12 Sep 2014 - Communiqué: Retirement Fund Auditor Reports View More
11 Sep 2014 - Communiqué: Revised Guide for Registered Auditors: Reporting on Financial Information contained in Interim, Preliminary, Provisional and Abridged Reports required by the JSE Listings Requirements View More
10 Sep 2014 - Revised Guide for Registered Auditors: Reporting on Financial information contained in Interim, Preliminary, Provisional and Abridged Reports required by the JSE Listings Requirements (September 2014) View More
03 Sep 2014 - Media Release: South Africa maintains first position for the strength of Auditing and Reporting standards for five years in a row View More
27 Aug 2014 - Advisory: Override Functionality on eFiling View More
27 Aug 2014 - Communiqué: Use of IRBA Logo View More
20 Aug 2014 - Inspections for purposes of JSE accreditation View More
18 Aug 2014 - Committee For Auditor Ethics IESBA Strengthen Auditor Independence By Issuing Proposed Amendments Addressing Long Association In Ethics Code View More
11 Aug 2014 - SAAPS 3 (Revised November 2013) Illustrative Reports – Afrikaans reports View More
8 Aug 2014 - IRBA Website Design and Development - Tender Bid 001-2014 View More
 
Home

Inspection Results

Attention: open in a new window. PrintE-mail

Inspection Results


For many years the results from engagement inspections (file reviews) have been based on re-review criteria. Re-review criteria were used to progressively improve the content and quality of audit working papers as prepared by practitioners.

 

In the first review cycle, documented tests of the balance sheet and balance sheet line items formed the base for considering whether adequate working papers existed to justify the audit opinion, while the criteria for the second review cycle was increased to include tests of transactions, planning and completion. The third review cycle introduced the concept of sufficient, appropriate and adequate working papers and 15 items were pre-determined to measure the quality of audit working papers.

 

The introduction of the firm inspection has resulted in examining audit working papers and other documentation against the full scope of the auditing standards and as a result the use of pre-determined re-review criteria has become obsolete.

 

The Inspections Committee has therefore decided that from the middle of 2010 all engagement and firm inspections will be based on the full scope of the Auditing, Accounting and Quality Control Standards, effective at the time of inspections.

 

The result is that all issues of insufficient, inadequate or inappropriate documentation found in audit working papers by the inspectors of the IRBA are to be judged against those standards and submitted to the Inspection Committee with the appropriate recommendation regarding the action to be taken to correct such shortcomings.

 

The results of inspections (firm and engagement) are now evaluated as follows:

 

Satisfactory


  • 0. No issues
  • 1. Documentation shortcomings, but risk of inappropriate audit opinion is unlikely.

 

Not Satisfactory


  • 2. Significant issues of non or inadequate documentation.
  • 3. Significant issues of non or inadequate documentation and risk of an inappropriate audit opinion is likely.
  • 4. Fundamental non or inadequate documentation and an inappropriate audit opinion has probably been expressed. The firm has taken appropriate corrective action.

 

Referral to the investigating committee


  • 5.
    • Fundamental non or inadequate documentation and an inappropriate audit opinion has probably been expressed. No corrective action taken by the firm or impossible to be taken by the firm; or
    • Total disregard for Standards (Auditing and Accounting); or
    • Public placed at risk; or
    • No improvements on follow-up visits.

 

The recommendation by the inspectors to the Inspection Committee will now be one of the above with an indication of the steps to be taken by the Inspections Department to ensure corrective action is taken by the firms and the individual practitioners, whichever is applicable.

 

The recommendation can vary from:

 

  • a written undertaking to take corrective action; or
  • follow-up visits where we re-inspect an entire audit file (or policies and procedures of the firm) or elements thereof; or
  • follow-up visits where we review the steps the firm has taken to ensure that issues have been properly addressed and, if necessary, have corrected the inappropriate audit opinion.

 

These follow-up visits can be scheduled immediately or within the 12 months following the original inspection.

 

Imre Nagy
Director: Inspections

 

Developed and maintained by JHNet JHNet Web Development