- This topic has 1 reply, 2 voices, and was last updated 6 months ago by Kim Smith.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
1. ma’am all non-audit works result in auditor receiving additional fees, does that mean we can always talk about self interest threat to get 1 mark?
Or that fees needs to be significant enough from the non-audit work to actually deserve a point for the mention of self interest threat?
2. ma’am can we directly use the phrase “the code” instead of mentioning IESBA internal code of ethics for professional accountants even once?
3. do we need to classify our safeguards based on the threat they are eliminating/reducing? like specifically mention that to reduce self review threat the following safeguards can be implemented…. to reduce self interest thereat following safeguards can be implemented….
1. Any fee gives rise to self-interest – the amount is relevant to evaluating the threat.
2. You can say “ACCA’s Code of Ethics (the Code)” instead – as equivalent.
3. Better to say that such-and-such a safeguard will reduce this-and-that threat as there’s unlikely to be a one-for-one relationship. Since the definition of safeguards has been tightened to “actions”, there are relatively few to consider (!)