審計程序AUDIT PROCEDURES
　　In Example 1 above, we identified that fraud and the legal proceedings were adjusting events that gave rise to an adjustment within the financial statements as at 30 September 2010. We also identified that the loss of the customer was also an adjusting event, but as the value of the receivable was considered immaterial, no adjustment was made to the financial statements. Let us expand on the requirement in Example 1 as follows:
　　前述案例中定義出了“調整事項”，其中，顧客的損失也是調整事項，但是由于這筆金額太小因而沒有調整財務報表。
以下是案例審計程序的詳述：

　　Required:
　　(b) Describe the audit procedures that should be performed to obtain sufficient appropriate evidence that the subsequent events have been appropriately treated in the financial statements.

 
　　Answer:
　　Candidates who are faced with scenarios such as those in Example 1 should think about the information needed that would prompt an accountant or finance director to go back to the year-end and retrospectively amend the financial statements. You could interpret the question as asking ‘what information would I need in real-life to justify a provision or disclosure within the financial statements before making such provision or disclosure?’ Where candidates have studied Paper F3 and have knowledge of IAS 10, thinking about the provisions contained in this IAS 10 will often lead you into thinking about the audit evidence you would need to satisfy yourself that the requirements in IAS 10 have been met, as well as offering ideas as to how you would go about obtaining this evidence for the audit file.
　　

　　Fraud
　　Fraud risk factors are covered in ISA 240, The Auditor’s Responsibilities Relating to Fraud in an Audit of Financial Statements. The fact that fraud has occurred at Gabriella Enterprises Co will increase the risk of material misstatement due to fraud.
The audit procedures to be performed to ensure the fraud has been correctly accounted for in the financial statements may include:
　　　• Recalculation of the amounts involved.
　　　• Discussions with management as to how such a fraud occurred and why it took six months’ to discover the fraud (controls should prevent, detect and correct material misstatements on a timely basis).
　　　• Establishing how the bookkeeper discovered the fraud and what controls (if any) contain weaknesses to allow the employee to commit the fraud.  Note that employee fraud usually involves the manipulation of controls, whereas management fraud often involves the overriding of controls.
　　　• Performing substantive procedures on journal entries (particularly those close to, or at, the year-end).
　　　• Confirming directly with suppliers the account activity for the period under audit.
　　　• Reviewing the purchase invoices and being on alert for any ‘doctored’ or ‘copy’ invoices and making enquiries as to their authenticity.
　　　• A review of human resources files for evidence of disciplinary proceedings taken against the employee. This will also confirm compliance with laws and regulations, particularly in relation to employment legislation and the withholding of monies.
　　　• Testing of other controls to identify other weaknesses that may indicate employee or management fraud.
　　　• Obtaining written representations from management concerning the fraud.
　　　• Test checking after-date cash for evidence of reimbursements by the employee, such as the withheld wages/salaries by the entity.
　　　• Discussions with the entity’s legal advisers as to the possibility of reimbursement of the balance of the misappropriated funds.

　　Legal proceedings
　　　• Obtaining a copy of the court order or other correspondence confirming the company has been found liable to pay compensation to its customer.
　　　• Test checking after-date cash to confirm payment to the customer.
　　　• Ensuring a provision has been recognised as opposed to disclosure as a contingent liability to meet the requirements in IAS 37, Provisions, Contingent Liabilities and Contingent Assets.
　　　• Ensuring the provision is reasonable in relation to the outcome of the court case.
　　　• Obtaining written representation from management to confirm the treatment of the provision.

　　Loss of customer
　　　• Discuss with management the reason for not adjusting the irrecoverable receivable.
　　　• The auditors have already agreed this amount is immaterial to the financial statements, so this amount would be put on an ‘audit error schedule’. Provided this amount remains immaterial at the completion stage, both individually and when aggregated with other misstatements, the auditor can still express an unmodified opinion.

　　Financial statements amended after the date of the auditor’s report, but before the financial statements are issued.
　　Circumstances may arise when the auditor becomes aware of facts that may materially affect the financial statements and, in such situations, the auditor will consider whether the financial statements need amending. The auditor is required to discuss with management how they intend to deal with events that will require the financial statements to be amended after the auditors have signed their report, but before the financial statements are issued.
　　Where the financial statements are amended, the auditor is required to carry out necessary audit procedures in light of the circumstances giving rise to the amendment. The auditor will also be required to issue a new auditor’s report on the amended financial statements and, therefore, must extend their subsequent events testing up to the (expected) date of the new auditor’s report. The revised auditor’s report must not be dated any earlier than the date of the amended financial statements. In situations where management refuses to make amendments to the financial statements, the auditor must take all steps required to avoid reliance by third parties on the auditor’s report. The auditor should also consider the need to resign from the audit.