4Step 1 in Applying Materiality Set preliminary judgment about materiality.Permissible misstatements are often less for smaller clients.Although the FASB and AICPA are unwilling to provide specific materiality guidelines to practitioners, bases are needed for evaluating materiality. See Figure 9-2 on page 235.Qualitative factors can affect materiality. See factors on pagesThe preliminary judgment about materiality is the maximum amountthe auditor believes the statements could be misstated and still notaffect the decisions of reasonable users. Decided early in audit.
5Step 2 in Applying Materiality Allocate preliminary judgment about materiality to segments.Most practitioners allocate materiality to balance sheet rather than income statement accounts. This is because most income statement misstatements have an equal effect on the balance sheet because of the double-entry bookkeeping system.The sum of the tolerable misstatement is allowed to exceed overall materiality because (1) it is unlikely that all accounts will be misstated by the full amount of tolerable misstatement, and (2) some accounts are overstated while others are understated, resulting in a net amount that is likely to be less than overall materiality.An allocation is necessary because evidence is accumulated bysegments rather than the financial statements taken as a whole. Theallocation to account balances is known as the tolerable misstatement.
6Illustration of Tolerable Misstatement Allocation for Current Assets Account MisstatementCash $ 4,000Accounts receivable 20,000Inventory ,000Preliminary judgmentabout materiality $50,000
7Step 3 in Applying Materiality Estimate total misstatement in segment.$3,500 net misstatement of the inventory sample$3,500 ÷ $50,000 × $450,000 = $31,500$50,000 total inventory sampled$450,000 total recorded population value for inventory$31,500 direct projection estimate of misstatement×÷=One way to calculate the estimate of misstatement is to make a directprojection from the sample to the population.
8Illustration of Estimating Total Misstatement in Segment Tolerable Direct SamplingAccount Misstatement Projection Error TotalCash $ 4,000 $ $ N/A $Accounts receivable 20, , ,000* 18,000Inventory , , ,750* 47,250Preliminary judgmentabout materiality $50,000*estimate for sampling error is 50%
9Step 4 in Applying Materiality Estimate the combined misstatement.Tolerable Direct SamplingAccount Misstatement Projection Error TotalCash $ 4,000 $ $ N/A $Accounts receivable 20, , ,000* 18,000Inventory , , ,750* 47,250Total estimatedmisstatement amount $43,500 $16,800 $60,300Preliminary judgmentabout materiality $50,000*estimate for sampling error is 50%
10Step 5 in Applying Materiality Compare combined estimate with preliminary or revised judgment about materiality.Tolerable Direct SamplingAccount Misstatement Projection Error TotalCash $ 4,000 $ $ N/A $Accounts receivable 20, , ,000* 18,000Inventory , , ,750* 47,250Total estimatedmisstatement amount $43,500 $16,800 $60,300Preliminary judgmentabout materiality $50,000*estimate for sampling error is 50%Because the estimated combined misstatement exceeds thepreliminary judgment, the financial statements are not acceptable.The auditor may perform additional audit procedures to reevaluatethe estimate, or require adjustment for the estimated misstatements.
11II. Risk in Auditing Components of Audit Risk Acceptable Audit Risk Inherent RiskControl RiskPlanned Detection Risk
12A. Components of Audit Risk Susceptibility of an assertion to material misstatement assuming no related internal controls.Inherent Risk(IR)Total misstatement-Caught by internal controlsRisk of misstatements not being detected by system of internal control.Control Risk(CR)-Caught by auditorDetection Risk(DR)Risk of misstatements not being detected by the auditor.=Undetected misstatementAudit Risk(AR)Misstatement that remains undetected by the auditor.
13B. Acceptable Audit Risk The following factors mean that audit risk should be kept lower:Reliance by External UsersLikelihood of Financial FailureIntegrity of Management
141. Reliance by External Users When external users place heavy emphasis on the financial statements, acceptable audit risk should be kept low. The following generally results in more users of the financial statements:Larger clientsPublicly held corporationsExtensive use of liabilitiesXYZ Co.Financial Statements
152. Likelihood of Financial Failure There is a greater chance of having to defend the quality of the audit when there is a financial failure. Failure indicators include:Shortage of fundsDeclining net income or continued lossesRisky industries such as technologyManagement lacking competency to deal with financial difficulties
163. Integrity of Management If a client has questionable integrity, the auditor is likely to assess acceptable audit risk lower. Indications of integrity problems include:Frequent disagreements with prior auditors, the IRS, and/or SECFrequent turnover of key financial and internal audit personnelOngoing conflicts with labor unions and employees
17C. Inherent Risk Nature of the Client’s Business Results of Previous AuditsInitial vs. Repeat EngagementRelated PartiesNonroutine TransactionsJudgment RequiredMake-up of the Population
181. Nature of the Client’s Business Ricky’s ElectronicsInherent risk is likely to vary from business to business for accounts such as inventory, accounts and loans receivable, and property, plant, and equipment.The nature of the business should have little effect on cash, notes payable, and mortgages payable.
