Sunday, February 14, 2010
True and fair view
The concept of the 'true and fair view' remains a cornerstone of financial reporting and auditing in the UK despite the adoption of international financial reporting standards, the Financial Reporting Council has said. Auditors of the published accounts of companies are required to form an opinion as to whether the accounts they audit show a ‘true and fair view’ of the organization's affairs. This is an important concept in the UK and may be used as an override even where a company has complied with all legal requirements. Despite its importance there is no legal definition of the expression. The meaning of ‘true and fair view’ develops over time as accounting standards are issued and new accounting issues are debated.
Purpose and scope of the Statement of Principles
The purpose of the draft Statement of Principles is to define the principles that should underlie the preparation and presentation of general purpose financial statements. It also provides the conceptual underpinnings for preparing future accounting standards. The Statement comprises the following eight chapters:
1 The Objective of Financial Statements.
2 The Reporting Entity.
3 The Qualitative Characteristics of Financial Information.
4 The Elements of Financial Statements.
5 Recognition in Financial Statements.
6 Measurement in Financial Statements.
7 Presentation of Financial Information.
8 Accounting for Interests in Other Entities.
The ASB believe that the draft Statement will assist preparers and users of financial statements, as well as auditors and others, to understand better its approach to formulating accounting standards. It should also help them to understand better the general nature and function of information reported in financial statements.
It is important to remember that the Statement of Principles is not an accounting standard and, therefore, does not prescribe how financial statements should be prepared or presented.
The draft Statement focuses on the financial statements that are either intended to give a true and fair view of the organisation’s financial performance and financial position or are intended to be consistent with financial statements that give such a view. This includes annual and interim financial statements, as well as preliminary announcements and summary financial statements.
Relevance of the Statement
The draft Statement is primarily designed to be relevant to the financial statements of profit-oriented organisations including those in the public sector, regardless of their size. However, it could also be relevant to not-for-profit organisations if some of the principles are re-expressed or their emphasis changed. A separate paper on not-for-profit entities and the Statement of Principles is to be issued in due course.
The draft Statement recognises that the concept of a true and fair view is fundamental to the whole system of financial reporting. An example of this is its insistence on relevance and reliability as the main indicators of the quality of financial information. The concept of a true and fair view is considered to be the ‘ultimate’ and lies at the core of all financial reporting. It is regarded as the ultimate test for financial statements and, as such, has a direct effect on accounting practice.
Financial statements will not give a true and fair view unless the information they contain is sufficient in quantity and quality to satisfy the reasonable expectations of the readers to whom they are addressed. These expectations change over time and the ASB seeks, through its accounting standards and other pronouncements, to respond to these expectations.
Sunday, January 24, 2010
Money laundering
Money laundering is the process by which criminals attempt to conceal the true origin and ownership of the proceeds of their criminal activity, allowing them to maintain control over the proceeds and, ultimately, providing a legitimate cover for their sources of income. The term is widely defined to include: possessing, in any way dealing with, or concealing, the proceeds of any crime ('criminal property'). It also includes:
This includes:
The offence of tipping-off occurs when the MLRO (or an individual) makes a disclosure which is likely to prejudice an investigation. This does not prevent businesses and individuals discussing with clients, and advising on, issues regarding prevention of money laundering or other related matters, on a non-specific basis.
Fiscal offences
Tax-related offences are not in a special category. Tax evasion is a crime, the proceeds of which can be laundered in the same way as those from drug trafficking, terrorist activity, theft, etc. Offences may relate to direct or indirect tax. Tax evasion offences, which fall within the definition of money laundering include underdeclaring income and overclaiming expenses.
Professional duty of confidence
Accounting professionals will not be in breach of any professional duty of confidence if they report, in good faith, any money laundering knowledge or suspicions to the appropriate authority.
Statutory provisions give protection against criminal action for members in respect of their confidentiality requirements. This protection applies even if the suspicions later prove to be groundless, provided that the reports were originally made in good faith.
Client confidentiality override provisions are available when:
Disclosure without reasonable grounds will increase the risk of a business or an individual being sued for breach of confidentiality.
Record keeping
All client identification records, together with a full audit trail of all transactions, must be maintained. Records of transactions must be kept in a readily retrievable form for a period of at least five years, with controls to ensure that they are not inadvertently destroyed. Client verification records must be retained throughout the period of the relationship and for five years after termination of the relationship. ACCA's Rules of Professional Conduct 'Retention of books, files, working papers and other documents' also apply.
