Every member in our audit team is well trained and performs follow by the conduct of AICPA and SEC. Regarding to the ethical and independence matter, we has three major requirements. 1. Our auditor have to sign the contract to make sure that he/she will not take a position in the The Coca-Cola Company in two years 2.

We will not hire the auditor who uses to work in The Coca-Cola Company. 3. We required the auditor to report to the partner who has special relationship with the The Coca-Cola Company. V. Ch4: Risk and Establish Materiality The Coca-Cola Company is a globalization company; it faces various issues. For example, Obesity concerns, water scarcity and poor quality, increased competition, and evolving consumer preferences are risks having the potential to have a material adverse effect on our client.

To be an auditor, we assess client’s RMM (risk of material misstatement) with understanding the client entity and industry. After audit risk is set, we go further to assesses inherent and control (environment) risks. In addition, assessing client’s inherent and control risks which can influence the level of detection risk directly. Base on the case, we make an assumption in order to maintain the audit risk. The following table shows numerical and non-numerical example of audit risk. Audit Risk |RMM |DR | | |IR |CR | | |5% |50% |20% |50% | |low |moderate |low |moderate | “Audit risk on most engagements is much lower than 5%. [5]According to conservative assumptions that we decide inherent risk is assessed at moderate (50%). The Coca-Cola Company is a multinational company, so there are not only lots of accounts receivable which come from different branches in the world, but also lots of inventories which were made or stored in different factories and warehouses in the world. As the reasons above, The Coca-Cola Company may face some risks, such as is there reason to believe that receivables include significant balances in foreign currencies?

Is there reason to believe that the existence of the accounts receivables which generate from different oversea branch companies or subsidiaries? Are there significant foreign currency inventories balance? Are manufactured inventories transferred between locations, divisions, or subsidiaries within a consolidated entity? Are there material-inventories owned by the client but held by others (e. g. , on consignment with customers)? Therefore, we should assess the inherent risk in moderate level.

On the basis of our experience, after we read the predecessor auditor’s report and our client’s past annual report. We presumed that our client has well internal control so that we can assess the control risk in low level. Overall, in order to keep the audit risk in low level, we decided our detection risk in moderate level. Besides, in our client’s industry there are some companies that try to inflate their revenue and assets so in our audit we will focus on operating cycle.

In other words, we will put emphasis on auditing accounts receivable and inventory to make sure there are no major accounting schemes or fraud that will mislead the presentation of financial statements. Materiality “Materiality includes both the nature of the misstatement, as well as the dollar amount of misstatement, and must be judged in importance by financial statement users. ”[6] In our engagement, we will use the nature and dollar amount to decide what materially is for our client as the follow chart. Account |Accounts receivable |Inventory | |Materiality | | | |Nature |1. Recognize revenue in wrong period |1. Easy to thief | | |2. The existence of the A/R |2.

Hard to count the ending balance | | |3. Risk of foreign currency exchange | | |Dollar amount |In our firm’s policy, in manufacture industry we adopt the 10% of net income after|The same as left column. | | |tax to decide the materiality. For example, the net income 2007 multiply 10% | | | |$5,981M*10%=600M | |

VI. Ch5: Consider Internal Control 1. Define Internal Control: According to the COSO’s definition of internal control, “ a process, effected by an entity’s board of directors, management, and other personnel designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the achievement of objectives in the following categories: (1) reliability of financial reporting, (2) compliance with applicable laws and regulations, and (3) effectiveness and efficiency of operations. ”[7] 2. Identify some controls that would be relevant to the audit. Account |Accounts receivable |Inventory | |Control | | | |Authority |Inquire about credit procedure for new customers (Valuation) |When shipping the Inventory to vendor or supplier, the | | |From a population of approved sales orders (and returns), select a|warehouseman should get the proper authority shipping | | |sample and examine documents for evidence of credit check |document. | |(Valuation) | | |Custody |Prepare daily cash summary (copy to A/R and Accounting) |Observe physical controls over inventory. | | |Segregation of duty: Mailroom & cashier |Segregation of duty: Warehouse & Shipping | |Recording keeping |Trace a sample of shipping documents (selection from pre-numbered |The perpetual records should reconcile to the general | | |shipping documents) to sales invoice, sales journal, and A/R |ledger. | |master file (Completeness) |The reconciliation of Inventory and the Lower or market| | |Match remittance advices and check deposit summary |price valuation should be review by proper accounting | | | |manager or management. | 3. Discuss the components of Internal Control: |Control environment |After we understand the internal control procedure and policy, we ensure that our client has ideal control| | |procedure, high ethical standard, and monitoring processes. | |Risk assessment |Risk exist in the oversea marketplace (in failures to merge China companies) | | |In failures to accurately record and report financial information. |Control activities |Authority | | |Custody | | |Segregation of duty | | |Recording keeping | |Information and Communication |Our client has good information and communication function including initiating, authorizing, recording, | | |processing, and reporting entity transactions, conditions, and events. |Monitoring |Our client use computer accounting software and system to assess the quality of other transaction and | | |operational controls over time. It includes the periodic assessment of both the design and operation of | | |controls on a timely basis. | 4. The elements involved in obtaining an understanding of Internal Control We should obtain an understanding of the five components of internal control sufficient to: A. Evaluating the design of relevant controls and determining whether they have been implemented. B. Assess the risk of material misstatement. C. Design the nature, extent, and timing of further audit procedures. 5. Access Control Risk We should assess the inherent risk in moderate level.

On the basis of our experience, after we read the predecessor auditor’s report and our client’s internal control procedures. We can presume that our client has well internal control so we can assess the control risk in low level. 6. Managements Responsibilities and the auditors’ responsibilities under Section 404. | |Managements |The auditors | |Laws or standards |Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 ( for publicly traded |Second standard of fieldwork | | |companies) |2. PCAOB Auditing Standard No. (AS 5) | |Responsibilities |In addition to certifying the company’s financial |Auditors must provide their opinion on the effectiveness of | | |statements (Section 302), management must also report on |client’s internal control. | | |the company’s internal control over financial reporting | | | |(Section 404). | | (Chris Linsteadt, 2008 Audit Class Slides ch6) VII. Ch6: Plan the Audit 1. Assess the need for specialists In our case, we should hire some computer audit experts who can help our firm to make sure that our client’s accounting system is sate and correct. 2. Assess the possibility of illegal acts. Risk |The possibility of illegal acts | |Is there reason to believe that the existence of the accounts |There were some fake transactions which were made by management or employees. | |receivables which generate from different oversea branch companies or |If the sales don’t get proper credit authority, there will be huge bad debt | |subsidiaries? |expense in the future | |Are there material-inventories owned by the client but held by others |The management may try to inflate the sales in the end of year so he may try to| |(e. g. , on consignment with customers)? |recognize consignment as sales revenue. | |The management may use consignment to control the company’s ending inventory or| | |COGS. | |Are manufactured inventories transferred between locations, divisions,|The management may use complicated related party transaction to generate fake | |or subsidiaries within a consolidated entity? |sales or ending inventory. | | |The employees may have chance to steal the coke formula or inventories. | 3. Identify related parties After we discussed with the management and checked the related party transactions, there is no material related party transaction in this engagement. 4.

Conduct preliminary analytical procedures. |Accounts Receivable |Inventory | |Compare with industry rate to make sure our client’s A/R turnover rate and |Compare with industry rate to make sure our client’s inventory turnover | |days are reasonable. |rate and days are reasonable. | |Compare our client’s allowance for doubtful account policy with competitors’|Make sure the change in our client’s inventories is reasonable without | |policy to make sure the bad debt expenses are reasonable estimated. |material misstatement. |Make sure the change in our client’s A/R is reasonable without material | | |misstatement. | | 5. Consider additional value added services. After we obtain and understand our client’s internal control, we should detect our client’s internal control. We can prepare a feedback report to our client and help our client to improve their internal control or accounting system. Besides, when our client’s face some problems about new accounting standards, we could help our clients to train their accountants 6. Audit Plan and Audit program. Receivables | |Name of Client: | |Period: | | | |Estimated audit hours: | |Audit procedures | |Sign and date by | |Working paper Ref. | | | |auditors | | | |01. TEST PROPRIETY OF REVENUE RECOGNITION POLICIES AND PROCEDURES – Receivables [Validity, | | | | | |Cutoff] | | | | | |02.

CONFIRM RECEIVABLES [Validity, Completeness, Recording, and Cutoff] [Q04 – No] | | | | | |03. TEST THE ALLOWANCE FOR DOUBTFUL ACCOUNTS AND BAD DEBT EXPENSE [Valuation] | | | | | |04. TEST PRESENTATION OF RECEIVABLES [Presentation] | | | | | |05. TEST LATE CUTOFF OF SALES [Cutoff] [Q01A – Sales Invoices] | | | | | |06. TEST LATE CUTOFF OF SALES [Cutoff] [Q01A – Initial Records] | | | | | |07.

ROLL-FORWARD TEST FOR RECEIVABLES TESTED PRIOR TO YEAR END [Validity, Completeness, | | | | | |Recording, Cutoff] | | | | | |08. TEST RECEIVABLES TO SUBSEQUENT CASH RECEIPTS [Validity, Completeness, Recording, Cutoff] | | | | | |09. TEST ALLOWANCES FOR SALES RETURNS AND DISCOUNTS [Valuation] | | | | | |10. TEST PRESENTATION OF RELATED-PARTY RECEIVABLES [Presentation] | | | | | |11.

