accounting&auditing

The National Bank of Cambodia has tripled the minimum capital requirement for commercial banks in Cambodia in an effort to tighten and strengthen the banking sector.

According to a copy of an NBC directive dated Friday, commercial banks in Cambodia are now required to have a minimum capital of 150 billion riel (about $36.50 million).

Commercial banks will be allowed to maintain the current capital requirement of 50 billion riel (about 12 million) if they have an "influential shareholder" that is a bank or financial institution with an "investment grade" rating from a "reputable rating agency," according to the directive.

While the country's four main banks - Acleda, ANZ Royal, Canadia and the Cambodian Public Bank - are likely to be unaffected by the change in conditions, it remains to be seen how many of the country's 17 other commercial banks will measure up to the new rules.

The country's six specialized banks, which only make loans and do not take deposits, must also increase their minimum capital to 30 billion riel (about $7.30 million) unless they have a bank or financial institution "influential shareholder" with an "investment grade" rating, according to the NBC directive.

All existing bank have until 2010 to meet the new requirements , the directive states.

National Bank of Cambodia Director - General Tal Nai Im said Monday morning that the new commercial bank requirements are aimed at making it more difficult for prospective bank to enter the sector in Cambodia.

"We will increase the minimum capital for commercial banks," Tal Nai Im said by telephone. "The reason is to limit the number," she said.

"Some banks that don't have the minimum might have to withdraw," she added.

The NBC's 2007 Supervision Report measured that general health of the country's banking sector by the increasing number of bank customers, which grew from 285,639 in 2006 to 456,026 in 2007, and the increase in deposits from $1.4 billion in 2006 to $2.5 billion in 2007.

Finance Ministry Secretary - General Hang Chuon Naron said that bank deposits had grown another $1 billion in the first half of 2008 and that he thought the banking sector was doing quite well in general, mainly due to increased customer confidence.

The new NBC protocol will go further to "make the banking system healthy," he said by telephone Monday.

"We have 21 [commercial] banks, which is enough for the size of the market," he said. "If we have to many banks, then existing ones won't make any money."

He declined to speculate as to whether smaller banks would fold or consolidate in the coming months, but said that "if they want to continue, they have to increase their minimum capital. If they don't have it, they will have to voluntarily close down."

Following the introduction of banking law in 1999, which raised minimum capital requirements for commercial banks from $5 million to $12 million, 14 banks were forced to close their doors - reducing the number of banks in Cambodia at that time from 31 to 17.

In the last few years, the number of banks has shot up again, which is something that the International Monetary Fund's Resident Representative John Nelmes warned puts undue strain on banking supervision.

"Banking supervision capacity has been improving, however there remains room for further improvement, and the increasing number of banks heightens demands on bank supervision," Nemes wrote by email.

"I think what is perhaps more important than the number of banks in Cambodian, is the quality of banks... Banks need to be well capitalized, well run and have solid banking knowledge and experience in providing banking services so that problems down the road are avoided, " he added.

ANZ Royal CEO Stephen Higgins expressed concern over the proliferation of banks at private equity firm Leopard Fund's investor conference last week.

He said by telephone Monday that the new measure announced by the NBC was probably good news for the country as well as that sector.

"For the big four [banks] that already qualify, it's probably goods news. From the perspective of the country and risk of the backing sector, it's good new", he said.

"I would imagine some of the smaller banks are rather concerned," he added.

Acleda CEO In Channy siad Monday that the new restrictions were a positive development because they allow the sector an opportunity to fine tune sound banking principles and bolster its reputation among customers.

"We need banks with a strong capital base operating in Cambodia," In Channy said.

In Channy added that at the end of 2007, the top four banks in Cambodian accounted for more than 80 percent of deposits.

Paul Freer, vice precedent of the Japanese-backed Maruhan Bank, which opened its doors earlier this year, said the new measure would not negatively affect his institution.

"It won't affect us too much... We have the funds available to inject," he said, adding that they will simple add another $15 million to their existing capital of $25 million.

The minimum capital in Vietnam, he said, is about $100 million and is about to be raised an additional $60 million.

"If you put it into perspective [Cambodia's new terms are] not that high. But it will shrink that number of banks. Smaller banks will either consolidate or move out," he said.

Vicente Contreras, operations manager at Cambodian Asia Bank, said he hadn't yet received information on the new requirements, but was mildly concerned at the news.

"Yes, I am concerned, but I think we can meet this [new requirement]," he said, adding that their current capital is about $13 million.

Contreras said he believed that, realistically speaking, only one or two banks would be in trouble as a result of NBC directive.


Source: The Cambodia Daily issued on 23 September 2008.

