50 views

Uploaded by Humayoun Ahmad Farooqi

financial audit manual

- fam Chapter 7 21092005
- fam Appendix C CAATs 26092005
- fam Chapter 13 22092005
- fam Chapter 3 21092005
- fam Appendix a Glossary 070904
- fam Appendix E Analytical Skills 26092005
- fam Chapter 8 21-09-2005
- fam Chapter 6 21092005
- fam Chapter 1 21092005
- fam Table of Contents Audit Manual
- fam Appendix B Sampling 21092005
- Chapter 2 070804
- fam Chapter 4 21092005
- fam Appendix F Interviewing 26092005
- fam Chapter 1421092005
- fam Chapter 9 2109-2005
- Chapter 8.docx
- Chapter 9 Auditing for Frau (1)
- Some important Question
- Chapter 15 Comp

You are on page 1of 6

Introduction

b) determination of components;

c) determination of specific financial audit objectives, related compliance with

authority objectives, error conditions and irregularities;

d) assessment of inherent risk and control risk; and

e) assessment of the optimum mix of tests of internal control, analytical

procedures and substantive tests of details.

D.1.2 As summarised in Chapter 7, the optimum mix of tests of internal control, analytical

procedures and substantive tests of details for one specific financial or compliance

with authority audit objective for one component may be different than for a

different objective for the same component, or for different components.

a) placing a lot of reliance on the internal control structure for some objectives and

components, but placing little reliance on the internal control structure for others;

b) Doing detailed predictive or statistical analysis for some objectives and components

but only reviews for reasonableness or comparative analysis for other objectives and

components; and

c) Using a low confidence level to perform substantive tests of details for some

objectives and components, while adopting a high confidence level for other

substantive tests of details.

D.1.4 The challenge is to combine all of these different sources of assurance to reach an

overall conclusion on the financial statements.

D.1.5 This Appendix does not attempt to provide a mathematical proof; rather, it presents

a non-technical discussion. It first considers what the overall error evaluation would

be like if the auditor used one substantive sample as the sole source of assurance for

the financial statements as a whole. It then considers what the overall error

evaluation would be like if the auditor divided the financial statements into

components but continued to obtain all of his/her assurance for each component

from a substantive sample. Finally, it considers what the overall error evaluation

would be like if the auditor used substantive tests of details as only one source of

assurance for each component, and used different confidence levels for different

components and objectives.

One overall substantive sample as the sole source of assurance for the financial

statements as a whole

D.1.6 Assume the auditor sets materiality at Rs. 3,000,000, expected aggregate error at Rs.

816,500 and audit risk at 5%. Also assume that the auditor does not divide the

financial statements up into components, and does not obtain any inherent

assurance, or any assurance from testing the internal control structure or from

analytical procedures. Instead, the auditor decides to use one overall substantive

sample for the financial statements as a whole. The confidence level used would be

95% – the converse of the 5% audit risk.

effective. However, if it was possible, the auditor would:

a) treat all of the transactions and balances in the financial statements as one

population;

b) use the Rs. 3,000,000 materiality amount and the Rs. 816,500 expected aggregate

error; and

c) use a confidence level of 95% to sample the population.

D.1.8 In this scenario, some of the selected sample items would be payroll expenditures,

some would be revenue transactions, some would be part of the year-end cash

balance, some would be part of the year-end long-term debt balance, etc. The

auditor would perform the appropriate audit procedures on each sample item.

D.1.9 Using this approach, the error evaluation for one substantive sample would become

the overall error evaluation. The auditor would have one most likely error for the

financial statements as a whole, one upper error limit for overstatements for the

financial statements as a whole, and one upper error limit for understatements for

the financial statements as a whole.

D.1.10 Next, assume the auditor divides the financial statements into components but

continues to obtain all of his/her assurance from a substantive sample performed at a

95% confidence level.