TEST VALUATION OF FOREIGN CURRENCY RECEIVABLES [Valuation] | | | | | |Reviewer : | |Sign: | |Date | 6. Audit Plan and Audit program. |Inventory | |Name of Client: | |Period: | | | |Estimated audit hours: | |Audit procedures | |Sign and date by | |Working paper Ref. | | |auditors | | | |01. OBSERVE AND TEST-COUNT INVENTORIES [Validity, Completeness, Recording, Cutoff, Valuation]| | | | | |02. TEST THE FINAL INVENTORY COMPILATION [Validity, Completeness, Recording, and Cutoff] | | | | | |03. TEST MARKET VALUATION RESERVES [Valuation] | | | | | |04. TEST PRESENTATION OF INVENTORY [Presentation] | | | | | |05.

TEST LATE CUTOFF OF INVENTORY PURCHASES [Cutoff] [Q05A – Recorded Purchases] | | | | | |06. TEST EARLY CUTOFF OF DEBIT NOTES [Cutoff] | | | | | |07. TEST BOOK TO PHYSICAL ADJUSTMENTS [Validity, Completeness, Recording] | | | | | |08. ROLL-FORWARD TEST FOR INVENTORIES PRICE TESTED PRIOR TO YEAR END [Validity, Completeness, | | | | | |Recording, Cutoff] | | | | | |09.

TEST ELIMINATION OF INTERCOMPANY PROFIT [Valuation] | | | | | |10. TEST BALANCES DENOMINATED IN FOREIGN CURRENCIES [Valuation] | | | | | |11. TEST PRESENTATION OF RELATED-PARTY BALANCES [Presentation] | | | | | |Reviewer : | |Sign: | |Date | VIII. Ch7: Complete the Audit The auditor’s responsibilities during the completion stage of the audit: “Before issuing the audit report, the auditor needs to: 1.

Perform a final review of the audit to be sure the financial statements are fairly presented and the audit documentation supports the audit report 2. Assess the ability of the client to continue as a going concern, and 3. Make a final review of the auditor’s assessment of internal control based on evidence gathered and any material misstatements identified in the financial statement audit. In addition, we should get the management representation letter and letter of audit inquiry to make sure there are no material contingent liabilities and events subsequent to the financial statements and keep communicating with the audit committee. The follow data are made by assumption: Contingent Liabilities |Subsequent events | |Our client may lose the litigation about merger in oversea. It will cause a |Note disclosure: | |huge loss for our client. |On January 8, 2009, our Company sold substantially all of our interest in | | |Vonpar Refrescos S. A. (“Vonpar”), a bottler headquartered in Brazil. Total| | |proceeds from the sale were approximately $238 million, and we recognized | | |a gain on this sale of approximately $71 million.

Prior to this sale, our | | |Company owned approximately 49 percent of Vonpar’s outstanding common | | |stock and accounted for the investment using the equity method | |Our client is a multinational company so it may have the threat of | | |expropriation of assets in a foreign country. | | |Our client may get loss in the highly competitive nonalcoholic beverages | | |industry.

If our client signs purchase and sale commitments with its | | |supplier, it may get a huge loss in the future. | | | |Other important investments which will change our client’s accounting | | |principle similar as above. | IX. Ch8: Evaluate results and issue an audit report Independent Auditor’s Report The Board of Directors and Stockholders The Coca-Cola Company:

We have audited the consolidated balance sheets of the Coca-Cola Company and subsidiaries (the “Company”) as of December 31, 2007 and 2008, and the related consolidated statement of income, stockholders’ equity and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2008. These consolidated financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these consolidated financial statements bases on our audits. We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement.

