Guide to Using International Standards on Auditing in - IFAC

31
<strong>Guide</strong> <strong>to</strong> <strong>Using</strong> <strong>International</strong> <strong>Standards</strong> on Auditing in the Audits of Small- and Medium-Sized Entities Volume 1—Core Concepts
• Contains the nature, extent, and timing of specific audit procedures tailored <strong>to</strong> respond <strong>to</strong> the assessed
risks of material misstatement at the assertion level.
The overall responses address assessed risks of material misstatement at the financial statement level. Such
responses would include the assignment and supervision of appropriate personnel, need for professional
skepticism, the extent of corroboration required for management’s explanations/representations,
consideration of the audit procedures <strong>to</strong> be performed, and what documentation would be examined in
support of material transactions.
Further audit procedures generally consist of substantive procedures such as tests of details, analytical
procedures, and tests of controls (where there is an expectation that such controls have been operating
effectively during the period).
Some of the matters the audi<strong>to</strong>r should consider when planning the appropriate mix of audit procedures <strong>to</strong>
respond <strong>to</strong> identified risks include the following:
• Use of tests of controls
– Identify relevant internal controls that, if tested, would reduce the need/scope for other
substantive procedures. As a general rule, the sample size for testing controls is often significantly
less than that of a substantive test of a transaction stream. Assuming that the relevant controls
operate consistently and control deviations are unlikely, the use of tests of controls can often result
in less work being performed. However, there is no requirement that the operating effectiveness
of internal controls (direct or indirect) be tested.
– Identify any assertions that cannot be addressed by substantive procedures alone. For example,
this can often apply <strong>to</strong> completeness of sales in a small entity, and situations where there is highly
au<strong>to</strong>mated processing of transactions (such as Internet sales) with little or no manual intervention.
• Substantive analytical procedures
These are procedures for which the <strong>to</strong>tal amount of a transaction stream can be reliably predicted based
on available evidence. This expectation is compared <strong>to</strong> the actual amount in the accounting records, and
the extent of any misstatement readily identified (See Volume 1, Chapter 10). In some cases, if the assessed
risk for a particular assertion is low (without considering related controls), the audi<strong>to</strong>r may determine that
substantive analytical procedures alone would provide sufficient appropriate audit evidence.
• Unpredictability
The need <strong>to</strong> incorporate an element of unpredictability in procedures performed. A typical example
would be procedures <strong>to</strong> address possible fraud.
• Management override
The need for specific audit procedures <strong>to</strong> address the potential for management override.
• Significant risks
The audit response <strong>to</strong> “significant risks” that have been identified. (See Volume 2, Chapter 10.)