D.1.11 In this scenario, the auditor would likely have virtually the same sample size in total

as he/she had in the previous scenario. The sample size for payroll expenditures

would be virtually the same as the number of sample items in the global sample that

represented payroll expenditures; the sample size for revenue transactions would be

virtually the same as the number of sample items in the global sample that

represented revenue transactions, etc. In other words, really nothing would change.

a) the auditor continues to use the same Rs. 3,000,000 materiality amount, and the

same Rs. 816,500 expected aggregate error;

b) the auditor continues to use the same 95% confidence level; and

c) the population value, in total and for each component, has not changed.

D.1.13 Given this fact the auditor would add up the most likely errors from each

component, and calculate an overall most likely error, an overall upper error limit

for overstatements and an overall upper error limit for understatements. It is likely

that the overall most likely error would be virtually the same as it was when the

auditor used one overall substantive sample as the sole source of assurance.

D.1.14 As for the upper error limit, the error evaluation process results in a very

conservative overall error evaluation. This is because the largest basic precision for

each of overstatements and understatements is being used, and because the sum of

the precision gap widenings will almost always be much higher than if the entire

financial statements were treated as one population and one overall sample had been

taken.

Substantive samples as only one source of assurance for each component and performed

using different confidence levels

D.1.15 Next we move on to the approach described in this manual, where substantive

samples are only one source of assurance. The auditor also obtains inherent

assurance, assurance from tests of internal control, and assurance from analytical

procedures. Furthermore, the auditor may obtain different amounts of assurance

from these other sources, resulting in different confidence levels for different

substantive samples.

D.1.16 Under this scenario, the auditor can still use the error evaluation described above.

a) continues to use the same Rs. 3,000,000 materiality amount and the same Rs.

816,500 expected aggregate error; and

b) while the confidence levels being used for the substantive tests of details are not the

same, the auditor is obtaining, in total, the same 95% overall assurance with respect

to each component and objective as he/she was obtaining in the previous scenarios.

D.1.18 In effect, then, all the auditor has done is change the sources of assurance to obtain

the same overall audit assurance of 95%.

D.1.19 To make this work, though, the auditor needs to address two other matters.

D.1.20 First, in order to ensure that he/she is, indeed, getting the required 95% assurance

from all of the tests, the auditor needs to deal with any conflicting audit evidence.

D.1.21 Second, while the most likely error is not affected by the confidence level being

used, and can therefore be added together just like in the previous scenarios, the

further possible error (the difference between the upper error limit and the most

likely error) is affected by the confidence level being used. To deal with this, the

auditor will need to make a conservative estimate of the further possible error.

D.2. Why Allocation of Materiality is Not Required

Introduction

D.2.1 As noted in the Manual, the materiality amount that is determined during the audit

planning phase is used for the audit of all components. There is no need to allocate

the amount to the various financial statement components. If materiality is set at Rs.

3,000,000 for the financial statements as a whole, the same Rs. 3,000,000 can be

used for each financial statement component, and for each specific financial audit

objective and error condition.

D.2.2 While a mathematical proof of this is beyond the scope of this manual, it can be

illustrated with a numerical example.

D.2.4 The first concept is that risk and assurance are converses of each other. If the auditor

wants to be 95% confident that the financial statements are not materially misstated,

this means that the auditor is prepared to take a 5% risk that he/she will fail to detect

errors summing to more than the materiality amount.

D.2.5 The second basic concept is that the probability of two mutually exclusive events

occurring is the probability of the first event occurring times the probability of the

second event occurring. If there is a 5% chance that Event A will occur, and a 5%

chance that Event B will occur, the probability that both Event A and Event B will

occur is 5% times 5% or 0.25% (.05 x .05 = .0025).

Numerical example

D.2.6 Let’s assume that the auditor wants to have 95% assurance that a financial statement

is not misstated by more than Rs. 3,000,000. Let’s also assume that the financial

statement is composed of two components – Component 1 and Component 2.

