2. 9 - 1 ©2006 Prentice Hall Business Publishing, Auditing 11/e, Arens/Beasley/Elder Materiality and Risk Chapter 9

3. 9 - 2 ©2006 Prentice Hall Business Publishing, Auditing 11/e, Arens/Beasley/Elder Learning Objective 1 Apply the concept of materiality to the audit.

4. 9 - 3 ©2006 Prentice Hall Business Publishing, Auditing 11/e, Arens/Beasley/Elder Materiality The auditor’s responsibility is to determine whether financial statements are materially misstated. If there is a material misstatement, the auditor will bring it to the client’s attention so that a correction can be made.

5. 9 - 4 ©2006 Prentice Hall Business Publishing, Auditing 11/e, Arens/Beasley/Elder Steps in Applying Materiality Step1 Set preliminary judgment about materiality. Planningextent of tests Step2 Allocate preliminary judgment about materiality to segments.

6. 9 - 5 ©2006 Prentice Hall Business Publishing, Auditing 11/e, Arens/Beasley/Elder Steps in Applying Materiality Evaluatingresults Step3 Estimate total misstatement in segment. Step4 Estimate the combined misstatement. Compare combined estimate with judgment about materiality. Step5

7. 9 - 6 ©2006 Prentice Hall Business Publishing, Auditing 11/e, Arens/Beasley/Elder Learning Objective 2 Make a preliminary judgment about what amounts to consider material.

8. 9 - 7 ©2006 Prentice Hall Business Publishing, Auditing 11/e, Arens/Beasley/Elder Set Preliminary Judgment about Materiality This preliminary judgment is the maximum amount by which the auditor believes the statements could be misstated and still not affect the decisions of reasonable users. Ideally, auditors decide early in the audit the combined amount of misstatements of the financial statements that would be considered material.

9. 9 - 8 ©2006 Prentice Hall Business Publishing, Auditing 11/e, Arens/Beasley/Elder Factors Affecting Judgment Materiality is a relative rather than an absolute concept. Bases are needed for evaluating materiality. Qualitative factors also affect materiality.

10. 9 - 9 ©2006 Prentice Hall Business Publishing, Auditing 11/e, Arens/Beasley/Elder Guidelines Guidelines Accounting and auditing standards do not provide specific materiality guidelines to practitioners. Professional judgment is to be used at all times in setting and applying materiality guidelines.

11. 9 - 10 ©2006 Prentice Hall Business Publishing, Auditing 11/e, Arens/Beasley/Elder Learning Objective 3 Allocate preliminary materiality to segments of the audit during planning.

12. 9 - 11 ©2006 Prentice Hall Business Publishing, Auditing 11/e, Arens/Beasley/Elder Allocate Preliminary Judgment About Materiality to Segments This is necessary because evidence is accumulated by segments rather than for the financial statements as a whole. Most practitioners allocate materiality to balance sheet accounts. SAS 39 (AU 350)

13. 9 - 12 ©2006 Prentice Hall Business Publishing, Auditing 11/e, Arens/Beasley/Elder Learning Objective 4 Use materiality to evaluate audit findings.

14. 9 - 13 ©2006 Prentice Hall Business Publishing, Auditing 11/e, Arens/Beasley/Elder Estimated Total Misstatement and Preliminary Judgment Cash Accounts receivable Inventory Total estimated misstatement amount misstatement amount Preliminary judgment about materiality about materiality $ 4,000 20,000 20,000 36,000 36,000$50,000 $ 0 12,000 12,000 31,500 31,500$43,500 $ N/A 6,000 6,000 15,750 15,750$16,800 $ 0 18,000 18,000 47,250 47,250$60,300 TolerablemisstatementDirectprojectionSampling error* TotalAccount Estimated misstatement amount *estimate for sampling error is 50%

15. 9 - 14 ©2006 Prentice Hall Business Publishing, Auditing 11/e, Arens/Beasley/Elder Estimated Total Misstatement and Preliminary Judgment Net misstatements in the sample $3,500 ÷ $50,000 × $450,000 = $31,500 × Total recorded population value ÷ Total sampled = Direct projection estimate of misstatement

16. 9 - 15 ©2006 Prentice Hall Business Publishing, Auditing 11/e, Arens/Beasley/Elder Learning Objective 5 Define risk in auditing.