An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion. In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements refereed to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Coca-Cola Company and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2007 and 2008, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2008, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2008, based on criteria established in Internal Control-Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission(COSO), and our report dated March 14, 2009 expressed an unqualified opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting. Lee &Cheng &Lin LLP Dallas, U. S. A. March 14, 2009 X. References • “The company description,” Market watch < http://www. marketwatch. om/tools/quotes/profile. asp? symb=ko> • Deppe, Larry A. , “Client acceptance: what to look for and why. (Tips for accountants on deciding which new clients to accept) (Cover Story)”, The CPA Journal , May 1992, • “Strategic vision”, The Coca Cola Company website • “2008The proxy statement”, The Coca Cola Company website, • Chris, Linsteadt, “2008 Audit Class Slides” • Rittenberg, Schwieger, Johnstone. Auditing, A Business Risk Approach. Thomson&South-Western Publishing. 6th,2008 • “SEC filing” The Coca Cola Company website Retrieved from the World Wide Web: XI. Attachment (Financial Statements) Consolidated Balance Sheet COCA COLA CO | | | | | |10-K | | | | | |02/28/2008 | | | | | |? | | | | | |Balance Sheet | | | | | |December 31, |2007. 00 |2006. 0 | |(In millions except par value) |? | |? | | |ASSETS |? |? |? |? | |CURRENT ASSETS |? |? |? |? | |Cash and cash equivalents |$4,093 |$2,440 | |Marketable securities |? |215 |? |150 | |Trade accounts receivable, less allowances |? |3,317 |? 2,587 | |of $56 and $63, respectively | | | | | |Inventories |? |2,220 |? |1,641 | |Prepaid expenses and other assets |? |2,260 |? |1,623 | |TOTAL CURRENT ASSETS |? |12,105 |? |8,441 | |INVESTMENTS |? |? |? |? | |Equity method investments: |? |? |? |? | |Coca-Cola Enterprises Inc. |? |1,637 |? 1,312 | |Coca-Cola Hellenic Bottling Company S. A. |? |1,549 |? |1,251 | |Coca-Cola FEMSA, S. A. B. de C. V. |? |996 |? |835 | |Coca-Cola Amatil Limited |? |806 |? |817 | |Other, principally bottling companies |? |2,301 |? |2,095 | |and joint ventures | | | | | |Cost method investments, principally |? |488 |? 473 | |bottling companies | | | | | |TOTAL INVESTMENTS |? |7,777 |? |6,783 | |OTHER ASSETS |? |2,675 |? |2,701 | |PROPERTY, PLANT AND EQUIPMENT net |? |8,493 |? |6,903 | |TRADEMARKS WITH INDEFINITE LIVES |? |5,153 |? |2,045 | |GOODWILL |? |4,256 |? |1,403 | |OTHER INTANGIBLE ASSETS |? |2,810 |? 1,687 | |TOTAL ASSETS |$43,269 |$29,963 | |LIABILITIES AND SHAREOWNERS EQUITY |? |? |? |? | |CURRENT LIABILITIES |? |? |? |? | |Accounts payable and accrued expenses |$6,915 |$5,055 | |Loans and notes payable |? |5,919 |? |3,235 | |Current maturities of long-term debt |? |133 |? |33 | |Accrued income taxes |? |258 |? 567 | |TOTAL CURRENT LIABILITIES |? |13,225 |? |8,890 | |LONG-TERM DEBT |? |3,277 |? |1,314 | |OTHER LIABILITIES |? |3,133 |? |2,231 | |DEFERRED INCOME TAXES |? |1,890 |? |608 | |SHAREOWNERS EQUITY |? |? |? |? | |Common stock, $0. 25 par value; Authorized 5,600 |? |880 |? |878 | |shares; | | | | |Issued 3,519 and 3,511 shares, respectively | | | | | |Capital surplus |? |7,378 |? |5,983 | |Reinvested earnings |? |36,235 |? |33,468 | |Accumulated other comprehensive income |? |626 |? |(1,291) | |(loss) | | | | | |Treasury stock, at cost 1,201 and 1,193 |? |####### |? ####### | |shares, respectively | | | | | |TOTAL SHAREOWNERS EQUITY |? |21,744 |? |16,920 | |TOTAL LIABILITIES AND SHAREOWNERS EQUITY |$43,269 |$29,963 | Consolidated Income Statement |COCA COLA CO | | | | | |10-K | | | | | |02/28/2008 | | | | | |? | | | | |Income Statement | | | | | |Year Ended December 31, |2007. 00 |2006. 00 | |(In millions except per share data) |? | |? | | |NET OPERATING REVENUES |$28,857 |$24,088 | |Cost of goods sold |? |10,406 |? 8,164 | |GROSS PROFIT |? |18,451 |? |15,924 | |Selling, general and administrative expenses |? |10,945 |? |9,431 | |Other operating charges |? |254 |? |185 | |OPERATING INCOME |? |7,252 |? |6,308 | |Interest income |? |236 |? |193 | |Interest expense |? |456 |? 220 | |Equity income net |? |668 |? |102 | |Other income (loss) net |? |173 |? |195 | |Gains on issuances of stock by equity method |? |? |? |? | |investees | | | | | |INCOME BEFORE INCOME TAXES |? |7,873 |? |6,578 | |Income taxes |? |1,892 |? 1,498 | |NET INCOME |$5,981 |$5,080 | |BASIC NET INCOME PER SHARE |$2. 59 |$2. 16 | |DILUTED NET INCOME PER SHARE |$2. 57 |$2. 16 | |AVERAGE SHARES OUTSTANDING |? |2,313 |? |2,348 | |Effect of dilutive securities |? |18 |? |2 | |AVERAGE SHARES OUTSTANDING ASSUMING DILUTION |? |2,331 |? |2,350 | Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows COCA COLA CO | | | | | |10-K | | | | | |02/28/2008 | | | | | |? | | | | | |Cash Flows | | | | | |? | | | | | |? | | | | | |? | | | | | |? |? |? |? |? |Year Ended December 31, |2007. 00 |2006. 00 | |(In millions) |? | |? | | |? | | | | | |OPERATING ACTIVITIES |? |? |? |? | |Net income |$5,981 |$5,080 | |Depreciation and amortization |? |1,163 |? 938 | |Stock-based compensation expense |? |313 |? |324 | |Deferred income taxes |? |109 |? |(35) | |Equity income or loss, net of dividends |? |(452) |? |124 | |Foreign currency adjustments |? |9 |? |52 | |Gains on issuances of stock by equity investees |? |? |? |? | |Gains on sales of assets, including bottling |? |(244) |? (303) | |interests | | | | | |Other operating charges |? |166 |? |159 | |Other items |? |99 |? |233 | |Net change in operating assets and liabilities |? |6 |? |(615) | |Net cash provided by operating activities |? |7,150 |? |5,957 | |INVESTING ACTIVITIES |? ? |? |? | |Acquisitions and investments, principally |? |(5,653) |? |(901) | |beverage and bottling companies | | | | | |Purchases of other investments |? |(99) |? |(82) | |Proceeds from disposals of other investments |? |448 |? |640 | |Purchases of property, plant and equipment |? |(1,648) |? (1,407) | |Proceeds from disposals of property, plant |? |239 |? |112 | |and equipment | | | | | |Other investing activities |? |(6) |? |(62) | |Net cash used in investing activities |? |(6,719) |? |(1,700) | |FINANCING ACTIVITIES |? |? |? |? | |Issuances of debt |? 9,979 |? |617 | |Payments of debt |? |(5,638) |? |(2,021) | |Issuances of stock |? |1,619 |? |148 | |Purchases of stock for treasury |? |(1,838) |? |(2,416) | |Dividends |? |(3,149) |? |(2,911) | |Net cash provided by (used in) financing |? |973 |? (6,583) | |activities | | | | | |EFFECT OF EXCHANGE RATE CHANGES ON CASH |? |249 |? |65 | |AND CASH EQUIVALENTS | | | | | |CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS |? |? |? |? | |Net increase (decrease) during the year |? |1,653 |? |(2,261) | |Balance at beginning of year |? |2,440 |? 4,701 | |Balance at end of year |$4,093 |$2,440 | | | | | Consolidated Statements of Shareowners’ Equity |COCA COLA CO | | | | | |10-K | | | | | |02/28/2008 | | | | | |? | | | | |CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF SHAREOWNERS#146; EQUITY | | | | | |Year Ended December 31, |2007. 00 |2006. 00 | |(In millions except per share data) |? | |? | | |? | | | | | |NUMBER OF COMMON SHARES OUTSTANDING |? |? |? |? | |Balance at beginning of year |? |2,318 |? |2,369 | |Stock issued to employees exercising stock |? |8 |? 4 | |options | | | | | |Purchases of stock for treasury 1 |? |(35) |? |(55) | |Treasury stock issued to employees exercising |? |23 |? |? | |stock options | | | | | |Treasury stock issued to former shareholders |? |4 |? |? |of glaceau | | | | | |Balance at end of year |? |2,318 |? |2,318 | |COMMON STOCK |? |? |? |? | |Balance at beginning of year |$878 |$877 | |Stock issued to employees exercising stock |? |2 |? |1 | |options | | | | | |Balance at end of year |? 880 |? |878 | |CAPITAL SURPLUS |? |? |? |? | |Balance at beginning of year |? |5,983 |? |5,492 | |Stock issued to employees exercising stock |? |1,001 |? |164 | |options | | | | | |Tax (charge) benefit from employees stock |? |(28) |? 3 | |option and restricted stock plans | | | | | |Stock-based compensation |? |309 |? |324 | |Stock purchased by former shareholders |? |113 |? |? | |of glaceau | | | | | |Balance at end of year |? |7,378 |? |5,983 | |REINVESTED EARNINGS |? |? |? |? | |Balance at beginning of year |? |33,468 |? 31,299 | |Adjustment for the cumulative effect on |? |(65) |? |? | |prior years of the adoption of Interpretation | | | | | |No. 48 | | | | | |Net income |? |5,981 |? |5,080 | |Dividends (per share $1. 36, $1. 24 and $1. 12 |? |(3,149) |? (2,911) | |in 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively) | | | | | |Balance at end of year |? |36,235 |? |33,468 | |ACCUMULATED OTHER COMPREHENSIVE INCOME |? |? |? |? | |(LOSS) | | | | | |Balance at beginning of year |? |(1,291) |? |(1,669) | |Net foreign currency translation adjustment |? |1,575 |? 603 | |Net gain (loss) on derivatives |? |(64) |? |(26) | |Net change in unrealized gain on available-for-sale |? |14 |? |43 | |securities | | | | | |Net change in pension liability |? |392 |? |? | |Net change in pension liability, prior |? |? |? |46 | |to adoption of SFAS No. 58 | | | | | |Net other comprehensive income adjustments |? |1,917 |? |666 | |Adjustment to initially apply SFAS No. 158 |? |? |? |(288) | |Balance at end of year |? |626 |? |(1,291) | |TREASURY STOCK |? |? |? |? | |Balance at beginning of year |? |(22,118) |? (19,644) | |Stock issued to employees exercising stock |? |428 |? |? | |options | | | | | |Stock purchased by former shareholders |? |66 |? |? | |of glaceau | | | | | |Purchases of treasury stock |? |(1,751) |? (2,474) | |Balance at end of year |? |(23,375) |? |(22,118) | |TOTAL SHAREOWNERS EQUITY |$21,744 |$16,920 | |COMPREHENSIVE INCOME |? |? |? |? | |Net income |$5,981 |$5,080 | |Net other comprehensive income adjustments |? |1,917 |? 666 | |TOTAL COMPREHENSIVE INCOME |$7,898 |$5,746 | [8] ———————– [1] http://www. marketwatch. com/tools/quotes/profile. asp? symb=ko [2] http://www. nysscpa. org/cpajournal/old/12543349. htm [3] http://www. thecoca-colacompany. com/citizenship/strategic_vision. html [4] http://www. thecoca-colacompany. com/investors/proxies. html [5] Rittenberg, Schwieger, Johnstone, p105 [6] Rittenberg, Schwieger, Johnstone, p101 [7] Chris, Linsteadt, “2008 Audit Class Slides Ch6” [8] http://ir. thecoca-colacompany. com/phoenix. zhtml? c=94566&p=irol-sec&se

Dear Mr. Lancaster,

This letter is to confirm the understanding of the arrangements for the objectives and terms of the upcoming auditing procedure for Apollo Shoes, Inc.

Our firm is pleased to continue to work with your company and perform the audit of the year ending on December 31, 2011. Our PCA staff members would like to confirm the audit objectives, terms, limitations, and nature of the services provided for this engagement. The highlight of our services will cover auditing financial statements that include the income statement, balance sheets, statement of retained earnings, and the statement of cash flows. The financial audits will make sure that financial statements are presented according to General Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP).

Since investors, creditors, managers, and government agencies use these statements, it is very important for the auditor to ensure all financial statements conform to GAAP (Arens, Elder, & Beasley, 2006). The audit team will also examine and measure the operational performance by studying specific parts of the organization and evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of operation activities on the financial statements. Our firm will gladly provide reasonable, but not absolute, assurance services that are performed by professional auditors to enhance the credibility of internal controls, IT systems, financial statements, compliance with regulation and human resource practices. Our auditors will express conclusion reports that will enhance the confidence of users, creditors, bankers, and management. One of the assurance services provided by our firm is attestation services. “An attestation service is a type of assurance service in which the CPA firm issues a report about the reliability of an assertion that is made by another party.

Attestation services fall in to four categories: audit of historical financial statements, effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, review of historical financial statements, and other attestation services that may be applied to a broad range of subject matter” (Arens, Elder,   & Beasley, 2006, p. 9). Our team will help to define material weaknesses in the internal controls that can occasionally create material misstatements in the financial statements. With the experience of our team, it is possible to determine whether deficiencies in the reports are significant enough to be considered material weaknesses.

The team will first work with the high-risk areas that require additional attention. These areas are sales and sales allowances, accounts receivable, inventory, expenses, property and equipment purchases. We will report our opinion after we are done with all the tests. We will discuss our opinion with you if the result is qualified opinion or if we have any concerns with continuing this engagement. Auditors will obtain documentary evidence to support their testing for the internal control and the examination of all transactions to verify the sufficiency of the information.

Our team will need to gain an understanding of your control structure and perform assessments to determine any control risks. However, auditors are not responsible for providing assurance on internal control or identifying significant deficiencies. In addition, auditors are not responsible for detecting errors or frauds that are immaterial to the financial statements. Auditors can provide a detailed examination of all transactions that are performed under a high risk of material errors and can notify the audit committee if any significant deficiencies are deducted.

Apollo’s management is responsible to maintain effective internal control over financial reports and make sure the company complies with the laws and regulations. Our team demands that the management provide us with all financial records and related information. We will require that your management team provide us with a letter to confirm management responsibility for the preparation of a financial statement in conformity with GAAP and provide all information necessary in a timely basis for our audit process.

The timing of the auditing process and the schedules are listed below for your review. The timely completion of this work will be at the end of our audit work. Our firm’s fees of the auditing process are to be estimated on a base of hourly rates. Our initial estimate of total fees, $250,000. 00, will be billed as work progresses. In the case of unusual circumstances, the fees may be adjusted to the new expansion of the engagement. Unless terminated, amended or otherwise superseded, this letter remains effective for the future years.

