Judgments of management concerning accounting estimates that the
auditor considers unreasonable or the selection and application of accounting policies that the auditor considers inappropriate. Examples of misstatements arising from fraud are provided in SA 240.5
Accumulation of Identified Misstatements (Ref: Para. 5)
A2. The auditor may designate an amount below which misstatements would be clearly trivial and would not need to be accumulated because the auditor expects that the accumulation of such amounts clearly would not have a material effect on the financial statements. “Clearly trivial” is not another expression for “not material”. Matters that are “clearly trivial” will be of a wholly different 5 SA 240, “The Auditor’s Responsibilities Relating to Fraud in an Audit of Financial Statements,” paragraphs A1-A6. (smaller) order of magnitude than materiality determined in accordance with SA 320, and will be matters that are clearly inconsequential, whether taken individually or in aggregate and whether judged by any criteria of size, nature or circumstances. When there is any uncertainty about whether one or more items are clearly trivial, the matter is considered not to be clearly trivial.
A3. To assist the auditor in evaluating the effect of misstatements accumulated during the audit and in communicating misstatements to management and those charged with governance, it may be useful to distinguish between factual misstatements, judgmental misstatements and projected misstatements. Factual misstatements are misstatements about which there is no doubt.
Judgmental misstatements are differences arising from the judgments of
management concerning accounting estimates that the auditor considers unreasonable, or the selection or application of accounting policies that the auditor considers inappropriate. Projected misstatements are the auditor’s best estimate of misstatements in populations, involving the projection of misstatements identified in audit samples to the entire populations from which the samples were drawn. Guidance on the determination of projected misstatements and evaluation of the results is set out in SA 5306.
Consideration of Identified Misstatements as the Audit Progresses
A4. A misstatement may not be an isolated occurrence. Evidence that other misstatements may exist include, for example, where the auditor identifies that a misstatement arose from a breakdown in internal control or from inappropriate assumptions or valuation methods that have been widely applied by the entity.
A5. If the aggregate of misstatements accumulated during the audit approaches materiality determined in accordance with SA 320, there may be a greater than an acceptably low level of risk that possible undetected misstatements, when taken with the aggregate of misstatements accumulated during the audit, could exceed the materiality. Undetected misstatements could exist because of the presence of sampling risk and non-sampling risk.7
A6. The auditor may request management to examine a class of transactions, account balance or disclosure in order for management to understand the cause of a misstatement identified by the auditor, perform procedures to determine the 6 SA 530, “Audit Sampling”, paragraphs 14-15. 7 SA 530, paragraphs 5(c) and (d). amount of the actual misstatement in the class of transactions, account balance or disclosure, and to make appropriate adjustments to the financial statements. Such a request may be made, for example, based on the auditor’s projection of misstatements identified in an audit sample to the entire population from which it was drawn.
Communication and Correction of Misstatements (Ref: Para. 8-9)
A7. Timely communication of misstatements to the appropriate level of management is important as it enables management to evaluate whether the items are misstatements, inform the auditor if it disagrees, and take action as necessary. Ordinarily, the appropriate level of management is the one that has responsibility and authority to evaluate the misstatements and to take the necessary action.
A8. Law or regulation may restrict the auditor’s communication of certain misstatements to management, or others, within the entity. For example, laws or regulations may specifically prohibit a communication, or other action, that might prejudice an investigation by an appropriate authority into an actual, or suspected, illegal act. In some circumstances, potential conflicts between the auditor’s obligations of confidentiality and obligations to communicate may be complex. In such cases, the auditor may consider seeking legal advice.
A9. The correction by management of all misstatements, including those communicated by the auditor, enables management to maintain accurate accounting books and records and reduces the risks of material misstatement of future financial statements because of the cumulative effect of immaterial uncorrected misstatements related to prior periods.
A10. SA 700 (Revised) requires the auditor to evaluate whether the financial statements are prepared and presented, in all material respects, in accordance with the requirements of the applicable financial reporting framework. This evaluation includes consideration of the qualitative aspects of the entity’s accounting practices, including indicators of possible bias in management’s judgments8, which may be affected by the auditor’s understanding of management’s reasons for not making the corrections.
Evaluating the Effect of Uncorrected Misstatements (Ref: Para. 10-11)
A11. The auditor’s determination of the materiality in accordance with SA 320 is often based on estimates of the entity’s financial results, because the actual financial results may not yet be known. Therefore, prior to the auditor’s 8 SA 700(Revised), paragraph 12. evaluation of the effect of uncorrected misstatements, it may be necessary to revise materiality determined in accordance with SA 320 based on the actual financial results.
A12. SA 320 explains that, as the audit progresses, the materiality for the financial statements as a whole (and, if applicable, the materiality level or levels for particular classes of transactions, account balances or disclosures) is revised in the event of the auditor becoming aware of information during the audit that would have caused the auditor to have determined a different amount (or amounts) initially9. Thus, any significant revision is likely to have been made before the auditor evaluates the effect of uncorrected misstatements. However, if the auditor’s reassessment of materiality determined in accordance with SA 320 (see paragraph 10 of this SA) gives rise to a lower amount (or amounts), then performance materiality and the appropriateness of the nature, timing and extent of the further audit procedures, are reconsidered so as to obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence on which to base the audit opinion.
A13. Each individual misstatement is considered to evaluate its effect on the relevant classes of transactions, account balances or disclosures, including whether the materiality level for that particular class of transactions, account balance or disclosure, if any, has been exceeded.