D.2.7 Based on the theory contained in this manual, the auditor could plan the audit in

such a way as to be able to conclude that he/she has:

a) 95% assurance that Component 1 is not misstated by more than Rs. 3,000,000; and

b) 95% assurance that Component 2 is not misstated by more than Rs. 3,000,000.

D.2.8 How can this be? If the auditor has 95% assurance that Component 1 is not

misstated by more than Rs. 3,0000,000, and 95% assurance that Component 2 is not

misstated by more than Rs. 3,000,000, how can the auditor have 95% assurance that

the two components, in total, are not misstated by more than Rs. 3,000,0000?

Shouldn’t the total be Rs. 6,000,000?

D.2.9 The reason why the total is not Rs. 6,000,000 is that the probability of both

Component 1 being misstated by more than Rs. 3,000,000 and Component 2 being

misstated by more than Rs. 3,000,000 (i.e., that, in total they are misstated by more

than Rs. 6,000,000) is not 5%. Using the second basic principle noted above, the

probability that the components are misstated, in total, by more than Rs. 6,000,000

is 5% times 5% or only 0.25% (.05 x .05 = .0025). Therefore, the auditor has

99.75% (100.00% - 0.25%) assurance that, in total, the two components are not

misstated by more than Rs. 6,000,000.

D.2.10 If the auditor has 99.75% assurance that, in total, the two components are not

misstated by more than Rs. 6,000,000, how much assurance does the auditor have

that, in total, the two components are not misstated by more than Rs. 3,000,000?

D.2.11 Logically, the answer is a lower level of assurance than 99.75%. If, for example, the

auditor finished performing his/her work and concluded that the most likely error in

the financial statements is Rs. 100,000,000, the auditor may be:

a) Virtually certain that the maximum possible error in the financial statement is less

than Rs. 6,000,000;

b) Reasonably confident that the maximum possible error is less than Rs. 3,000,000;

and

c) Only somewhat confident that the maximum possible error is less than Rs.

1,500,000.

D.2.12 Therefore, decreasing the materiality amount decreases the amount of assurance that

one can get from the same amount of work.

D.2.13 Using monetary unit sampling, the sample size required to obtain 95% assurance

that a component is not misstated by more than Rs. 3,000,000 is exactly the same as

the sample size required to obtain 77.65% assurance that the component is not

misstated by more than Rs. 1,500,000. Therefore, instead of concluding that he/she

has 95% assurance that Component 1 is misstated by more than Rs. 3,000,000, the

auditor can conclude that he/she has 77.65% assurance that the component is

misstated by more than Rs. 1,500,000. The auditor can do the same with Component

2. And in total? Well, if there is a 22.35% (100.00% - 77.65%) risk that Component

1 is misstated by more than Rs. 1,500,000, and a 22.35% risk that Component 2 is

misstated by more than Rs. 1,500,000, then the risk that, in total, the financial

statement is misstated by more Rs. 3,000,000 is 22.35% times 22.35%, or 5% (.2235

x .2235 = .05). This is, of course, exactly the same as the risk that the auditor is

prepared to take that each component is misstated by more than Rs. 3,000,000.

D.2.14 The same result will occur no matter which combination of amounts adding up to

Rs. 3,000,000 is used. For example, the sample size required to obtain 95%

assurance that a component is not misstated by more than Rs. 3,000,000 is exactly

the same as the sample size required to obtain:

a) 83.40% assurance that the component is not misstated by more than Rs. 1,800,000;

and

b) 69.88% assurance that the component is not misstated by more than Rs. 1,200,000.

D.2.15 Therefore the risk that, in total, Component 1 is misstated by more than Rs.

1,800,000 and that Component 2 is misstated by more than Rs. 1,200,000 (i.e., that,

in total, the two components are misstated by more than Rs. 3,000,000), is 16.60%

(100.00% – 83.40%) times 30.12% (100.00% – 69.88%), or 5% (.1660 x .3012 = .

05).

D.2.16 The same result will also occur no matter how many components are used. As long

as the amounts being used sum to Rs. 3,000,000, the risk will always multiply out to

5%.

