Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
OVERVIEW
Objective
To describe the concept of materiality and its relationship with audit risk.
MATERIALITY
IASC definition
Basic principles
AUDIT
Planning materiality
PROCEDURES
Effect of audit work
Relationship with risk
EVALUATING
Essential procedure
MISSTATEMENTS
1 MATERIALITY
… Materiality depends on the size of the item or error judged in the particular
circumstances of its omission or misstatement. It provides a threshold or cutoff point
rather than being a primary qualitative characteristic which information must have if it
is to be useful.
ISA 320 also repeats, as a standard, the objective of an audit (see Session 1).
2 CONSIDERATIONS
Example 1
Identify FOUR users of financial statements and state their information needs.
Solution
1
The International Accounting Standards Committee’s Framework for the Preparation and
Presentation of Financial Statements
Illustration 1
2.2 Amount
In designing the audit plan, the auditor sets an acceptable materiality level so
as to detect quantitatively material misstatements.
profit → loss
net current assets → net current liabilities.
2.3 Nature
3 AUDIT PROCEDURES
% guides
5 – 10% profit
½ – 1% net assets
1 – 2% total assets
½ – 1 % revenue.
Example 2
Turnover $5,000,000
Total assets $6,250,000
Profit before tax $417,000
Required:
(i) $20,000
(ii) $40,000
(iii) $100,000.
(b) Justify a materiality level which you consider to be more suitable (if any).
Solution
(a)
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(b)
Example 3
Required:
Suggest how a materiality level of $25,000 may affect audit procedures on trade
receivables and prepayments.
Solution
The relationship between materiality and the level of audit risk is described as
“inverse” (ie the higher the materiality level, the lower the audit risk and vice
versa).
4 EVALUATING MISSTATEMENTS
Uncorrected misstatements =
Example 4
Required:
Determine the minimum adjustment (if any) that must be made for the presentation of
the financial statement to be evaluated as fair if:
If any remaining (unadjusted) aggregate may be material the auditor’s report should be
modified in accordance with ISA 700 (see Session 17).
FOCUS
EXAMPLE SOLUTIONS
Investors (owners) and their Providers of capital are concerned with the risk and
advisers return of their investment. They need information
− for decision-making (buy, hold or sell?)
− to assess the enterprise’s ability to pay
dividends
Lenders (eg banks) Whether loans and interest will be paid when due
Suppliers and other trade Whether amounts owing will be paid when due
creditors
(i) $20,000 – this is likely to too low as it falls below the lower limits
for turnover, total assets and profit before tax.
(ii) $40,000 – this is more suitable in that it lies within the % ranges for
turnover and profit before tax. However, it may still be regarded as
too low in relation to the balance sheet.
(iii) $100,000 – although suitable for the audit of the balance sheet, this is
likely to be considered too high for classes of transactions and material
error in the income statement may not be detected by audit procedures.
(b) Recommendation
WORKING
% $000
Turnover ½–1 25 – 50
Total assets 1–2 62.5 – 125
Profit before tax 5 – 10 20.8 – 41.7
Trade receivables
The average balance in the range $1,000 – $5,000 is $2,100 and the average
balance less than $1,000 is $670. If the profile of these balances is similar to
the previous year audit tests may not be detailed, but take the form of
analytical procedures (see Session 15).
Prepayments
In aggregate, net profit and net current assets are overstated by $178,000 – which is
material. A minimum adjustment of $78,000 is therefore needed. For example, if the
understatement of trade payables is due to liabilities for purchases having been omitted,
then if management are prepared to adjust the trade payables to correct the $80,000
understatement, the remaining unadjusted aggregate, $98,000 is less that the materiality
limit.
However, if the incorrect cut-off (say) was in error, management should be prepared to
adjust for it. (If not, this might raise doubts about whether the “error” was by accident
or design.)