• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
Free ACCA & CIMA online courses from OpenTuition

Free ACCA & CIMA online courses from OpenTuition

Free Notes, Lectures, Tests and Forums for ACCA and CIMA exams

  • ACCA
  • CIMA
  • FIA
  • OBU
  • Books
  • Forums
  • Search
  • Register
  • Login
  • ACCA Forums
  • Ask ACCA Tutor
  • CIMA Forums
  • Ask CIMA Tutor
  • FIA
  • OBU
  • Buy/Sell Books
  • All Forums
  • Latest Topics

Congratulations to Jamil from Pakistan and Jeeva from Malaysia - Global Prize winners!
see all ACCA December 2022 Genius Hunt Competition winners >>

Specially for OpenTuition students: 20% off BPP Books for ACCA & CIMA exams – Get your BPP Discount Code >>

Audit procedures – assertions

Forums › Ask ACCA Tutor Forums › Ask the Tutor ACCA AA Exams › Audit procedures – assertions

  • This topic has 3 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 1 year ago by Kim Smith.
Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • August 21, 2021 at 11:34 am #632396
    orhodes
    Member
    • Topics: 17
    • Replies: 21
    • ☆

    Hi Kim

    I am struggling to remember audit procedures to confirm assertions like completeness, occurrence, cut-off for example purchases.
    I kind understand it all but it doesn’t click I my head.
    For example for “purchases” one of the procedure to confirm completeness is “for a sample of amounts on the ledger, agree to the computerised payment list to verify the amount and supplier. The purpose is to provide assurance that the payment list is complete and accurate.” (BPP, 150 Westra Co question)

    I am trying to find logic so it’s easier on the exam. When I think about purchases, I think about that we have all invoices for all goods that we received, if not then we should have an accrual; prices on invoices are correct so the purchase amount is not misstated.
    I am not sure why in the question they are talking about the payment list, basicly to confirm that we are paying suppliers on the ledger not someone odd.
    I get confused on tracing in general because it should be in a certain order. In one order it confirms completeness (invoice to GRN to order, to amount in ledge). In backwards order confirms occurance (amount in ledger to invoice to GRN).
    I can’t see the difference why we can’t put for both completeness and occurance tracing in one order (amount in ledger to invoice to GRN to order for example).

    Not sure how to remember it all.

    Thanks
    Oksana

    August 21, 2021 at 1:21 pm #632404
    Kim Smith
    Keymaster
    • Topics: 100
    • Replies: 6794
    • ☆☆☆☆☆

    First see Chapter 16:

    s2. Assertions about classes of TRANSACTIONS and events and related disclosures are for the period
    s3. Assertions about account BALANCES and related disclosures relate to the period end

    See “Learn the assertions” at the bottom of the page.

    Occurrence – transactions and events that have BEEN RECORDED or disclosed have occurred and pertain to the entity. The “direction” of this, then, is “backwards” from what is recorded to “source”.

    Completeness is the “opposite” – you are asking “what has NOT been recorded?”. The direction of testing CANNOT therefore be the same – you have to start at the SOURCE – e.g. receipt/despatch of goods should give rise to recording of purchases/sales (and payables/receivables).

    August 21, 2021 at 2:12 pm #632413
    orhodes
    Member
    • Topics: 17
    • Replies: 21
    • ☆

    Thank you very much for an explanation! I understand it better now. I’ll practice more questions and hopefully won’t get confused on the exam.

    Oksana

    August 21, 2021 at 2:48 pm #632418
    Kim Smith
    Keymaster
    • Topics: 100
    • Replies: 6794
    • ☆☆☆☆☆

    It may help you to draw yourself “flows” like this:

    This would take you “backwards” from purchases/payables in the FS to source:

    FS -> TB -> Payables control a/c balance reconciled to list of individual balances -> make-up of individual balances -> purchase invoices -> GRNs

    This “direction” of testing is relevant to the assertions of occurrence (purchase transactions) and/or existence (payables balance).

    For completeness you do in reverse. If something is “missing” in reverse – e.g. there’s a GRN but there’s no purchase invoice (yet) – that’s why you need an accrual.

  • Author
    Posts
Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Log In

Primary Sidebar

ACCA News:

 

ACCA My Exam Performance for non-variant Applied Skills exams is available NOW

NEW! Download the ACCA Pass Guide

FREE Verifiable CPD for ACCA Members

ACCA mock exams and debrief videos

ACCA Options:  “Read the Mind of the Marker” articles

Subscribe to ACCA’s Student Accountant Direct

Donate

If you have benefited from OpenTuition please donate.

ACCA CBE 2023 Exams

Instant Poll * How was your exam, and what was the result?

BT CBE exam was.. | MA CBE exam was..
FA CBE exam was.. | LW CBE exam was..

Specially for OpenTuition students

20% off BPP Books

Get BPP Discount Code

Latest comments

  • Iby2012 on Introduction to Financial Accounting – ACCA Financial Accounting (FA) lectures
  • Iby2012 on Introduction to Financial Accounting – ACCA Financial Accounting (FA) lectures
  • Iby2012 on Introduction to Financial Accounting – ACCA Financial Accounting (FA) lectures
  • baraka42 on PM Chapter 13 Questions Standard Costing and Basic Variance Analysis
  • baraka42 on PM Chapter 13 Questions Standard Costing and Basic Variance Analysis

Copyright © 2023 · Support · Contact · Advertising · OpenLicense · About · Sitemap · Comments · Log in


We use cookies to show you relevant advertising, find out more: Privacy Policy · Cookie Policy