ADP: Registration as a Registered Candidate Auditor

09 Apr 2015 - Communiqué: Estate Agency Affairs Board Alert View More
31 Mar 2015 - Communiqué: Confusion created by Business Report Article View More
31 Mar 2015 - Communiqué: IRBA Language Policy 2015 View More
17 Mar 2015 - Communiqué: Updated Guidance on the provision of the non-audit services by the auditor of a company View More
17 Mar 2015 - Fees payable to the Board with effect from 1 April 2015 View More
17 Mar 2015 - IRBA welcomes outcome of voting on the Auditing Profession Amendment Bill View More
16 Mar 2015 - Communiqué: Proposed Amendments to the IRBA Code of Professional Conduct for Registered Auditors relating to the Definition of Public Interest Entities View More
17 Mar 2015 - Inspections Findings Newsflash 2 of 2015 View More
11 Mar 2015 - Communiqué: Guide for Registered Auditors: Assurance Engagements on the Annual Financial Statements and Annual Statutory Returns of a Medical Scheme View More
06 Feb 2015 - Communiqué: Renumbering to Certain Paragraphs of the IRBA Code of Professional Conduct for Registered Auditors (Revised 2014) View More
26 Jan 2015 - Communiqué: Clarification on B-BBEE Verification Engagements performed in terms of the 2013 Codes of Good Practice View More
23 Jan 2015 - Communiqué: Effect of the proclamation of the B-BBEE Amendment Act into law View More
21 Jan 2015 - Communiqué: IAASB Issues a Framework for Audit Quality: Key Elements that Create an Environment for Audit Quality 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