A14. If an individual misstatement is judged to be material, it is unlikely that it can be offset by other misstatements. For example, if revenue has been materially overstated, the financial statements as a whole will be materially misstated, even if the effect of the misstatement on earnings is completely offset by an equivalent overstatement of expenses. It may be appropriate to offset misstatements within the same account balance or class of transactions; however, the risk that further undetected misstatements may exist is considered before concluding that offsetting even immaterial misstatements is appropriate10.
A15. Determining whether a classification misstatement is material involves the evaluation of qualitative considerations, such as the effect of the classification misstatement on debt or other contractual covenants, the effect on individual line items or sub-totals, or the effect on key ratios. There may be circumstances where the auditor concludes that a classification misstatement is not material in the context of the financial statements as a whole, even though it may exceed the materiality level or levels applied in evaluating other misstatements. For example, a misclassification between balance sheet line items may not be considered material in the context of the financial statements as a whole when 9 SA 320, paragraph 12. 10 The identification of a number of immaterial misstatements within the same account balance or class of transactions may require the auditor to re-assess the risk of material misstatement for that account balance or class of transactions. the amount of the misclassification is small in relation to the size of the related balance sheet line items and the misclassification does not affect the income statement or any key ratios.
A16. The circumstances related to some misstatements may cause the auditor to evaluate them as material, individually or when considered together with other misstatements accumulated during the audit, even if they are lower than the materiality for the financial statements as a whole. Circumstances that may affect the evaluation include the extent to which the misstatement: Affects compliance with regulatory requirements; Affects compliance with debt covenants or other contractual requirements; Relates to the incorrect selection or application of an accounting policy that has an immaterial effect on the current period’s financial statements but is likely to have a material effect on future periods’ financial statements; Makes a change in earnings or other trends, especially in the context of general economic and industry conditions; Affects ratios used to evaluate the entity’s financial position, results of operations or cash flows;
Affects segment information presented in the financial statements (for
example, the significance of the matter to a segment or other portion of the entity’s business that has been identified as playing a significant role in the entity’s operations or profitability);
Has the effect of increasing management compensation, for example, by
ensuring that the requirements for the award of bonuses or other incentives are satisfied;
Is significant having regard to the auditor’s understanding of known
previous communications to users, for example in relation to forecast earnings; Relates to items involving particular parties (for example, whether external parties to the transaction are related to members of the entity’s management); Is an omission of information not specifically required by the applicable financial reporting framework but which, in the judgment of the auditor, is important to the users’ understanding of the financial position, financial performance or cash flows of the entity; or Affects other information to be included in the entity’s annual report (for example, information to be included in a “Management Discussion and Analysis” or an “Operating and Financial Review”) that may reasonably be expected to influence the economic decisions of the users of the financial statements. SA 720(Revised)11 deals with the auditor’s responsibilities relating to other information. These circumstances are only examples; not all are likely to be present in all audits nor is the list necessarily complete. The existence of any circumstances such as these does not necessarily lead to a conclusion that the misstatement is material.
A17. SA 24012, explains how the implications of a misstatement that is, or may be, the result of fraud ought to be considered in relation to other aspects of the audit, even if the size of the misstatement is not material in relation to the financial statements.
A18. The cumulative effect of immaterial uncorrected misstatements related to prior periods may have a material effect on the current period’s financial statements. There are different acceptable approaches to the auditor’s evaluation of such uncorrected misstatements on the current period’s financial statements. Using the same evaluation approach provides consistency from period to period.
A19. In the case of an audit of certain entities, such as, Central/State governments and related government entities (for example, agencies, boards, commissions), the evaluation whether a misstatement is material may also be affected by legislation or regulation and additional responsibilities for the auditor to report other matters, including, for example, fraud.
A20. Furthermore, issues such as public interest, accountability, probity and ensuring effective legislative oversight, in particular, may affect the assessment whether an item is material by virtue of its nature. This is particularly so for items that relate to compliance with regulation, legislation or other authority.
Communication with Those Charged with Governance (Ref: Para. 12)
A21. If uncorrected misstatements have been communicated with person(s) with management responsibilities and those person(s) also have governance responsibilities, they need not be communicated again with those same person(s) in their governance role. The auditor nonetheless has to be satisfied that communication with person(s) with management responsibilities adequately informs all of those with whom the auditor would otherwise communicate in their governance capacity.13 11 SA 720(Revised), “The Auditor’s Responsibilities Relating to Other Information”. 12 SA 240, paragraph 35. 13 SA 260(Revised), paragraph13.
A22. Where there is a large number of individual immaterial uncorrected misstatements, the auditor may communicate the number and overall monetary effect of the uncorrected misstatements, rather than the details of each individual uncorrected misstatement.
A23. SA 260(Revised) requires the auditor to communicate with those charged with governance the written representations the auditor is requesting (see paragraph 14 of this SA).14 The auditor may discuss with those charged with governance the reasons for, and the implications of, a failure to correct misstatements, having regard to the size and nature of the misstatement judged in the surrounding circumstances, and possible implications in relation to future financial statements.
Written Representation (Ref: Para. 14)
A24. Because management and, where appropriate, those charged with governance are responsible for adjusting the financial statements to correct material misstatements, the auditor is required to request them to provide a written representation about uncorrected misstatements. In some circumstances, management and, where appropriate, those charged with governance may not believe that certain uncorrected misstatements are misstatements. For that reason, they may want to add to their written representation words such as: “We do not agree that items ………and …………… constitute misstatements because [description of reasons].” Obtaining this representation does not, however, relieve the auditor of the need to form a conclusion on the effect of uncorrected misstatements.
Documentation (Ref: Para. 15)
A25. The auditor’s documentation of uncorrected misstatements may take into account:
