Learn: Auditing Theory and Auditing Problems

Overview

Welcome to our deep dive into key concepts of Auditing Theory and Auditing Problems, designed especially for CPALE candidates and those mastering professional audit standards. This guide will walk you through the critical thinking and frameworks behind typical audit scenarios, from audit opinions and procedures to professional skepticism, impairment, and reporting. By the end, you'll be equipped to analyze audit situations, apply relevant standards, and avoid common errors—without memorizing answers, but by truly understanding the "why" behind them.

---

Concept-by-Concept Deep Dive

1. Audit Opinions and Their Implications

What it is:
Audit opinions express the auditor’s conclusion about the fairness of a client’s financial statements. The type of opinion depends on the nature and extent of misstatements or the inability to obtain sufficient evidence.

Types of Audit Opinions:

• Unmodified (Unqualified) Opinion: States the financial statements are fairly presented.
• Qualified Opinion: Issued when there are material misstatements or limitations, but they are not pervasive.
• Adverse Opinion: Given when misstatements are both material and pervasive, rendering the financial statements misleading.
• Disclaimer of Opinion: Used when the auditor cannot obtain enough evidence and the possible effects could be both material and pervasive.

Reasoning Recipe:

1. Identify the Issue: Is there a misstatement, or is audit evidence lacking?
2. Assess Materiality: Is the issue material (significant to users)?
3. Assess Pervasiveness: Does the issue affect many elements of the statements?
4. Select the Opinion: Apply the above to the typology of opinions.

Common Misconceptions:

• Believing any misstatement leads automatically to an adverse opinion (it must also be pervasive).
• Confusing inability to gather evidence (leads to disclaimer) with known misstatements (leads to qualified or adverse).

---

2. Professional Skepticism and Analytical Procedures

What it is:
Professional skepticism is a critical, questioning mindset that auditors must maintain throughout the audit. Analytical procedures are evaluations of financial data using relationships and trends.

Professional Skepticism:

• Definition: A skeptical attitude means always questioning, never assuming, and being alert to evidence that may contradict documents or statements.
• Maintained: From planning to conclusion, especially when management assertions are significant.

Analytical Procedures:

• Types: Used in planning, as substantive tests, and near the end for overall review.
• Purpose: To identify unusual transactions, balances, or ratios that may indicate risks of material misstatement.

Step-by-Step:

1. Establish Expectations: What are normal trends or ratios?
2. Compare Actuals: Look for deviations.
3. Investigate: Follow up on significant or unexplained variances.

Common Misconceptions:

• Assuming analytical procedures can replace all substantive tests (they complement but do not substitute detailed testing).
• Treating professional skepticism as mere suspicion, rather than a balanced, evidence-based approach.

---

3. Audit Assertions and Procedures

What it is:
Audit assertions are implicit or explicit claims made by management regarding the financial statements. Audit procedures are designed to test these assertions.

Common Assertions:

• Existence/Occurrence: The assets and transactions exist or occurred.
• Completeness: All items that should be included are present.
• Valuation/Allocation: Items are properly valued.
• Rights and Obligations: The entity owns or controls the assets.
• Presentation and Disclosure: Items are appropriately classified and disclosed.

Procedures Example:

• Tracing: From source documents to journals (tests completeness).
• Vouching: From journals to source documents (tests occurrence).

Step-by-Step:

1. Identify Relevant Assertions: For each account or transaction.
2. Select Procedures: That best test those assertions.
3. Evaluate Evidence: Determine sufficiency and appropriateness.

Common Misconceptions:

• Confusing tracing with vouching.
• Assuming one procedure tests all assertions.

---

4. Impairment and Valuation Standards

What it is:
Impairment occurs when the carrying amount of an asset exceeds its recoverable amount, as per PAS 36. Valuation standards (such as PVS 1) provide the framework for how assets and liabilities are measured.

PAS 36 (Impairment of Assets):

• Carrying Amount: The value at which an asset is recognized on the balance sheet.
• Recoverable Amount: The higher of fair value less costs to sell and value in use.