D.2.17 In conclusion, then, there is no need to allocate materiality – the auditor can use the

Rs. 3,000,000 materiality amount on each component, and can still conclude with

respect to Rs. 3,000,000 overall.

- fam Chapter 7 21092005Uploaded byHumayoun Ahmad Farooqi
- fam Appendix C CAATs 26092005Uploaded byHumayoun Ahmad Farooqi
- fam Chapter 13 22092005Uploaded byHumayoun Ahmad Farooqi
- fam Chapter 3 21092005Uploaded byHumayoun Ahmad Farooqi
- fam Appendix a Glossary 070904Uploaded byHumayoun Ahmad Farooqi
- fam Appendix E Analytical Skills 26092005Uploaded byHumayoun Ahmad Farooqi
- fam Chapter 8 21-09-2005Uploaded byHumayoun Ahmad Farooqi
- fam Chapter 6 21092005Uploaded byHumayoun Ahmad Farooqi
- fam Chapter 1 21092005Uploaded byHumayoun Ahmad Farooqi
- fam Table of Contents Audit ManualUploaded byHumayoun Ahmad Farooqi
- fam Appendix B Sampling 21092005Uploaded byHumayoun Ahmad Farooqi
- Chapter 2 070804Uploaded byShahid Nasir Malik
- fam Chapter 4 21092005Uploaded byHumayoun Ahmad Farooqi
- fam Appendix F Interviewing 26092005Uploaded byHumayoun Ahmad Farooqi
- fam Chapter 1421092005Uploaded byHumayoun Ahmad Farooqi
- fam Chapter 9 2109-2005Uploaded byHumayoun Ahmad Farooqi
- Chapter 8.docxUploaded byjohn brown
- Chapter 9 Auditing for Frau (1)Uploaded byKeith Joanne Santiago
- Some important QuestionUploaded byHasan Ds
- Chapter 15 CompUploaded byLiezl del Rosario
- ch02_Part1Uploaded bySergio Hoffman
- fam Chapter 15 21092005Uploaded byHumayoun Ahmad Farooqi
- fam Chapter 12 22092005Uploaded byHumayoun Ahmad Farooqi
- AuditingUploaded byHengky Jaya
- fam Chapter 10 22092005Uploaded byHumayoun Ahmad Farooqi
- FinaleUploaded byJolina Mancera
- SyllabiUploaded byVineet Shah
- Exam 3 Review Sheet Summer 09Uploaded bykpatel4u
- fam hapter 11 22092005Uploaded byHumayoun Ahmad Farooqi
- 02 Understanding Public Sector Auditing.docUploaded byMell Yuliastina