17. 9 - 16 ©2006 Prentice Hall Business Publishing, Auditing 11/e, Arens/Beasley/Elder Risk Auditors accept some level of risk in performing the audit. An effective auditor recognizes that risks exist, are difficult to measure, and require careful thought to respond. Responding to risks properly is critical to achieving a high-quality audit.

18. 9 - 17 ©2006 Prentice Hall Business Publishing, Auditing 11/e, Arens/Beasley/Elder Risk and Evidence Auditors gain an understanding of the client’s business and industry and assess client business risk. Auditors use the audit risk model to further identify the potential for misstatements and where they are most likely to occur.

19. 9 - 18 ©2006 Prentice Hall Business Publishing, Auditing 11/e, Arens/Beasley/Elder Illustration of Differing Evidence Among Cycles Sales and collectioncycleAcquisition and payment cycle Payroll and personnelcycleInherentriskAMediumHighLow ControlriskBMediumLowLow Acceptable audit risk CLowLowLow Planned detection risk DMediumMediumHigh

20. 9 - 19 ©2006 Prentice Hall Business Publishing, Auditing 11/e, Arens/Beasley/Elder Illustration of Differing Evidence Among Cycles Inventory and warehousingcycle Capital acquisition and repayment cycle InherentriskAHighLow ControlriskBHighMedium Acceptable audit risk CLowLow Planned detection risk DLowMedium

21. 9 - 20 ©2006 Prentice Hall Business Publishing, Auditing 11/e, Arens/Beasley/Elder Learning Objective 6 Describe the audit risk model and its components.

22. 9 - 21 ©2006 Prentice Hall Business Publishing, Auditing 11/e, Arens/Beasley/Elder Audit Risk Model for Planning PDR = AAR ÷ (IR × CR) PDR = Planned detection risk AAR = Acceptable audit risk IR = Inherent risk CR = Control risk

23. 9 - 22 ©2006 Prentice Hall Business Publishing, Auditing 11/e, Arens/Beasley/Elder Learning Objective 7 Consider the impact of engagement risk on acceptable audit risk.

24. 9 - 23 ©2006 Prentice Hall Business Publishing, Auditing 11/e, Arens/Beasley/Elder Impact of Engagement Risk on Acceptable Audit Risk Auditors decide engagement risk and use that risk to modify acceptable audit risk. Engagement risk closely relates to client business risk.

25. 9 - 24 ©2006 Prentice Hall Business Publishing, Auditing 11/e, Arens/Beasley/Elder Factors Affecting Acceptable Audit Risk The degree to which external users rely on the statements The likelihood that a client will have financial difficulties after the audit report is issued The auditor’s evaluation of management’s integrity

26. 9 - 25 ©2006 Prentice Hall Business Publishing, Auditing 11/e, Arens/Beasley/Elder Making the Acceptable Audit Risk Decision Methods used to assess acceptable audit risk External users’ reliance on financialstatements Examine financial statements. Examine financial statements. Read minutes of the board. Read minutes of the board. Examine form 10K. Examine form 10K. Discuss financing plans Discuss financing plans with management. Factors

27. 9 - 26 ©2006 Prentice Hall Business Publishing, Auditing 11/e, Arens/Beasley/Elder Making the Acceptable Audit Risk Decision Likelihood of financial difficulties Analyze financial statements Analyze financial statements for difficulties using ratios. Examine inflows and outflows Examine inflows and outflows of cash flow statements. Managementintegrity See Chapter 8 for client See Chapter 8 for client acceptance and continuance. Methods used to assess acceptable audit risk Factors

28. 9 - 27 ©2006 Prentice Hall Business Publishing, Auditing 11/e, Arens/Beasley/Elder Learning Objective 8 Consider the impact of several factors on the assessment of inherit risk.

29. 9 - 28 ©2006 Prentice Hall Business Publishing, Auditing 11/e, Arens/Beasley/Elder Factors Affecting Inherent Risk  Nature of the client’s business  Results of previous audits  Initial versus repeat engagement  Related parties  Nonroutine transactions  Judgment required to correctly record account balances and transactions  Makeup of the population

30. 9 - 29 ©2006 Prentice Hall Business Publishing, Auditing 11/e, Arens/Beasley/Elder Learning Objective 9 Discuss the relationship of risks to audit evidence.