If your company agrees to the terms and conditions of this engagement, we would like to ask you to sign this letter and return it to us and keep a copy for your references. We appreciate providing you with our services.

Theresa Golding BA 418 – Auditing Dr. Charles Pineno April 25, 2010 PART 1: “Small Firms May Face Audit Music” (published in The Wall Street Journal on April 19, 2007) addresses the ending of the delay in applying portions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 to smaller companies. At the time of the article, some 6,000 smaller public companies had yet to be required to “make an annual assessment of their internal financial-reporting controls with further review by the company’s outside auditor of these systems designed to help prevent accounting mistakes and fraud. The delay arose from complaints that compliance was overly costly and time consuming for larger companies. According to Mr. Cox, the SEC and the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) are close to making less burdensome for all companies which would end the need to further exempt the smaller companies. The proposed changes would make realization of compliance in 2008 possible. Delays could again result if the new standards are not issued soon enough to meet the current deadlines. The chairman of PCAOB, Mark Olson, has blamed the high cost of complying on what is viewed as an overly cautious approach.

PCAOB reports that progress is being made but there is still a way to go as some auditing firms still have not fully integrated an audit of the company’s financial statements with an audit of the company’s internal controls which are interrelated. PART 2 –RISK ASSESSMENT STANDARDS: Standard 1 – Reasonable Assurance, Evidence SAS No. 104 (“Amendment to SAS No. 1, Codification of Auditing Standards and Procedures) addresses “the attributes of audit evidence and the concept of reasonable assurance. This particular standard is closely related to General Standard 3: The auditor must exercise due professional care in the performance of the audit and the preparation of the report. Chapter 1: The Role of the Public Accountant in the American Economy The two forms of assurance services that CPAs perform with particular emphasis on “those that increase the reliability of information. ” Since reliability enhancement is such a huge part of assurance services, this standard is fundamental because proper assessment and testing of risk plays a critical role in the reliability of information.

Chapter 2: Professional Standards This chapter introduced the 10 Generally Accepted Auditing Standards as set forth by the AICPA. As previously stated, there is a close relationship between Standard 1 and General Standard 3. Also, this standard also has a close relationship with Standard of Fieldwork 3 which reads: The auditor must obtain “sufficient appropriate audit evidence” by performing audit procedures to afford a reasonable basis for an opinion regarding the financial statements under audit.

The gathering of evidence regarding risk falls into this standard of fieldwork. Chapter 3: Professional Ethics Within the chapter on “Professional Ethics,” we learned that Article V of the AICPA Code of Professional Conduct addresses “Due Care” and states: “A member should observe the profession’s technical and ethical standards, strive continually to improve competence and the quality of services, and discharge professional responsibility to the best of the member’s ability. Reasonable assurance and proper evidence regarding risk assessment would fall under the “Due Care” responsibility. Chapter 4: Legal Liability of CPAs Chapter 4 described the sources of CPA liability as: Contract, Negligence, and Fraud. Should the CPA not incorporate the appropriate levels of reasonable assurance and evidence regarding risk assessment, they could be found liable for at least ordinary or simple negligence. If there was a blatant disregard for this standard, the possibility of gross negligence could also exist. Chapter 5: Audit Evidence and Documentation

The chapter detailed relationships among audit risk, audit evidence, and financial statement assertions and directly relates to the third standard of fieldwork stating that: the auditor must obtain appropriate audit evidence by performing audit procedures to afford a reasonable basis for an opinion regarding the financial statements under audit. This chapter also emphasizes the point of that there is an appropriate level of audit risk that must be met and the evidence collected and testing procedures utilized must be in keeping with this level.

Chapter 6: Audit Planning, Understanding the Client, Assessing Risks, and Responding “Planning the audit” provides the foundation of the process. The reasonable assurance and evidence standard regarding risk assessment should be considered and integral part of the planning process. Chapter 7: Internal Control Assessment of internal control is part of knowing reasonable assurance can be given and regarding the reliability of the evidence acquired. Chapter 8: Audit Sampling Acceptable risk level is an important element of determining the proper sampling technique and size.

Should an inappropriate sample technique/size be utilized, reasonable assurance will be lacking. Standard 2 – Internal Control, Evidence SAS No. 105 serves as an amendment to SAS No. 95, Generally Accepted Auditing Standards. Along with addressing work by the auditor on internal control, it further addresses audit evidence as well. This standard broadens the understanding the auditor must obtain of the business as well as its environment. Chapter 2: Professional Standards There is a relationship between this Risk Assessment Standard and Standard of Fieldwork 2.

The fieldwork standard addresses the requirement for the auditor obtaining “a sufficient understanding of the entity and its environment”. It has now been further broadened when looking at the level of internal control. Chapter 5: Audit Evidence and Documentation The reliability of the evidence collected directly relates to whether it was “generated through a system of effective controls rather than ineffective controls. ” Those controls will be more thoroughly assessed under this new Risk Assessment Standard.

Chapter 6: Audit Planning, Understanding the Client, Assessing Risks, and Responding The scope of the audit plan is impacted by the level of internal control exercised by the client. Broadening the requirements regarding assessment will allow for a stronger foundation in how the plan is developed. Chapter 7: Internal Control This is likely the most important chapter regarding the ins and outs of internal control and this standard should be forefront when considering the content of the chapter.

Chapter 8: Consideration of Internal Control in an Information Technology Environment Technological advances have done much to advance levels of internal control. However, if technology is not being utilized effectively, it can also raise the level of risk and under the new standard must be evaluated very carefully. Chapter 9: Audit Sampling Internal control plays an immense role in the level of sampling that should be done. Given the broader consideration now due to internal control, sampling levels will likely be impacted. Standard 3 – Evidence

The standard defines evidence as comprising “all information that supports the auditor’s opinion on the financial statements. ” It also “stresses the importance of supporting management’s assertions regarding the financial statements by gathering audit evidence. ” Chapter 1: The Role of the Public Accountant in the American Economy The assurance service of reliability will only be at the proper level if the appropriate evidence is collected and examined with regards to the assertion of management. Chapter 2: Professional Standards Fieldwork standard 3 addresses the requirement of obtaining “sufficient appropriate audit evidence. This evidence directly ties to Reporting Standard 4 regarding the expression of an opinion regarding management’s assertions. Chapter 3: Professional Ethics Article II of the Code addresses serving the public interest. The public will look to the auditor’s opinion regarding management’s assertions and thus the evidence gathered should serve the purpose of protecting the public well. Chapter 4: Legal Liability of CPAs The inappropriate gathering of evidence could lead to the issuance of an incorrect opinion regarding management’s assertions and open the CPA to liability issues.

Chapter 5: Audit Evidence and Documentation Audit risk, audit evidence, and financial statement assertions are closely intertwined and the Risk Standard puts more emphasis on that relationship and will do much to increase the reliability regarding the assertions about the financial statements. Chapter 6: Auditing Planning, Understanding the Client, Assessing Risks, and Responding To guarantee the opinions issued regarding management’s assertions, it is imperative that a CPA plan the audit appropriately and have a working knowledge of the client.

This standard will strengthen risk assessment and the depth of knowledge the CPA will have about the client. Chapter 7: Internal Control Management’s assertions are influenced by their effective use of internal control. Analyzing and reporting on the level of internal control plays an important role in the opinion that will be issued regarding management’s assertions. Chapter 9: Audit Sampling The sampling scope needs to have the strength necessary to offer an appropriate opinion regarding management’s assertions.

The evidence gathered determines the level of sampling needed and due care must be exercised throughout the process with the CPA remaining cognizant of management’s assertions. Standard 4 – Audit Risk, Materiality SAS No. 107 addresses the relationship between audit risk and materiality and has employed a Modified Audit Risk Model. Chapter 2: Professional Standards Assessment of the risk of material misstatement of the financial statements is covered heavily in Standard of Fieldwork 2. The level of risk will greatly determine the design of the audit procedures.

Chapter 4: Legal Liability of CPAs Should the auditor not accurately assess the risk of material misstatement, issues of liability could arise. Chapter 5: Audit Evidence and Documentation The evidence collected and documentation kept is done in an effort to reduce audit risk and thus must be taken seriously and the level of risk must be adequately determined to provide this. Chapter 6: Audit Planning, Understanding the Client, Assessing Risks, and Responding The planning of audit should be undertaken in such a way that the level of risk determined can be sufficiently addressed.

A clear understanding of the client and a clear procedure for assessing risks are fundamental to the overall process. Chapter 7: Internal Control The stronger the internal control, the lesser the risk and vice versa. It is imperative that a proper assessment of internal control be done to insure that the risk level is known prior to the collection of evidence and the conducting of sampling. Chapter 9: Audit Sampling The greater the amount of sampling conducted, the lower the level of audit risk.

Proper risk assessment procedures are instrumental in determining the necessary level of sampling to be done. Standard 5 – Planning, Supervision SAS No. 108 “superseded guidance provided in previous standards and deals with the understanding of the engagement and planning issues. ” This standard provides that the auditor plan the strategy concurrently with planning the engagement. Chapter 1: The Role of the Public Accountant in the American Economy The nature of the attest engagement must be clear to both the CPA and the firm and clearly defined at the onset of planning.

