Sir, sorry for asking a silly question that what is the difference between assurance engagement and non-assurance engagement?
if non-assurance engagement is that auditor/practitioner will not express and opinion/ conclusion on it , why the review engagement which is non-assurance engagement will need to provide negative assurance? (eg: nothing has come to the auditor’s attention that causes the auditor to believe that the financial statements are not prepared in accordance with the applicable financial reporting framework).
A bit confused about it.
Thank you
Ask the Tutor ACCA AAA
Assurance engagement
With reference to this article, the review engagement is classified as the non-assurance engagement
https://www.accaglobal.com/an/en/student/exam-support-resources/professional-exams-study-resources/p7/technical-articles/continue-to-be-rest-assured.html
6y ago#2Assurance may be reasonable/"positive" (e.g. audit engagement) or limited/"negative" (e.g. review engagement). Negative does NOT mean no assurance.
I agree with you - the article should be describing the review as "non-audit" rather than "non-assurance" - I will draw to ACCA's attention when next I have the opportunity.
Sign in to reply to this topic.