31. 9 - 30 ©2006 Prentice Hall Business Publishing, Auditing 11/e, Arens/Beasley/Elder Relationship of Risk Factors, Risk, and Evidence D = Direct relationship; I = Inverse relationship Factorsinfluencingrisks Acceptable audit risk PlanneddetectionriskPlannedauditevidenceInherentrisk Control risk I D I ID I D

32. 9 - 31 ©2006 Prentice Hall Business Publishing, Auditing 11/e, Arens/Beasley/Elder Relationship of Risk Factors, Risk, and Evidence The engagement may require more experienced staff. The engagement will be reviewed more carefully than usual. Auditors can change the audit to respond to risks.

33. 9 - 32 ©2006 Prentice Hall Business Publishing, Auditing 11/e, Arens/Beasley/Elder Audit Risk for Segments Both control risk and inherent risk are typically set for each cycle, each account, and often even each audit objective, not for the overall audit.

34. 9 - 33 ©2006 Prentice Hall Business Publishing, Auditing 11/e, Arens/Beasley/Elder Relating Risk of Fraud to Risk Model Components The risk of fraud can be assessed for the entire audit or by cycle, account, and objective. Specific response could include revising assessments of acceptable audit risk, inherent risk, and control risk.

35. 9 - 34 ©2006 Prentice Hall Business Publishing, Auditing 11/e, Arens/Beasley/Elder Tolerable Misstatement, Risks, and Balance-related Objectives It is common to assess inherent and control risk for each balance-related audit objective. It is not common to allocate materiality to objectives.

36. 9 - 35 ©2006 Prentice Hall Business Publishing, Auditing 11/e, Arens/Beasley/Elder Measurement Limitations One major limitation in the application of the audit risk model is the difficulty of measuring the components of the model.

37. 9 - 36 ©2006 Prentice Hall Business Publishing, Auditing 11/e, Arens/Beasley/Elder Relationships of Risk to Evidence Acceptable audit risk InherentriskControlriskPlanneddetectionrisk Amount of evidencerequiredSituationHighLowLowMediumHighLowLowHighMediumLowLowLowHighMediumMediumHighMediumLowMediumMediumLowMediumHighMediumMedium12345

38. 9 - 37 ©2006 Prentice Hall Business Publishing, Auditing 11/e, Arens/Beasley/Elder Tests of Details of Balances Evidence Planning Worksheet Auditors develop various types of worksheets to aid in relating the considerations affecting audit evidence to the appropriate evidence to accumulate.

39. 9 - 38 ©2006 Prentice Hall Business Publishing, Auditing 11/e, Arens/Beasley/Elder Learning Objective 10 Discuss how materiality and risk are related and integrated into the audit process.

40. 9 - 39 ©2006 Prentice Hall Business Publishing, Auditing 11/e, Arens/Beasley/Elder Tolerable Misstatements, Risk, and Planned Evidence D = Direct relationship; I = Inverse relationship Acceptable audit risk Inherentrisk Controlrisk Tolerablemisstatement Planned detection risk Planned audit evidence I D I II I D D

41. 9 - 40 ©2006 Prentice Hall Business Publishing, Auditing 11/e, Arens/Beasley/Elder Evaluating Results AcAR = IR × CR × AcDR AcAR = Achieved audit risk AcAR = Achieved audit risk IR = Inherent risk CR = Control risk AcDR = Achieved detection risk

42. 9 - 41 ©2006 Prentice Hall Business Publishing, Auditing 11/e, Arens/Beasley/Elder Audit Risk Models for Planning Evidence and Evaluating Results Acceptableauditrisk Inherentrisk Controlrisk AchieveddetectionriskSubstantiveauditevidence Achievedauditrisk Compare D I D D D = Direct relationship I = Inverse relationship

43. 9 - 42 ©2006 Prentice Hall Business Publishing, Auditing 11/e, Arens/Beasley/Elder Revising Risks and Evidence The audit risk model is primarily a planning model and is therefore of limited use in evaluating results. Great care must be used in revising the risk factors when the actual results are not as favorable as planned.

44. 9 - 43 ©2006 Prentice Hall Business Publishing, Auditing 11/e, Arens/Beasley/Elder End of Chapter 9