Chapter 2: Professional Standards General Standard 1 requires “adequate technical training and proficiency” for the auditor and staff. Standard of Fieldwork 1 requires that the auditor “adequately plan the work and properly supervise any assistants. ” Should these standards not be adhered to, the audit risk will be higher than an acceptable norm and during the planning of both the engagement and audit procedures, the auditor should remain cognizant of the roles these standards are playing/not playing. Chapter 3: Professional Ethics

Auditors without proper training and proficiency that do not fulfill this responsibility are not acting in the ethical manner required of the profession and could likely face consequences. Chapter 4: Legal Liability of CPAs Auditors who do agree to an engagement for which they lack the proper training and/or technical ability (to include their assistants) could be open to liability issues in the area of contract and negligence. Chapter 5: Audit Evidence and Documentation Should proper planning and supervision not occur, the level of audit risk will be extremely high and likely not accounted for properly during the process.

Chapter 6: Audit Planning, Understanding the Client, Assessing Risks, and Responding Planning of the audit is the first and probably most important step in the Audit Process. This step provides the foundation and it is critical that the auditor know the business at hand, and have the necessary personnel with the necessary training to undertake the engagement. With the new standard this step is concurrent with the planning of the engagement as a whole. Chapter 7: Internal Control If the auditor and team do not adequately assess the internal control, audit risk will likely be understated.

It is essential that the risk assessment procedure implemented be understood by all and adequately applied. Chapter 9: Audit Sampling The risk determines the scope of sampling to be conducted. It is also important that ALL members of the team know the level of sampling to be done and have a clear understanding of the sampling procedure. Standard 6 – Understanding and Assessing Risk This standard again “supersedes previous guidance on the auditor’s consideration of internal control” and reiterates the need for the auditor to obtain “an understanding of the entity and its environment. Chapter 2: Professional Standards The easiest way for an auditor to adequately understand and assess risk to clearly understand the entity and its environment as well as the level and effectiveness of internal control which is once again in keeping with Standard of Fieldwork 2. Chapter 3: Professional Ethics Should risk not be properly understood or assessed, the subsequent reports issued will not be done with “Due Care” and thus, will not be in keeping with the Code of Professional Conduct as prescribed by the AICPA. Chapter 4: Legal Liability of CPAs

Misunderstanding and improper assessment of risk will likely create issues of liability for CPAs. Chapter 5: Audit Evidence and Documentation The audit evidence and documentation gathered/prepared should adequately reflect the risk level and thus a clear understanding and assessment of risk need occur to guarantee the appropriateness of said evidence and documentation. Chapter 6: Audit Planning, Understanding the Client, Assessing Risks, and Responding Proper planning can only occur with a proper understanding and assessment of risk.

So while planning the audit is technically the first step in the process, assessment/understanding of risk needs to be considered at the same time. Chapter 7: Internal Control Internal Control is at the center of risk assessment and should be considered part of the process of assessing risk, thus hopefully leading to a clear understanding. Chapter 9: Audit Sampling The needed level of audit sampling directly correlates to the perceived level of audit risk. Thus, a clear understanding and assessment of risk will do much to ensure the appropriate level of sampling.

Standard 7 – Responding to Risks SAS No. 110 (covered as Standard 7) works in conjunction with SAS 109 (covered as Standard 6). Response to risk was covered exclusively for terms of our course in Chapter 6: Audit Planning, Understanding the Client, Assessing Risks, and Responding. As stated in both the article and our chapter, an auditor responds to risk at two levels: 1) overall level of financial statement and 2) level of relevant assertion. This will be of greater focus with the new standards and Response to Risk will be of as much importance as the assessment of said risk.

Standard 8 – Sampling The purpose of SAS No. 111 is to provide guidance which addresses both statistical and nonstatistical sampling. The standard also “notes that the auditor should set tolerable misstatement at a level below that of materiality for the financial statements. ” Chapter 2: Professional Standards Sampling is an integral part of obtaining sufficient evidence which is basis for Standard of Fieldwork 3. Chapter 5: Audit Evidence and Documentation There needs to be an adequate amount of audit evidence collected to meet the sampling need.

The evidence collected also has to be adequate in amount to ease the risk which also applies to the sampling procedure in that the sample sizes need to be substantial enough to account for the risk. Chapter 6: Audit Planning, Understanding the Client, Assessing Risks, and Responding The level of risk is a crucial element in audit planning and the audit plan determines the level of sampling that must be completed to adequately deal with the risk level. Chapter 7: Internal Control

The strength of internal control plays a major role in the level of sampling that will be required because of the inverse relationship between risk and internal control. Chapter 9: Audit Sampling Audit sampling provides the best method for collecting evidence and the amount needed is proportional to the level of risk assessed. PART 3: The SASs described in the article will now need to be at the forefront of the management accountant’s mind when preparing for an audit. The procedures will now be far more involved and as a result, procedural adjustments will likely need to be made.

The auditors will likely expect far more from the management accountants because of the need to assess far more in terms of acceptable level risks. Management accountants would do well to address their internal control issues because the stronger the internal control the less the concern for risk in the eyes of the auditor. Clear understanding of the standards and what changes they have created will benefit a management accountant greatly as they will be better able to anticipate what an auditor and his or her team will likely be inquiring about and what evidence they will probably want to collect.

PART 4: Internal Control when implemented effectively does much to reduce the overall risk of material misstatement by a company. With the drafting and release of these new standards firms will do well to assess their current internal control and consider previous audit reports regarding it. The firms would do well to first address all areas of weakness that have been previously denoted if it has not already done so. Under the new standards, those particular areas will likely receive the most scrutiny from auditors.

Secondly, though other areas may not have been identified as weak in previous audits, they might likely be less effective under the new standards and as such should be assessed as to whether it will stand up under the scrutiny the new standards call for. The importance of quality internal control was not of much significance pre-Sarbanes Oxley, however 2002 brought an end to that and now with the more concise standards set forth recently, is of the utmost importance.

Because of the fact that there is no legal, cultural, and moral framework for assigning liability in the case of the failure of investor decision, the question of whether or not investors may be able to blame or sue the false actions and problematic decisions as a result of auditor information failure is a hazy question to be addressed. From the point of view of auditors and the current business practice, assigning liability to auditors and trusting the financial statements that they produce entirely in order to base various positions that are connected to investment is problematic because of two points.

First, investors should be able to look at other various financial statements and documents before investment decisions are made. The rationale for this is that there could be problems associated with the failure of auditors to correctly indicate information on audited documents. Second, current business practices should take into consideration not only human errors which are also expected to occur in the process that auditors make, but also on various financial documents that are provided with a company which are accompanied to the results of auditor information. In the first place, the cutthroat world of business requires that the future and prospective investors should take into consideration all factors — including the various risks that are associated with investing in that specific firm — before a decision is made. The cultural standpoint — as well as the existing legal framework for dealing with problems in auditor information required that such investors have a well-founded research on the company they are investing in. Therefore, to answer it, although there are definitely channels in place for potential investors use financial documents that are provided by the corporate auditor in order to make decisions with regards to investing, the key word that is provided for us which is the complete relying on such financial documents is not advisable.

In fact, throughout the history of corporations, any investor should realize that there has been a complicated and well-documented history of investor actions that had made use of documents and financial statements that had been provided to them by auditors which resulted in various failures and losses as a result of completely relying on such auditor financial documents.

The second question that is required of us to answer this should an investor be able to sue auditors for providing false documentation and financial information? First and foremost, the way that the legal system is constructed — specifically those related to corporate law — allows for any kind of legal action to be made in cases of protest which would be duly investigated according to corporate law. Therefore, it is definitely the case that investors would be able to sue auditors. However, this is a question of whether or not they may be able to, and not if it is the right decision to do and if they should. Again, the question of morality and actual practice of suing auditors for providing financial information is a discussion of great interest in the business world. Some sites claim that a legal framework under the wing of corporate law should be passed that auditors for a corporation or a company should have no liability whatsoever as to the problems which result in using the financial information to provide in order to make future investment decisions. On the other end of the spectrum, however, there are those who claim that full liability should be taken by the auditors of the company if and when Harry and shareholders as well as investors of a company make false and problematic decisions — decisions that would eventually translate to financial losses — as a result of the erroneous documents that they have provided.

Proponents of the first argument claimed that if auditors are not required to shoulder any kind of liability for the problems that would be faced by shareholders and investors with respect to losses because of the financial information they have provided, then there would be no need for auditors to be paid or to be employed in the first place. Auditors, as a rule of thumb, and as is the popular convention as well as the actual job description they receive upon employment — and these critics have pointed out that auditors are one of the highest paid in the corporate financial industry — have under their responsibility to provide accurate information and correct financial documents not only to the general public but also — and especially — to the shareholders and investors of the firm. If they are allowed complete immunity to legal action and liability as a result of not being able to perform their duties, then the whole point of the auditing process as well as employing auditors would be irrelevant in the first place. In fact, case studies have pointed out that in certain situations where companies have already specified that their current auditors do not shoulder any form of liability and investors and shareholders may not be able to sue auditors for providing erroneous financial information have had a complete lack in capital due to low investment — or even in some cases a complete absence of willing investors.

On the other end of the decision spectrum, however, some have pointed out that auditors must have no shouldered liability and investors should not be able to sue them because of the fact that auditors, like any other employee of the corporation, are individuals and since the corporate entity is a separate entity from individuals, that investors have no right to sue auditors directly but rather general such legal actions towards the corporation as a whole. The proof that those who vouch for this site claim is that financial bankruptcy is not associated in carried over to the shareholders and investors of a corporation but rather to the corporate entity itself. Therefore, in this legal framework, the same argument must also run to the actions of auditors. Although auditors are lower ranking officers from the shareholders and members of the board of directors of companies, they should be given the same corporate benefits of separation from the corporate entity and their own liability.