Client identification
The requirement to verify the identities of all clients is mandatory. Verification must be documented before any work is undertaken. Sufficient knowledge of a client must be maintained to be able to identify that which is unusual and/or suspicious. Members are required to obtain evidence of identity for all clients where:
Basic elements:
The basic elements to be considered when designing an anti-money laundering programme include:
Dedicated resources
A person should be identified and charged with the responsibility for overseeing the entire anti-money laundering programme. The MLRO must be:
A regular review of the programme should be undertaken to ensure that it is functioning as designed. Such a review could be performed by external or internal resources, and should be accompanied by a formal assessment or written report.
- an attempt or conspiracy or incitement to commit such an offence
- aiding, abetting, counselling or procuring the commission of such an offence
- an act which would constitute any of these offences if done in the UK.
This includes:
- proceeds of tax evasion
- a benefit obtained through bribery and corruption
- benefits obtained, or income received, through the operation of a criminal cartel
- benefits (ie saved costs) arising from a failure to comply with a regulatory requirement that is a criminal offence.
The offence of tipping-off occurs when the MLRO (or an individual) makes a disclosure which is likely to prejudice an investigation. This does not prevent businesses and individuals discussing with clients, and advising on, issues regarding prevention of money laundering or other related matters, on a non-specific basis.
Fiscal offences
Tax-related offences are not in a special category. Tax evasion is a crime, the proceeds of which can be laundered in the same way as those from drug trafficking, terrorist activity, theft, etc. Offences may relate to direct or indirect tax. Tax evasion offences, which fall within the definition of money laundering include underdeclaring income and overclaiming expenses.
Professional duty of confidence
Accounting professionals will not be in breach of any professional duty of confidence if they report, in good faith, any money laundering knowledge or suspicions to the appropriate authority.
Statutory provisions give protection against criminal action for members in respect of their confidentiality requirements. This protection applies even if the suspicions later prove to be groundless, provided that the reports were originally made in good faith.
Client confidentiality override provisions are available when:
- there is knowledge or suspicion that a person has committed a money laundering offence
- a prohibited act will be or has been committed.
Disclosure without reasonable grounds will increase the risk of a business or an individual being sued for breach of confidentiality.
Record keeping
All client identification records, together with a full audit trail of all transactions, must be maintained. Records of transactions must be kept in a readily retrievable form for a period of at least five years, with controls to ensure that they are not inadvertently destroyed. Client verification records must be retained throughout the period of the relationship and for five years after termination of the relationship. ACCA's Rules of Professional Conduct 'Retention of books, files, working papers and other documents' also apply.
Client identification
The requirement to verify the identities of all clients is mandatory. Verification must be documented before any work is undertaken. Sufficient knowledge of a client must be maintained to be able to identify that which is unusual and/or suspicious. Members are required to obtain evidence of identity for all clients where:
- an ongoing business relationship is to be established
- the total value of any transactions is not known at the outset
- a one-off transaction or a series of transactions in excess of (the equivalent of) Euro 15,000 is to be undertaken.
Basic elements:
The basic elements to be considered when designing an anti-money laundering programme include:
- dedicated resources
- written policies and procedures
- comprehensive coverage
- timely escalation and resolution of matters
- explicit management support
- sufficient training and education
- regular review/audit of the programme.
Dedicated resources
A person should be identified and charged with the responsibility for overseeing the entire anti-money laundering programme. The MLRO must be:
- competent and knowledgeable about money laundering
- empowered with full responsibility and authority to make and enforce policies and procedures.
A regular review of the programme should be undertaken to ensure that it is functioning as designed. Such a review could be performed by external or internal resources, and should be accompanied by a formal assessment or written report.
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Whistleblowing
The objectives of an internal whistleblowing program are
* A lack of trust in the internal system
* Unwillingness of employees to be "snitches"
* Misguided union solidarity
* Belief that management is not held to the same standard
* Fear of retaliation
* Fear of alienation from peers
Steps for Creating a Whistleblowing Culture
A policy about reporting illegal or unethical practices should include
* Formal mechanisms for reporting violations, such as hotlines and mailboxes
* Clear communications about the process of voicing concerns, such as a specific chain of command, or the identification of a specific person in the organization, such as an ombudsman or a human resources professional
* Clear communications about bans on retaliation
In addition, a clear connection should exist between an organization's code of ethics and performance measures. For example, in the performance review process, employees can be held accountable not only for meeting their goals and objectives but also for doing so in accordance with the stated values or business standards of the company.
