Accounting Standard No. 5, an audit of internal control over the fiscal coverage that is integrated with an audit of fiscal statements, was created by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board as an amendment to Accounting Standard No. 2 to clear up uncertainnesss for hearers. The criterion was created in conformity with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act ( 2002 ) which requires direction of publicly held companies to describe on the effectivity of internal control in add-on to the appraisal of fiscal statements.
When carry oning an audit of internal controls over fiscal coverage, the hearer must derive an apprehension of the audit entity so that the hearer can successful place possible internal control hazards. The hearer achieves this by utilizing the top-down attack, which is a consecutive procedure of placing hazards and which controls later need to be tested. This attack begins with the hearer placing hazards of internal control over fiscal coverage to guarantee the truth of fiscal statements. In order to guarantee truth, the hearer must place likely stuff mistakes in the fiscal statements.
After placing internal control hazards of fiscal coverage, the hearer must so concentrate on hazards associated with entity-level controls. Entity-level controls are more specific controls established within the entity to guarantee the dependability and confidence of fiscal statements such as control environment, controls to supervise other controls, and controls of terminal of period coverage. Control environment controls consist of direction ‘s ability to set up effectual internal controls over fiscal statement coverage and the integrity/ethics supported by direction. The control environment besides includes controls like the effectual inadvertence of the board of managers and audit commission over direction. Controls that proctor other controls include direction override, which is of import in to guarantee the engagement of direction with internal controls and fiscal statement coverage is non excessively influential. Often these controls are designed to place dislocations in lower controls.
Entity-level controls can hold important effects on the likeliness that stuff misstatements will be detected or prevented in a timely footing. An hearer ‘s rating of entity-level controls can ensue in the increased or decreased extent that an hearer will execute proving on other identified controls.
Following the hearer ‘s focal point of entity-level controls the hearer must scatter farther by placing important histories, revelations, and matching averments. This measure of the top-down attack requires that the hearer assesses histories, revelations, and averments that can show a possibility of material misstatement in the fiscal statements. To decently measure these, an hearer must see qualitative and quantitative hazard factors which can include size/composition of histories, susceptibleness of error/fraud, nature of the history, and dealing complexness.
It is the hearer ‘s duty to find possible histories and revelations that can be possible beginnings of stuff misstatements. To better the confidence that an hearer determines misstatement beginnings, the hearer should hold a thorough apprehension of the induction, mandate, processing, and recording of minutess. The hearer should besides place controls direction implements to forestall or observe unauthorised acquisition, usage, or temperament of assets that could potentially do a material misstatement. Walkthroughs are a utile auditing tool, where the hearer uses enquiry, observation, document review, and public presentation of controls to follow a dealing from inception throughout the company ‘s procedure of entering. It is up to the hearer to guarantee that the controls tested support the hearer ‘s decision of the control sufficiency for assessed hazard of misstatement.
The audit of internal control over fiscal coverage can frequently ensue in a material failing or important lack, which consequences in different intervention harmonizing to established auditing criterions. A material failing is a lack, or combination of, originating in the audit of internal control over fiscal coverage, when there is a sensible possibility that a material misstatement of the company ‘s fiscal statements will non be prevented or detected in a timely footing.
When carry oning an audit of internal controls over fiscal coverage there are several indexs hearers can witness that suggest a stuff failing exists. These indexs of stuff failings include marks of fiscal fraud by direction or the uneffective inadvertence of coverage and internal controls by the audit commission. It is besides likely that a stuff failing exists when an hearer identifies a material misstatement that would non hold been detected by the internal controls established by direction. Finally an hearer can reexamine old period fiscal statement revelations, and histories of fiscal restatements can frequently bespeak the being of a material failing.
When an hearer has determined the being of a stuff failing, its find must be communicated in composing to direction and the audit commission. All failings must be communicated before the issue of the audit study of internal control on fiscal coverage. If the hearer determines that inadvertence of the audit commission is uneffective, the hearer must pass on this sentiment to the board of managers straight.
A important lack is the being of one or more lacks originating in the audit of internal control over fiscal coverage. Theses lacks are less terrible than those of a material failing ; nevertheless are of import plenty to advert by those responsible for fiscal coverage inadvertence.
When an hearer has determined the being of a important lack, the hearer must pass on its being in composing to the audit commission. The hearer must so pass on all important lacks of internal control of fiscal describing with direction and advise the audit commission when this communicating has been completed.
After pass oning the audit findings with the audit commission, direction, and/or the board of managers the hearer is required to make an audit study. In the study the hearer must province the being of restriction with an audit of internal controls for fiscal coverage. These restrictions include the failure to forestall or observe stuff or important lacks, which can originate through the impairment of policy and process conformity by companies or the insufficiency of controls due to status alterations.