Because of these two arguments, the current legal framework does not have a permanent set of decision rules in order to asign auditor liability. Therefore, it has been the dominant convention in the corporate world that although auditors in one degree to another may be sued because of providing false and loss of current financial documents and computations, especially in cases of fraud and other morally problematic actions, this decision process should give auditors limited liability in most cases.

In fact, in the real world scenario where many auditors in corporations that provided problematic financial information are low ranking in the first place, and because investment in capital decisions range to the millions of dollars, selling them would not be able to replenish such losses in the first place.

What we have learned in this case and scenario is that there are many factors to consider especially when assigning liability to certain entities or individuals within the corporate and business framework and background. Although it is easy enough to point fingers and assign faults, limitations on liability must be implemented because of the current way that corporations and businesses operate today and because of the various legal frameworks that are installed within the business operating system and environment. In the case of auditors — and even other financial employees — they are not robotic entities and machines, but rather are human beings also makes mistakes and could even operate under morally problematic situations — such as cases of fraud. Therefore, in such circumstances, investors and shareholders may be able to sue individuals for fraudulent actions but such liabilities must be limited and fall under the greater umbrella of the corporate entity that covers such auditors and financial employees.

References

Dye, R. A. (1993). Auditing standards, legal liability, and auditor wealth. Journal of Political Economy, 887-914.

Ewert, R. (1999). Auditor liability and the precision of auditing standards. Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics, 155, 181-206.

Napier, C. J. (1998). Intersections of law and accountancy: unlimited auditor liability in the United Kingdom. ACCOUNTING ORGANISATIONS AND SOCIETY, 23, 105-128.

Narayanan, V. G. (1994). An analysis of auditor liability rules. Journal of Accounting Research, 39-59.

Pae, S., & Yoo, S. W. (2001). Strategic interaction in auditing: An analysis of auditors’ legal liability, internal control system quality, and audit effort. Accounting Review, 333-356.

Radhakrishnan, S. (1999). Investors’recovery friction and auditor liability rules. Accounting Review, 225-240.

I sincerely hope that this assignment meets your approval and demonstrates my ability to resent assignments. If you require further clarification, I will be happy to contact you according to your convenience. Sincerely, Ishrat Nahid ID: 0930183 Executive Summery An auditor is an official whose Job it is to carefully check the accuracy of business records. An auditor can be either an independent auditor unaffiliated with the company being audited or a captive auditor, and some are elected public officials. Auditors are used to ensure that organizations are maintaining accurate and honest financial records and statements.

In this report I have written about the plan of audit and the importance of ndependence of auditors. Planning the audit is an important step to conduct the audit. Auditor uses different planning methods to determine risk assessment, assessment of internal controls etc. The auditor either internal or external cannot complete all the aspects of the audit in one year. The auditors plan the audit is such a way they can cover the audit over a period of time. Auditor independence is one of the most important issues in accounting practice today.

Independence increases the effectiveness of the audit by providing assurance that the auditor will plan and execute the audit objectively. High-quality audits enhance the reliability of the financial reporting process by investors and other users. Topic 1. Planning of audit 15- 163. References Page no 5-14 2. Independence of auditor 17 audit report Planning refers to the process of deciding what to do and how to do it. Planning involves selecting mission and objective and the actions to achieve them; it requires decision making that is, choosing from among alternative future course of actions.

Plans thus provide a rational approach to achieving reselected objectives. Planning is an intellectually demanding process; it requires that we consciously determine ourses of action and base our decisions on purpose, knowledge and considered estimates. An audit plan is the specific guideling to be followed when conducting an internal or external audit. Internal audits are usually conducted by a company’s accounting staff and are primarily used for a management review of accounting process.

External audits are conduct by external public accounting firms or private certified accountants (CPA) to ensure outside stakeholders that the company’s financial information is prepared in accordance with that Jurisdiction’s accepted accounting principles. External audit usually use a formal audit plan for auditors to follow when conducting audits. Audit planning improves the quality of audit work. It is necessary for an effective, efficient and timely audit. Adequate audit planning establishes the right means to achieve the objectives of audit.

It helps in identifying potential problems and ensures that work is completed expeditiously. An audit plan does help the auditor not only to understand the scope of audit but also facilities smooth conduct of audit. Auditors use five types of test to determine whether financial statements are fairly stated: rocedures to obtain understanding of internal control, tests of controls, substantive tests of transactions, analytical procedures and tests of details of balances. All audit procedures fall into one or more than one of these five categories.

By these tests detection risk reduces and effectiveness of internal control has increase. Five types of tests are firstly, update and evaluate the auditor’s previous experience with the entity. Secondly, make inquiries of client personnel. Thirdly, read client’s policy and systems manuals. Fourthly, examine documents and records. Fifthly, observe entity and operations. A meaningful audit plan considers some basic steps. If these basic steps are the minimal possible time. Step 1: Talk to the client The auditor discusses the nature of the engagement and the client’s business and industry trends at the beginning of planning.

Insights gained from this discussion help the au ditor navigate through the remainder of the audit planning procedures. These insights set the stage for an active two way communication process that result in a fully engaged audi tor. Step 2: Obtaining background information An extensive understanding of the clients business and industry and knowledge bout the company’s operations are essential for doing an adequate audit. The auditor asks about recent developments in the company that may cause the audit to differ from prior years.

Developments such as mergers, new locations or new product lines may have a significant impact on the audit plan for the current year. These discussions take place at the client 10 cation. Going on site provides the auditor the opportunity to meet with key employees or new employees and to see for him or herself any changes in the overall operations of the client. Step 3: Prepare A Complete list of items needed from the client Before starting uditing auditors require samples, documents and many other papers those auditors need to audit.

A meaningful audit plan pro vides an updated list of client-prepared items that considers the following: New schedules because of changed risk profiles at the client New schedules resulting from a change in audit ap proach Example schedules and templates so the client prepares them in the auditors desired format Insertion of due dates for each schedule that has been agreed to by the client For larger clients, insert the name of a person respon Sible for the completion of the schedule that has been agreed to by the client

A company has not followed generally accepted accounting principles In the recording of its leases.

7 2. A company has not followed generally accepted accounting principles In the recording of its leases. The amounts involved are immaterial.

7 3. A company valued its inventory at current replacement cost. While the auditor believes that the inventory costs do approximate replacement costs, these costs do not approximate any GAAP inventory valuation method.

7 4. A client changed Its depreciation method for production equipment from the traight-line method to the units-of-production method based on hours of utilization. The auditor concurs with the change.

7 5. A client changed its depreciation method for production equipment from the straight-line to a units-of-production method based on hours of utilization. The auditor does not concur with the change.

7 6. A client changed the depreciable life of certain assets from 10 years to 12 years.  The auditor concurs with the change.

 7.7 A client changed the depreciable life of certain assets from 10 years to 12 years. The auditor does not concur with the change. Confined to fixed assets and ccumulated depreciation, the misstatements involved are not considered pervasive.

7 8. A client changed from the method it uses to calculate postemployment benefits from one acceptable method to another one. The effect of the change Is Immaterial this year, but is expected to be material in the future.

7 9. A client changed the salvage value of certain assets from 5 percent to 10 percent of original cost. The auditor concurs with the change. 1 10, A client uses the specific identification method of accounting for valuable Items in inventory, and LIFO for less valuable items. The auditor concurs that this is a reasonable practice. 1 tOf3 has substantial doubt about an entity’s ability to continue as a going concern for a reasonable period of time. The notes to the financial statements adequately disclose the situation. 12. Due to recurring operating losses and working capital deficiencies, an auditor reasonable period of time. The notes to the financial statements do not adequately disclose the substantial doubt situation, and the auditor believes the omission fundamentally affects the users’ understanding of the financial statements. 4 13. An auditor reporting on group financial statements decides to take responsibility for the work of a component auditor who audited a 70 percent owned subsidiary and issued an unmodified opinion.

The total assets and revenues of the subsidiary are 5 percent and 8 percent, respectively, of the total assets and revenues of the entity being audited. 1 14. An auditor reporting on group financial statements decides not to take responsibility for the work of a component auditor who audited a 70 percent owned subsidiary and issued an unqualified opinion. The total assets and revenues of the ubsidiary are 5 percent and 8 percent, respectively, of the total assets and revenues of the entity being audited. 10 15.

An auditor was hired after year-end and was unable to observe the counting of the year-end inventory. She is unable to apply other procedures to determine whether ending inventory and related information are properly stated. 8 16. An auditor was hired after year-end and was unable to observe the counting of the year-end inventory. However, she was able to apply other procedures and determined that ending inventory and related information are properly stated. 1 17. An auditor discovered that a client made illegal political payoffs toa candidate for president of the United States.

The auditor was unable to determine that amounts associated with the payoffs because of the client’s inadequate record- retention policies. The client has added a note to the financial statements to describe the illegal payments and has stated that the amounts of the payments are not determinable. 1 18. An auditor discovered that a client made illegal political payoffs toa candidate retention policies, although there is no likelihood that the financial statements are ervasively misstated, they may be materially misstated.

The client refuses to disclose the payoffs in a note to the financial statements. 3 19. In auditing the long-term investments account of a new client, an auditor finds that a large contingent liability exists that is material to the consolidated company. It is probable that this contingent liability will be resolved with a material loss in the future, but the amount is not estimable. Although no adjusting entry has been made, the client has provided a note to the financial statements that describes the matter in etail. 1 20.