Top management, starting with the CEO, should demonstrate a strong commitment to encouraging whistleblowing. This message must be communicated by line managers at all levels, who are trained continuously in creating an open-door policy regarding employee complaints.
Publicize the Organization's Commitment
To create a culture of openness and honesty, it is important that employees hear about the policy regularly. Top management should make every effort to talk about the commitment to ethical behavior in memos, newsletters, and speeches to company personnel. Publicly acknowledging and rewarding employees who pinpoint ethical issues is one way to send the message that management is serious about addressing issues before they become endemic.
Managers should be required to investigate all allegations promptly and thoroughly, and report the origins and the results of the investigation to a higher authority. For example, at IBM, a long-standing open-door policy requires that any complaint received must be investigated within a certain number of hours. Inaction is the best way to create cynicism about the seriousness of an organization's ethics policy.
Attitudes toward whistleblowing have evolved considerably during the past 50 years in corporate America, from the early days of the "organization man" ethos where loyalty to the company was the ruling norm, to the present time when public outrage about corporate misconduct has created a more auspicious climate for whistleblowing.
Prior to the 1960s, corporations had broad autonomy in employee policies and could fire an employee at will, even for no reason. Employees were expected to be loyal to their organizations at all costs. Among the few exceptions to this rule were unionized employees, who could only be fired for "just cause," and government employees because the courts upheld their constitutional right to criticize agency policies. In private industry, few real mechanisms for airing grievances existed although, for example, IBM claimed from its earliest days, to have an effective open-door policy that allowed employees to raise any issue.
In part because of this lack of protection for whistleblowers, problems were often concealed rather than solved. Probably the most egregious example was in asbestos manufacturing, where the link to lung disease was clearly established as early as 1924 but actively suppressed by company officials. The first product liability lawsuit against an asbestos manufacturer was not successfully promulgated until 1971.
The 1970s were notable for cases in which employees who had known of product defects or hazards decided to "swallow the whistle," as Alan Westin, Henry Kurtz, and Albert Robbins put it in their book, Whistleblowing. The result was that consumers and other employees were seriously harmed; and when the information went public, so were the organizations that were damaged by awards in the millions.
Even in cases where whistleblowing occurred, it was not always heeded. In 1972, Firestone Tire Director of Development Thomas A. Robertson sent top management a memo warning that the 500 tire was inferior and subject to belt-edge separation at high speeds. His warning was ignored despite reports about poor performance from major customers such as General Motors, and the 500 tire was kept on the market. By the time Time magazine reported that accidents caused by blowouts had resulted in more than 41 deaths and hundreds of serious injuries, the company had already replaced 3 million tires and spent millions of dollars in personal injury lawsuits. If Robertson had received an internal hearing or blown the whistle externally, such disasters for the public and the company could have been avoided.
Unfortunately, it appears Firestone did not make the necessary organizational changes to prevent such debacles, since the story repeated itself in 2000. After an investigation by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Ford announced a recall and replacement of 3.5 million Firestone tires in October 2000. This recall occurred after 200 deaths and 700 serious injuries had already been reported because of the unsafe tires.
When news of the problem broke in late 2000 and early 2001, it became clear many groups at Ford and Firestone had known about the faulty tires as early as 1996. The ultimate result of inaction by these groups was that Firestone and Ford were called to testify before Congress, millions of dollars were spent settling lawsuits, and a century-long relationship between Ford and Firestone was severed in 2001.
There have, of course, been successful cases of whistleblowing although even in these cases, the personal and professional toll on the individuals has been heavy. In 1968, A. Ernest Fitzgerald, who was in charge of cost evaluations of the C-5A air transport program, found a cost overrun of $2 billion. Although the Air Force dismissed him, he was reinstated through legal action. He was, however, demoted. He later won another appeal for reinstatement in his former position. The reasoning for the actions against him was explained in a memorandum to John Haldeman of the Nixon White House: " Fitzgerald is no doubt a top-notch expert, but he must be given very low marks on loyalty; and loyalty is the name of the game."
In 1996, Jeffery Wigand, a tobacco researcher, revealed that Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. knew tobacco was addictive. His revelations had a dramatic impact on public policy and public perceptions of the tobacco industry. However, although he was vindicated by the attention he received in the media and by the fact that after his revelations, victims of tobacco-related illnesses began to be successful in their litigation against the tobacco companies, he still experienced severe personal consequences including threats against his family, loss of income, divorce, and the threat of litigation for breach of confidentiality.
- To encourage employees to bring ethical and legal violations they are aware of to an internal authority so that action can be taken immediately to resolve the problem
- To minimize the organization's exposure to the damage that can occur when employees circumvent internal mechanisms
- To let employees know the organization is serious about adherence to codes of conduct
* A lack of trust in the internal system
* Unwillingness of employees to be "snitches"
* Misguided union solidarity
* Belief that management is not held to the same standard
* Fear of retaliation
* Fear of alienation from peers
Steps for Creating a Whistleblowing Culture
- Create a Policy
A policy about reporting illegal or unethical practices should include
* Formal mechanisms for reporting violations, such as hotlines and mailboxes
* Clear communications about the process of voicing concerns, such as a specific chain of command, or the identification of a specific person in the organization, such as an ombudsman or a human resources professional
* Clear communications about bans on retaliation
In addition, a clear connection should exist between an organization's code of ethics and performance measures. For example, in the performance review process, employees can be held accountable not only for meeting their goals and objectives but also for doing so in accordance with the stated values or business standards of the company.
- Get Endorsement From Top Management
Top management, starting with the CEO, should demonstrate a strong commitment to encouraging whistleblowing. This message must be communicated by line managers at all levels, who are trained continuously in creating an open-door policy regarding employee complaints.
Publicize the Organization's Commitment
To create a culture of openness and honesty, it is important that employees hear about the policy regularly. Top management should make every effort to talk about the commitment to ethical behavior in memos, newsletters, and speeches to company personnel. Publicly acknowledging and rewarding employees who pinpoint ethical issues is one way to send the message that management is serious about addressing issues before they become endemic.
- Investigate and Follow Up
Managers should be required to investigate all allegations promptly and thoroughly, and report the origins and the results of the investigation to a higher authority. For example, at IBM, a long-standing open-door policy requires that any complaint received must be investigated within a certain number of hours. Inaction is the best way to create cynicism about the seriousness of an organization's ethics policy.
- Assess the Organization's Internal Whistleblowing System
Attitudes toward whistleblowing have evolved considerably during the past 50 years in corporate America, from the early days of the "organization man" ethos where loyalty to the company was the ruling norm, to the present time when public outrage about corporate misconduct has created a more auspicious climate for whistleblowing.
Prior to the 1960s, corporations had broad autonomy in employee policies and could fire an employee at will, even for no reason. Employees were expected to be loyal to their organizations at all costs. Among the few exceptions to this rule were unionized employees, who could only be fired for "just cause," and government employees because the courts upheld their constitutional right to criticize agency policies. In private industry, few real mechanisms for airing grievances existed although, for example, IBM claimed from its earliest days, to have an effective open-door policy that allowed employees to raise any issue.
In part because of this lack of protection for whistleblowers, problems were often concealed rather than solved. Probably the most egregious example was in asbestos manufacturing, where the link to lung disease was clearly established as early as 1924 but actively suppressed by company officials. The first product liability lawsuit against an asbestos manufacturer was not successfully promulgated until 1971.
The 1970s were notable for cases in which employees who had known of product defects or hazards decided to "swallow the whistle," as Alan Westin, Henry Kurtz, and Albert Robbins put it in their book, Whistleblowing. The result was that consumers and other employees were seriously harmed; and when the information went public, so were the organizations that were damaged by awards in the millions.
Even in cases where whistleblowing occurred, it was not always heeded. In 1972, Firestone Tire Director of Development Thomas A. Robertson sent top management a memo warning that the 500 tire was inferior and subject to belt-edge separation at high speeds. His warning was ignored despite reports about poor performance from major customers such as General Motors, and the 500 tire was kept on the market. By the time Time magazine reported that accidents caused by blowouts had resulted in more than 41 deaths and hundreds of serious injuries, the company had already replaced 3 million tires and spent millions of dollars in personal injury lawsuits. If Robertson had received an internal hearing or blown the whistle externally, such disasters for the public and the company could have been avoided.
Unfortunately, it appears Firestone did not make the necessary organizational changes to prevent such debacles, since the story repeated itself in 2000. After an investigation by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Ford announced a recall and replacement of 3.5 million Firestone tires in October 2000. This recall occurred after 200 deaths and 700 serious injuries had already been reported because of the unsafe tires.
When news of the problem broke in late 2000 and early 2001, it became clear many groups at Ford and Firestone had known about the faulty tires as early as 1996. The ultimate result of inaction by these groups was that Firestone and Ford were called to testify before Congress, millions of dollars were spent settling lawsuits, and a century-long relationship between Ford and Firestone was severed in 2001.
There have, of course, been successful cases of whistleblowing although even in these cases, the personal and professional toll on the individuals has been heavy. In 1968, A. Ernest Fitzgerald, who was in charge of cost evaluations of the C-5A air transport program, found a cost overrun of $2 billion. Although the Air Force dismissed him, he was reinstated through legal action. He was, however, demoted. He later won another appeal for reinstatement in his former position. The reasoning for the actions against him was explained in a memorandum to John Haldeman of the Nixon White House: " Fitzgerald is no doubt a top-notch expert, but he must be given very low marks on loyalty; and loyalty is the name of the game."
In 1996, Jeffery Wigand, a tobacco researcher, revealed that Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. knew tobacco was addictive. His revelations had a dramatic impact on public policy and public perceptions of the tobacco industry. However, although he was vindicated by the attention he received in the media and by the fact that after his revelations, victims of tobacco-related illnesses began to be successful in their litigation against the tobacco companies, he still experienced severe personal consequences including threats against his family, loss of income, divorce, and the threat of litigation for breach of confidentiality.
Internal audit & Corporate governance
MANAGEMENT IS counting on internal auditors more than ever to improve governance processes, according to a new report from Crowe Chizek, an assurance, consulting, and risk management provider. Infernal Audit Plays Pivotal Role in Strengthening Corporate Governance focuses on the profession's opportunities to become a strategic player in corporate governance in response to increased government regulation and management directives to strengthen controls and improve risk management.
The report notes that The IIA's International Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing calls on internal auditors to evaluate and offer recommendations to improve governance processes and affirms their importance in risk management activities. Providing an overview of the governance trends and challenges internal auditors face, the report reminds auditors and management that the board of directors bears the primary responsibility for ensuring effective governance. The report provides examples of steps internal auditors can take to help management and the board with their responsibilities, such as:
The report notes that The IIA's International Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing calls on internal auditors to evaluate and offer recommendations to improve governance processes and affirms their importance in risk management activities. Providing an overview of the governance trends and challenges internal auditors face, the report reminds auditors and management that the board of directors bears the primary responsibility for ensuring effective governance. The report provides examples of steps internal auditors can take to help management and the board with their responsibilities, such as:
- Assisting the board of directors in its governance self-assessment.
- bringing best practice ideas about internal controls and risk management processes to the audit committee.
- Looking for opportunities to leverage compliance activities to reduce long-term costs.
- Reviewing the organization's code of conduct and ethics policies to ensure they are current and are communicated to employees.
- Conducting annual audits of whistleblower hotline and follow-up processes and reporting the results to the audit committee.
- Addressing disclosure and transparency objectives in the annual audit plan.
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
ACCA F8 Areas of concern for December 2007
Following are the Exam Tips by me that I personally think will appear in December 2007 sitting of Audit and Assurance. As the exam are getting closer, there always be a pressure, that's why I have compiled some of the topic that from my personal viewpoint,is highly examinable. Eventhough there are lots and few tips provided out there, I have my own approach,that is by make going through this check list of concern:
- Purchases, i personally think everybody will judge sales,well i bet that Alan will change his mind to state Purchase
- Subsequent event or Going concern..likely to be going concern..my strong feeling is on going concern bcos that going concern question last round, alan himself not satisfy with the performance of candidates,maybe he's gonna try it again
- Fixed asset,more concern on depreciation
- audit report on explaining reasoning behind each paragraph of matters
- as this is more exposure on ethics.i reckons that COde of ethics is VERY important..know how to explain all 5
- Payroll
- Internal audit role,responsibilities
- Audit software or Test data..likely audit software..learn the weakness of using it..because extensively in the past focus on advantanges..so please know the weakness..
