qs 6 smith n Co bpp rev kit

If you’re getting a “kick-back” from an entity because you have recommended that entity to your clients, that “commission” (a nicer expression!) should be fully disclosed to the client and the client should acknowledge that disclosure, in writing

The business of Smith auditors is to audit. Indulging in recommending Software Supply to Smith’s audit clients could be seen to detract from the independent relationship where it may be viewed by an outsider that the recommendation is being made purely with the intention of receiving commission

When you’re auditing your clients financial statements and records and you discover an unacceptable number of errors occasioned by the Software Supply services, do you hold your hands up and admit to the client that you have made a mistake in recommending Software Supply in the first place

And what happens when it is later discovered that Software Supply company is not up to the standard with which you would wish to be associated

Not only is that potentially directly damaging to the client’s interests. It will also not do your own reputation a power of good

Self-interest threat, self-review threat, both direct threats to being and being seen to be independent

Better not to have put yourself into this position but, if you persist with this activity, at least institute safeguards such as regular monitoring of Software Supply’s goods and services as well as obtaining that written acknowledgement from the client that they are aware of the receipt by you of this commission

OK?