In auditing the long-term investments account ofa new client, an auditor finds future, and this amount is reasonably estimable as $2,000,000. Although no adjusting entry has been made, the client has provided a note to the financial statements that describes the matter in detail and includes the $2,000,000 estimate in that note. 7 21. A client is issuing two years of comparative financial statements. The first year was audited by another auditor who is not being asked to reissue her audit report. (Reply as to the successor auditor’s report.

Communications Between Predecessor and Successor Auditors 155 AU Section 315 Communications Between Predecessor and Successor Auditors (Supersedes SAS No. 7. ) Source: SAS No. 84; SAS No. 93. Effective with respect to acceptance of an engagement after March 31, 1998, unless otherwise indicated. Introduction .01 This section provides guidance on communications between predecessor and successor auditors when a change of auditors is in process or has taken place. It also provides communications guidance when possible misstatements are discovered in ? ancial statements reported on by a predecessor auditor. This section applies whenever an independent auditor is considering accepting an engagement to audit or reaudit (see paragraph . 14 of this section) ? nancial statements in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards, and after such auditor has been appointed to perform such an engagement. .02 For the purposes of this section, the term predecessor auditor refers to an auditor who (a) has reported on the most recent audited ? nancial statements1 or was engaged to perform but did not complete an audit of the ? ancial statements2 and (b) has resigned, declined to stand for reappointment, or been noti? ed that his or her services have been, or may be, terminated. The term successor auditor refers to an auditor who is considering accepting an engagement to audit ? nancial statements but has not communicated with the predecessor auditor as provided in paragraphs . 07 through . 10 and to an auditor who has accepted such an engagement. [As amended, effective for audits of ? nancial statements for periods ending on or after June 30, 2001, by Statement on Auditing Standards No. 3. ] Change of Auditors .03 An auditor should not accept an engagement until the communications described in paragraphs . 07 through . 10 have been evaluated. 3 However, an auditor may make a proposal for an audit engagement before communicating with the predecessor auditor. The auditor may wish to advise the prospective 1 The provisions of this section are not required if the most recent audited ? nancial statements are more than two years prior to the beginning of the earliest period to be audited by the successor auditor. There may be two predecessor auditors: the auditor who reported on the most recent audited ? nancial statements and the auditor who was engaged to perform but did not complete an audit of any subsequent ? nancial statements. [As amended, effective for audits of ? nancial statements for periods ending on or after June 30, 2001, by Statement on Auditing Standards No. 93. ] 3 When the most recent ? nancial statements have been compiled or reviewed in accordance with the Statements on Standards for Accounting and Review Services, the accountant who reported on those ? ancial statements is not a predecessor auditor. Although not required by this section, in these circumstances the successor auditor may ? nd the matters described in paragraphs . 08 and . 09 useful in determining whether to accept the engagement. AU §315. 03 156 The Standards of Field Work client (for example, in a proposal) that acceptance cannot be ? nal until the communications have been evaluated. .04 Other communications between the successor and predecessor auditors, described in paragraph . 11, are advisable to assist in the planning of the engagement.

However, the timing of these other communications is more ? exible. The successor auditor may initiate these other communications either prior to acceptance of the engagement or subsequent thereto. .05 When more than one auditor is considering accepting an engagement, the predecessor auditor should not be expected to be available to respond to inquiries until a successor auditor has been selected by the prospective client and has accepted the engagement subject to the evaluation of the communications with the predecessor auditor as provided in paragraphs . 07 through . 10. 06 The initiative for communicating rests with the successor auditor. The communication may be either written or oral. Both the predecessor and successor auditors should hold in con? dence information obtained from each other. This obligation applies whether or not the successor auditor accepts the engagement. Communications Before Successor Auditor Accepts Engagement .07 Inquiry of the predecessor auditor is a necessary procedure because the predecessor auditor may be able to provide information that will assist the successor auditor in determining whether to accept the engagement.

The successor auditor should bear in mind that, among other things, the predecessor auditor and the client may have disagreed about accounting principles, auditing procedures, or similarly signi? cant matters. .08 The successor auditor should request permission from the prospective client to make an inquiry of the predecessor auditor prior to ? nal acceptance of the engagement. Except as permitted by the Rules of the Code of Professional Conduct, an auditor is precluded from disclosing con? dential information obtained in the course of an engagement unless the client speci? cally consents.

Thus, the successor auditor should ask the prospective client to authorize the predecessor auditor to respond fully to the successor auditor’s inquiries. If a prospective client refuses to permit the predecessor auditor to respond or limits the response, the successor auditor should inquire as to the reasons and consider the implications of that refusal in deciding whether to accept the engagement. .09 The successor auditor should make speci? c and reasonable inquiries of the predecessor auditor regarding matters that will assist the successor auditor in determining whether to accept the engagement.

Matters subject to inquiry should include— • • • Information that might bear on the integrity of management. Disagreements with management as to accounting principles, auditing procedures, or other similarly signi? cant matters. Communications to those charged with governance regarding fraud and illegal acts by clients. [4] [4] [Footnote deleted to re? ect conforming changes necessary due to the issuance of Statement on Auditing Standards No. 114. ] AU §315. 04 Communications Between Predecessor and Successor Auditors 157 • • Communications to management and those charged with governance regarding signi? ant de? ciencies and material weaknesses in internal control. 5 The predecessor auditor’s understanding as to the reasons for the change of auditors. The successor auditor may wish to consider other reasonable inquiries. [Revised, May 2006, to re? ect conforming changes necessary due to the issuance of Statement on Auditing Standards No. 112. Revised, April 2007, to re? ect conforming changes necessary due to the issuance of Statement on Auditing Standards No. 114. ] . 10 The predecessor auditor should respond promptly and fully, on the basis of known facts, to the successor auditor’s reasonable inquiries.

However, should the predecessor auditor decide, due to unusual circumstances such as impending, threatened, or potential litigation; disciplinary proceedings; or other unusual circumstances, not to respond fully to the inquiries, the predecessor auditor should clearly state that the response is limited. If the successor auditor receives a limited response, its implications should be considered in deciding whether to accept the engagement. Other Communications .11 The successor auditor should request that the client authorize the predecessor auditor to allow a review of the predecessor auditor’s working papers.

The predecessor auditor may wish to request a consent and acknowledgment letter from the client to document this authorization in an effort to reduce misunderstandings about the scope of the communications being authorized. 6 It is customary in such circumstances for the predecessor auditor to make himself or herself available to the successor auditor and make available for review certain of the working papers. The predecessor auditor should determine which working papers are to be made available for review and which may be copied.

The predecessor auditor should ordinarily permit the successor auditor to review working papers, including documentation of planning, internal control, audit results, and other matters of continuing accounting and auditing signi? cance, such as the working paper analysis of balance sheet accounts, and those relating to contingencies. Also, the predecessor auditor should reach an understanding with the successor auditor as to the use of the working papers. 7 The extent, if any, to which a predecessor auditor permits access to the working papers is a matter of judgment.

Successor Auditor’s Use of Communications .12 The successor auditor must obtain suf? cient appropriate audit evidence to afford a reasonable basis for expressing an opinion on the ? nancial statements he or she has been engaged to audit, including evaluating the consistency of the application of accounting principles. The audit evidence used in analyzing the impact of the opening balances on the current-year ? nancial statements and consistency of accounting principles is a matter of professional judgment. Such audit evidence may include the most recent audited ? ancial 5 See section 316, Consideration of Fraud in a Financial Statement Audit; section 317, Illegal Acts by Clients; and section 325, Communicating Internal Control Related Matters Identi? ed in an Audit. [Footnote revised, May 2006, to re? ect conforming changes necessary due to the issuance of Statement on Auditing Standards No. 112. ] 6 Appendix A [paragraph . 24] contains an illustrative client consent and acknowledgment letter. 7 Before permitting access to the working papers, the predecessor auditor may wish to obtain a written communication from the successor auditor regarding the use of the working papers.

Appendix B [paragraph . 25] contains an illustrative successor auditor acknowledgment letter. AU §315. 12 158 The Standards of Field Work statements, the predecessor auditor’s report thereon,8 the results of inquiry of the predecessor auditor, the results of the successor auditor’s review of the predecessor auditor’s working papers relating to the most recently completed audit, and audit procedures performed on the current period’s transactions that may provide evidence about the opening balances or consistency.

For example, evidence gathered during the current year’s audit may provide information about the realizability and existence of receivables and inventory recorded at the beginning of the year. The successor auditor may also apply appropriate auditing procedures to account balances at the beginning of the period under audit and to transactions in prior periods. [As amended, effective for audits of ? nancial statements for periods ending on or after June 30, 2001, by Statement on Auditing Standards No. 93.

Revised, March 2006, to re? ect conforming changes necessary due to the issuance of Statement on Auditing Standards No. 105. ] . 13 The successor auditor’s review of the predecessor auditor’s working papers may affect the nature, timing, and extent of the successor auditor’s procedures with respect to the opening balances and consistency of accounting principles. However, the nature, timing, and extent of audit work performed and the conclusions reached in both these areas are solely the responsibility of the successor auditor.

In reporting on the audit, the successor auditor should not make reference to the report or work of the predecessor auditor as the basis, in part, for the successor auditor’s own opinion. Audits of Financial Statements That Have Been Previously Audited . 14 If an auditor is asked to audit and report on ? nancial statements that have been previously audited and reported on (henceforth referred to as a reaudit), the auditor considering acceptance of the reaudit engagement is also a successor auditor, and the auditor who previously reported is also a predecessor auditor.