- Audit of receivables..and relate to audit software
- Reliance on Internal audit
- Engagement letter..contents..
Use the tips as areas to have a good look at, but remember that no-one knows what’s in the exam except the examiner.
Revise everything …
Wishing you all the best for Dec 07
© 2007 Nik Farhan Disclaimer
Thursday, August 2, 2007
Going Concern ISA 570
Auditors, in conducting their annual audits, to consider an entity's ability to continue as a going concern. The auditor will normally reach substantial doubt that an entity can continue as a going concern if the entity is unable to meet its obligations as they become due without:
1. substantial disposition of assets outside the ordinary course of business,
2. restructuring of debt,
3. externally forced revisions of its operations or similar actions.
Before disclosing the auditor's substantial doubt concerning the entity's ability to continue as a going concern, the auditor is required to consider management's plans over the next year to meet its obligations as they become due.
Today discussion is on going concern where ISA 570 state that:
Going concern basis
Event - condition when auditor identified significant doubt entitiy ability to continue as going concern should:
1. substantial disposition of assets outside the ordinary course of business,
2. restructuring of debt,
3. externally forced revisions of its operations or similar actions.
Before disclosing the auditor's substantial doubt concerning the entity's ability to continue as a going concern, the auditor is required to consider management's plans over the next year to meet its obligations as they become due.
Today discussion is on going concern where ISA 570 state that:
Going concern basis
- Presumes that the entity will continue in operational existence for the forseeable future.
- Requires Financial statements(FS) to be prepared on going concern basis (IAS 1).
- ISA 570 requires auditor to consider entity ability to continue as a going concern and appropriate disclosure in FS.
- If going concern inappropriate? - need assess different values in FS (break-up value)
- Asset (write-down) to Recoverable amount.
- Additional liabiities for losses arise.
- Required consider going concern status of company and disclosure to going concern in arriving audit opinion.
- Required assess adequacy (process) used by directors have satisfied themselves the going concern basis and adequate discloure made.
- Make enquiries of directors and examine document in support company going concern status (Cash flows and budget forecast)
- Consider director have paid particular attention the period is adequate(12month from date of balance sheet), others is enquire management knowledge,in terms of events and conditions that may affect entity ability to continue going concern.
- Need to obtain management representation and adequancy disclosure in FS
- Indicators of going concern ( e.g impairment assets,trading losses,net liabilities,etc)
- Significant concern Going concern - But DO NOT disagree but adequate disclosure -> UNQUALIFIED - "Emphasis of matter"
- Inadequate disclosure->Qualified - "Adverse opinion"
- Director attention period less 12 month from date of Balance sheet -> modify report - Qualified Report as "LIMITATION OF SCOPE"
- Auditor disagree of preparation of FS on Going concern - Qualified as "Adverse opinion"
- Auditor unable to form opinion on Going concern- Limitation on scope -> Qualified "Except For" if material, "Disclaimer" if pervasive.
Event - condition when auditor identified significant doubt entitiy ability to continue as going concern should:
- Review management plan for future action based on going concern assessment,
- Gather sufficient audit evidence to confirm it is material uncertainty exists and any plan to mitigate those factors,
- Seek written representation form management for future action,
- Analyse and discuss Cash flow with management,
- Read minutes of meetings between shareholder and board of directors,
- Enquire entity lawyer to identify any litigation or claims?,
- Review events after period end where any items affects the entity going concern.
Tuesday, July 10, 2007
Audit of small entities/company
The main area of this topic discuss on the audit of small entities which concern on:
- Day-to-day of Owner-managers
- Few sources of income and uncomplete activities
- Simple record keeping(fewer ledgers,daybooks)
- Limited Internal control
- Existence of owner-manager actively involved in the day-to-day running of the business.
- Audit risk increases as both easily override any internal control.
- However; audit risk might be decrease as presence day-to-day substitute to formal internal control.
- Risk assessment based on auditors knowledge of integrity and competencies of owner-manger.
- Small entities have more going concern problem as they often vulnerable to cash flow problem, in addition bad debts.
- Related parties:Owner-manager confuse business affair with own affair.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)