- This topic has 1 reply, 2 voices, and was last updated 7 years ago by
.
- Posts
I feel little a bit confused regarding the review of the audit work. Could you please confirm my below understandings:
1/ Independent review by professional accoutant: Does it apply when the audit firm provide business advice to the clients and it need independent review by professional accoutant which is another partner or other professionals not being the audit’s firm employees?
2/ Regular review on safeguard related to confidentiality: It should be conducted by Senior Manager or Partner? Is it right?
3/ Hot review: Hot review is applied to pre-issuance quality control review conducted by the independent partner at the planning and completion stages of the audit. Audit on public interest is subject to hot review.
4/ Cold review: Cold review is applied after the completion of the audit.
1. Having a professional accountant who was not involved in an engagement review (i.e. “independent”) review work performed is an example of an engagement-specific safeguard in the work environment that may be applied to reduce an ethical threat to an acceptable level.
2. I don’t know what you mean but an audit firm would regularly review all its policies and procedures. For example, if it is the firm’s policy that no staff should hold financial interests in any client, a partner with specific responsibility for compliance would ensure that all staff complete an annual declaration to that effect.
3. Yes, an engagement quality control review (EQCR) must be completed “hot” (before the audit opinion is issued). It is up to the audit firm to decide on the criteria for applying EQCR – so although required for listed entities, they could also apply to other engagements.
4. The term “post-issuance review” (i.e. “cold”) is used in the Code of Ethics to mean a review equivalent to an EQCR after the issue of the audit opinion.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.