In addition to the communications described in paragraphs . 07 through . 10, the successor auditor should state that the purpose of the inquiries is to obtain information about whether to accept an engagement to perform a reaudit. .15 If the successor auditor accepts the reaudit engagement, he or she may consider the information obtained from inquiries of the predecessor auditor and review of the predecessor auditor’s report and working papers in planning the reaudit. However, the information obtained from those inquiries and any review of the predecessor auditor’s report and working papers is not suf? ient to afford a basis for expressing an opinion. The nature, timing, and extent of the audit work performed and the conclusions reached in the reaudit are solely the responsibility of the successor auditor performing the reaudit. .16 The successor auditor should plan and perform the reaudit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards. The successor auditor should not assume responsibility for the predecessor auditor’s work or issue a report that re? ects divided responsibility as described in section 543, Part of Audit Performed by Other Independent Auditors.

Furthermore, the predecessor auditor is not a specialist as de? ned in section 336, Using the Work of a Specialist, or an internal auditor as de? ned in section 322, The Auditor’s Consideration of the Internal Audit Function in an Audit of Financial Statements. .17 If the successor auditor has audited the current period, the results of that audit may be considered in planning and performing the reaudit of the 8 The successor auditor may wish to make inquiries about the professional reputation and standing of the predecessor auditor.

See section 543, Part of Audit Performed by Other Independent Auditors, paragraph . 10a. AU §315. 13 Communications Between Predecessor and Successor Auditors 159 preceding period or periods and may provide audit evidence that is useful in performing the reaudit. [Revised, March 2006, to re? ect conforming changes necessary due to the issuance of Statement on Auditing Standards No. 105. ] . 18 If, in a reaudit engagement, the successor auditor is unable to obtain suf? cient appropriate audit evidence to express an opinion on the ? nancial tatements, the successor auditor should qualify or disclaim an opinion because of the inability to perform procedures the successor auditor considers necessary in the circumstances. [Revised, March 2006, to re? ect conforming changes necessary due to the issuance of Statement on Auditing Standards No. 105. ] . 19 The successor auditor should request working papers for the period or periods under reaudit and the period prior to the reaudit period. However, the extent, if any, to which the predecessor auditor permits access to the working papers is a matter of judgment. See paragraph . 11 of this section. ) . 20 In a reaudit, the successor auditor generally will be unable to observe inventory or make physical counts at the reaudit date or dates in the manner discussed in paragraphs . 09 through . 11 of section 331, Inventories. In such cases, the successor auditor may consider the knowledge obtained from his or her review of the predecessor auditor’s working papers and inquiries of the predecessor auditor to determine the nature, timing, and extent of procedures to be applied in the circumstances.

The successor auditor performing the reaudit should, if material, observe or perform some physical counts of inventory at a date subsequent to the period of the reaudit, in connection with a current audit or otherwise, and apply appropriate tests of intervening transactions. Appropriate procedures may include tests of prior transactions, reviews of records of prior counts, and the application of analytical procedures, such as gross pro? t tests.

Discovery of Possible Misstatements in Financial Statements Reported on by a Predecessor Auditor . 21 If during the audit or reaudit, the successor auditor becomes aware of information that leads him or her to believe that ? nancial statements reported on by the predecessor auditor may require revision, the successor auditor should request that the client inform the predecessor auditor of the situation and arrange for the three parties to discuss this information and attempt to resolve the matter.

The successor auditor should communicate to the predecessor auditor any information that the predecessor auditor may need to consider in accordance with section 561, Subsequent Discovery of Facts Existing at the Date of the Auditor’s Report, which sets out the procedures that an auditor should follow when the auditor subsequently discovers facts that may have affected the audited ? nancial statements previously reported on. 9 . 22 If the client refuses to inform the predecessor auditor or if the successor auditor is not satis? d with the resolution of the matter, the successor auditor should evaluate (a) possible implications on the current engagement and (b) whether to resign from the engagement. Furthermore, the successor auditor may wish to consult with his or her legal counsel in determining an appropriate course of further action. Effective Date .23 This section will be effective with respect to acceptance of an engagement after March 31, 1998. Earlier application is permitted. 9 See section 508, Reports on Audited Financial Statements, paragraphs . 70 through . 74, for reporting guidance. AU §315. 23 160 .24

The Standards of Field Work Appendix A Illustrative Client Consent and Acknowledgment Letter 1. Paragraph . 11 of this section states, “The successor auditor should request that the client authorize the predecessor auditor to allow a review of the predecessor auditor’s working papers. The predecessor auditor may wish to request a consent and acknowledgment letter from the client to document this authorization in an effort to reduce misunderstandings about the scope of the communications being authorized. ” The following letter is presented for illustrative purposes only and is not required by professional standards. Date] ABC Enterprises [Address] You have given your consent to allow [name of successor CPA ? rm], as successor independent auditors for ABC Enterprises (ABC), access to our working papers for our audit of the December 31, 19X1, ? nancial statements of ABC. You also have given your consent to us to respond fully to [name of successor CPA ? rm] inquiries. You understand and agree that the review of our working papers is undertaken solely for the purpose of obtaining an understanding about ABC and certain information about our audit to assist [name of successor CPA ? m] in planning the audit of the December 31, 19X2, ? nancial statements of ABC. Please con? rm your agreement with the foregoing by signing and dating a copy of this letter and returning it to us. Attached is the form of the letter we will furnish [name of successor CPA ? rm] regarding the use of the working papers. Very truly yours, [Predecessor Auditor] By: ___________________________ Accepted: ABC Enterprises By: ___________________________ Date: _________________ AU §315. 24 Communications Between Predecessor and Successor Auditors .25 161 Appendix B Illustrative Successor Auditor Acknowledgment Letter . Paragraph . 11, footnote 7, of this section states, “Before permitting access to the working papers, the predecessor auditor may wish to obtain a written communication from the successor auditor regarding the use of the working papers. ” The following letter is presented for illustrative purposes only and is not required by professional standards. [Successor Auditor] [Address] We have previously audited, in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America, the December 31, 20X1, ? nancial statements of ABC Enterprises (ABC). We rendered a report on those ? ancial statements and have not performed any audit procedures subsequent to the audit report date. In connection with your audit of ABC’s 20X2 ? nancial statements, you have requested access to our working papers prepared in connection with that audit. ABC has authorized our ? rm to allow you to review those working papers. Our audit, and the working papers prepared in connection therewith, of ABC’s ? nancial statements were not planned or conducted in contemplation of your review. Therefore, items of possible interest to you may not have been speci? cally addressed. Our use of professional judgment and the assessment of audit risk nd materiality for the purpose of our audit mean that matters may have existed that would have been assessed differently by you. We make no representation as to the suf? ciency or appropriateness of the information in our working papers for your purposes. We understand that the purpose of your review is to obtain information about ABC and our 19X1 audit results to assist you in planning your 19X2 audit of ABC. For that purpose only, we will provide you access to our working papers that relate to that objective. Upon request, we will provide copies of those working papers that provide factual information about ABC.

You agree to subject any such copies or information otherwise derived from our working papers to your normal policy for retention of working papers and protection of con? dential client information. Furthermore, in the event of a third-party request for access to your working papers prepared in connection with your audits of ABC, you agree to obtain our permission before voluntarily allowing any such access to our working papers or information otherwise derived from our working papers, and to obtain on our behalf any releases that you obtain from such third party.

You agree to advise us promptly and provide us a copy of any subpoena, summons, or other court order for access to your working papers that include copies of our working papers or information otherwise derived therefrom. Please con? rm your agreement with the foregoing by signing and dating a copy of this letter and returning it to us. AU §315. 25 162 Very truly yours, [Predecessor Auditor] The Standards of Field Work By: ___________________________ Accepted: [Successor Auditor] By: ___________________________ Date: __________________ Even with the client’s consent, access to the predecessor auditor’s working papers may still be limited.

Experience has shown that the predecessor auditor may be willing to grant broader access if given additional assurance concerning the use of the working papers. Accordingly, the successor auditor might consider agreeing to the following limitations on the review of the predecessor auditor’s working papers in order to obtain broader access: • • • The successor auditor will not comment, orally or in writing, to anyone as a result of the review as to whether the predecessor auditor’s engagement was performed in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards.

The successor auditor will not provide expert testimony or litigation support services or otherwise accept an engagement to comment on issues relating to the quality of the predecessor auditor’s audit. The successor auditor will not use the audit procedures or results thereof documented in the predecessor auditor’s working papers as audit evidence in rendering an opinion on the 19X2 ? nancial statements of ABC Enterprises, except as contemplated in Statement on Auditing Standards No. 84. The following paragraph illustrates the above:

Because your review of our working papers is undertaken solely for the purpose described above and may not entail a review of all our working papers, you agree that (1) the information obtained from the review will not be used by you for any other purpose, (2) you will not comment, orally or in writing, to anyone as a result of that review as to whether our audit was performed in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards, (3) you will not provide expert testimony or litigation support services or otherwise accept an engagement to comment on issues relating to the quality of our audit, and (4) you will not use the audit procedures or results thereof documented in our working papers as audit evidence in rendering your opinion on the 19X2 ? nancial statements of ABC, except as contemplated in Statement on Auditing Standards No. 84. [Revised, October 2000, to re? ect conforming changes necessary due to the issuance of Statement on Auditing Standards No. 93. Revised, March 2006, to re? ect conforming changes necessary due to the issuance of Statement on Auditing Standards No. 105. ] AU §315. 25