192. Results of Previous Audits Misstatements found in the previous year’s audit have a high likelihood of occurring again.Many types of misstatements are systematic in nature, and organizations are slow in making changes to eliminate them.
203. Initial vs. Repeat Engagement Most auditors use a larger inherent risk for initial audits than for repeat engagements in which no material misstatements had been found.
214. Related PartiesExamples of related party transactions are those between parent and subsidiary companies, and management or owners and the company.Increases inherent risk because there is a greater likelihood of misstatement.
225. Nonroutine Transactions Transactions that are unusual for the client are more likely to be recorded incorrectly.Examples include fire losses, major property acquisitions, etc.
23Uncollectible accounts receivable 6. Judgment NeededMany account balances require estimates and a great deal of management judgment including:Uncollectible accounts receivableObsolete inventoryWarranty liabilities
247. Make-up of the Population Accounts receivable where most accounts are significantly overdueTransactions with related partiesDisbursements made payable to cashInventory with a slow turnover
25There are two basic phases to an auditor’s evaluation of control risk: D. Control RiskThere are two basic phases to an auditor’s evaluation of control risk:Obtain an understanding of internal control. This phase applies to all audits.Test the internal controls for effectiveness. This phase only applies when the auditor chooses to assess control risk at below the maximum.
26E. Planned Detection Risk The auditor can reduce planned detection risk by performing more substantive testing.Lowering Acceptable Audit RiskIncreased audit evidenceLower Detection Risk
27III. Planning Model Relationships Acceptable Audit Risk RelationshipsInherent Risk RelationshipsControl Risk RelationshipsThe Overall Relationship of Components in Planning the Audit ProcessThe Audit Risk Model for Planning
28A. Acceptable Audit Risk Relationships Planneddetection riskaudit evidenceInverseDirectAcceptable audit risk is the risk that the auditor is willing to take of giving an unqualified opinion when the financial statements are materially misstated.As acceptable audit risk increases, the auditor is willing to collect less evidence (inverse) and therefore accept a higher detection risk (direct).
29B. Inherent Risk Relationships Planneddetection riskaudit evidenceIDInherent risk is the susceptibility of an assertion to material misstatement assuming no related internal controls.As inherent risk increases, the auditor must reduce detection risk (inverse) by collecting more audit evidence (direct).
30C. Control Risk Relationships Planneddetection riskPlannedaudit evidenceIDControlriskControl risk is the risk of misstatements not being detected by the client’s system of internal control.As control risk increases, the auditor must reduce detection risk (inverse) by collecting more audit evidence (direct).
31D = Direct relationship; I = Inverse relationship D. The Overall Relationship of Components in Planning the Audit ProcessAcceptableaudit riskDDIInherentriskPlanneddetection riskIPlannedaudit evidenceIIDIControlriskTolerablemisstatementD = Direct relationship; I = Inverse relationship
32E. The Audit Risk Model for Planning PDR = AAR ÷ (IR × CR)WherePDR = Planned detection riskAAR = Acceptable audit riskIR = Inherent riskCR = Control risk
33IV. Evaluating Results Audit Risk Model for Evaluating Results Reducing Achieved Audit RiskRevising Risks and Evidence
34A. Audit Risk Model for Evaluating Results AcAR = IR × CR × AcDRWhereAcAR = Achieved audit riskAcDR = Achieved detection riskIR = Inherent riskCR = Control risk
35B. Reducing Achieved Audit Risk The audit risk model for evaluating results is stated in SAS 47. Research subsequent to the issuance of SAS 47 has shown that it is not appropriate to uses this evaluation formula as originally intended. However, the model does show three possible ways to reduce achieved audit risk to an acceptable level.Reduce inherent risk – not feasible unless new facts are uncovered during the audit process.Reduce control risk – may be possible to reevaluate control risk to a lower level by conducting more tests of internal controls.Reduce achieved detection risk – can be achieved by larger sample sizes and/or additional audit procedures.
36C. Revising Risks and Evidence Great care must be used when revising the risk factors when the actual results are not as favorable as planned.When the auditor concludes that the original assessment of control risk or inherent risk was understated or acceptable audit risk was overstated, a two step approach should be used:The auditor must revise the original assessment of the appropriate risk.The auditor should consider the effect of the revision on evidence requirements , without the use of the audit risk model. Research shows that using the model in the evaluation stage often results in an insufficient increase of evidence.
37Risk and Audit Planning SummaryAudit ProcessApplying MaterialityRisk and Audit PlanningEvaluating ResultsRiskInternal Control