- mardon-ke-libas-aur-balon-ke-shari-ahkam-by-sheikh-kamaluddin-ahmad-rashdiUploaded byHumayoun Ahmad Farooqi
- Punjab Delegation of Financial Rules Updated 2012Uploaded byHumayoun Ahmad Farooqi
- Tanbeeh ul-Ghafileen By Shaykh Abu Laith Samarqandi r.a Urdu TranslationUploaded byTalib Ghaffari
- Pay Fixation punjabUploaded byHumayoun Ahmad Farooqi
- Bermuda Tikon Aur Dajjal by Sheikh Umar AsimUploaded byMusalman Bhai
- AffidavitUploaded byHumayoun Ahmad Farooqi
- 50% allowance clarificationUploaded byHumayoun Ahmad Farooqi
- Aqeedah Zahoor e Mehdi Ahadith Ki Roshni Mein by Sheikh Mufti Nizamuddin Shamzai (r.a)Uploaded byMusalman Bhai
- Regularization of Contract Employees grade 1-15 punjab govtUploaded byHumayoun Ahmad Farooqi
- Pension Increases table punjabUploaded byHumayoun Ahmad Farooqi
- Final Seniority List of DDAO/DTO/DOAUploaded byHumayoun Ahmad Farooqi
- Bachon Ke Liay Ibtidai Deeni Taleemaat by Sheikh Mufti Ehsanullah ShaiqUploaded byMusalman Bhai
- Black WaterUploaded byHumayoun Ahmad Farooqi
- List of Sahaba R.A - Updated www.QuranWaHadith.comUploaded byShadab Shaikh
- DAJJAL Kaun Kaab Kaaha by Mufti Abu Lubaba Shah MansoorUploaded byHumayoun Ahmad Farooqi
- The Punjab Motor Vehicles Taxation ActUploaded byHumayoun Ahmad Farooqi
- The Punjab Land Revenue ActUploaded byHumayoun Ahmad Farooqi
- The Punjab Government Servants Housing Foundation Act 2004Uploaded byHumayoun Ahmad Farooqi
- The Punjab Court FeesUploaded byHumayoun Ahmad Farooqi
- Electronic Crimes Act 2004Uploaded byHumayoun Ahmad Farooqi
- Final Manual of DaosUploaded byHumayoun Ahmad Farooqi
- 91550647 Building and Road B R Code DFRUploaded byg1381821
- Intergovernmental TransfersUploaded byHumayoun Ahmad Farooqi
- punjab Medical Attendance RulesUploaded byHumayoun Ahmad Farooqi
- PEEDA ActUploaded byFurzan Abbas
- Constitution of Pakistan 1973 in Urdu verUploaded bymuradlaghari
- District Budget RulesUploaded byHumayoun Ahmad Farooqi
- The Punjab Urban Immovable Property Tax ActUploaded byHumayoun Ahmad Farooqi
- Electronic Transactions Ordinance 2002Uploaded byHumayoun Ahmad Farooqi
- Islami Mahino Ke Fazail o Ahkaam Molana RoohullahUploaded byKamrans_Maktaba_Urdu

- Kemp Coop Minutes for Cert of Good StandingUploaded byJf Larong
- Jamila ResumeUploaded byanon_416197098
- IATF 16949 Project Manager's GuideUploaded byJOECOOL67
- IMPLEMENTING ISO 90012008 QUALITY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM A REFERENCE.pdfUploaded bysekar
- Recall productUploaded byS M Arif Hussain
- trial balanceUploaded bykarmakarritesh
- My Business Uk - Case studies from businesslink.gov.ukUploaded bydmaproiect
- Secretarial Practices OutlineUploaded bynaeem_shams
- BBM Compensation Management assignmentUploaded bySyed Imran
- 2016 Annual ReportUploaded byJohn Baptist
- Model Internal Audit Activity Charter 2aUploaded bylucky adhitya
- QMS 6-2Uploaded bypradeep
- Chapter 15 SMUploaded byAvreile Rabena
- Senior Accountant Auditor MBA in Houston TX Resume Rochelle ButlerUploaded byRochelleButler
- PerspectiveUploaded byapi-3832696
- Eric Intelex Risk ManagementUploaded byjessica
- Annual Report Final 07 12.2011Uploaded byitsindbvp
- 4-Spare Parts Management 1Uploaded byMohd Kamil
- Director Manager Internal Audit in Washington DC Resume Jeffrey BarnesUploaded byJeffreyBarnes2
- Generally Accepted Accounting PrinciplesUploaded byHafiz Suleman
- Bat AttaUploaded byTimberly
- CAMELSUploaded byAyan Kanjilal
- CMMI ArtifactUploaded bysivaniranjan
- Shibiz Not EssUploaded byKatou Berezovska
- SCM MinistryUploaded bySayma Zerin Toma
- ERO0196047-IPC.pdfUploaded byakansha
- 47644146-TaxationUploaded byDyl Sorongon
- What is Environmental AuditingUploaded byRavi Dubey
- Inventory Control,Asset and Store Management and Distibution - ErickUploaded byBoard Arunda
- AUDIT THEORY 1.pdfUploaded byJohn Carlo Peru