Opinions

“what is the difference between a moderate level and a negative assurance?which one does a due diligence review give?”

I believe that they are one and the same thing! Both involve the accountant saying “nothing has come to our attention ….”

Due diligence would have to be a negative assurance because a full audit is not available

“If a client company is in breach of laws and regulations,can the auditor disclose to the authority as an ethical stance and will he issue an unmodified or modified opinion if the matter is very material if disclosed to relevant authority and is otherwise not affecting(such as a fine for breach of regulations)?”

There are limited situations where an auditor MUST disclose to the relevant authority. This is not a matter of ethics – it’s a legal requirement.

There are situations where the auditor MAY disclose with client’s permission. If permission not granted, auditor should seriously, very seriously, consider resigning.

If the client makes a voluntary disclosure or if the auditor, with the client’s permission, makes full disclosure to the relevant authorities, and the client incorporates full explanatory details within the financial statements together with the history, cause and effect of these former breaches, and if the auditor is content that full disclosure has been made in the most appropriate and unambiguous way, then no reason to qualify the audit opinion.

Most likely would modify the report with an emphasis of matter

OK?

You’re welcome