Introduction

1. The purpose of this InternationalCambodian Standard on Auditing (ICSA) is to establish standards and provide guidance on the auditor's responsibility in the audit of financial statements with respect to the going concern assumption used in the preparation of the financial statements, including considering management's assessment of the entity's ability to continue as a going concern.

2. When planning and performing audit procedures and in evaluating the results thereof, the auditor should consider the appropriateness of management's use of the going concern assumption in the preparation of the financial statements.

Management's Responsibility

3. The going concern assumption is a fundamental principle in the preparation of financial statements. Under the going concern assumption, an entity is ordinarily viewed as continuing in business for the foreseeable future with neither the intention nor the necessity of liquidation, ceasing trading or seeking protection from creditors pursuant to laws or regulations. Accordingly, assets and liabilities are recorded on the basis that the entity will be able to realizse its assets and discharge its liabilities in the normal course of business.

4. Some financial reporting frameworks contain an explicit requirement1 for mAn entity’s management is required by Accounting Standards to make a specific assessment of the entity's ability to continue as a going concern., and standards regarding matters to be considered and disclosures to be made in connection with going concern. For example, International Accounting Standard 1 (revised 1997), 'Presentation of Financial Statements' requires management to make an assessment of an enterprise's ability to continue as a going concern.2

5. In other financial reporting frameworks, there may be no explicit requirement for management to make a specific assessment of the entity's ability to continue as a going concern. Nevertheless, since the going concern assumption is a fundamental principle in the preparation of the financial statements, management has a responsibility to assess the entity's ability to continue as a going concern even if the financial reporting framework does not include an explicit responsibility to do so.

65. When there is a history of profitable operations and a ready access to financial resources, management may make its assessment without detailed analysis.

76. Management's assessment of the going concern assumption involves making a judgment, at a particular point in time, about the future outcome of events or conditions which are inherently uncertain. The following factors are relevant:

· In general terms, the degree of uncertainty associated with the outcome of an event or condition increases significantly the further into the future a judgment is being made about the outcome of an event or condition. For that reason, Accounting Standards most financial reporting frameworks that require an explicit management assessment specify the period for whichthat management is required to take into account all available information for at least twelve months from the balance sheet date.

· Any judgment about the future is based on information available at the time at which the judgment is made. Subsequent events can contradict a judgment which was reasonable at the time it was made.

· The size and complexity of the entity, the nature and condition of its business and the degree to which it is affected by external factors all affect the judgment regarding the outcome of events or conditions.

87. Examples of events or conditions, which individually or collectively, may cast significant doubt about the going concern assumption are set out below. This listing is not all-inclusive nor does the existence of one or more of the items always signify that a material uncertainty3 exists.
_______________________
1The detailed requirements regarding management's responsibility to assess the entity's ability to continue as a going concern and related financial statement disclosures may be set out in accounting standards, legislation or regulation.

IAS 1, "Presentation of Financial Statements", paragraphs 23 and 24 state: "When preparing financial statements, management should make an assessment of an enterprise's ability to continue as a going concern. Financial statements should be prepared on a going concern basis unless management intends to liquidate the enterprise or to cease trading, or has no realistic alternative but to do so. When management is aware, in making its assessment, of material uncertainties related to events or conditions which may cast significant doubt upon the enterprise's ability to continue as a going concern, those uncertainties should be disclosed. When the financial statements are not prepared on a going concern basis, that fact should be disclosed, together with the basis on which the financial statements are prepared and the reasons why the enterprise is not considered to be a going concern.

In assessing whether the going concern assumption is appropriate, management takes into account all available information for the foreseeable future, which should be at least, but is not limited to, twelve months from the balance sheet date. The degree of consideration depends on the facts in each case. When an enterprise has a history of profitable operations and ready access to financial resources, a conclusion that the going concern basis of accounting is appropriate can be reached without detailed analysis. In other cases, management may need to consider a wide range of factors surrounding current and expected profitability, debt repayment schedules and potential sources of replacement financing before it can satisfy itself that the going concern basis is appropriate.".

3 The phrase "material uncertainty" is used in IAS 1 in discussing the uncertainties related to events or conditions which may cast significant doubt on the enterprise's ability to continue as a going concern that should be disclosed in the financial statements. In other financial reporting frameworks, and elsewhere in the ISA's the phrase "significant uncertainties" is used in similar circumstances.

Management's Responsibility Financial

· Net liability or net current liability position.

· Fixed-term borrowings approaching maturity without realistic prospects of renewal or repayment; or excessive reliance on short-term borrowings to finance long-term assets.

· Indications of withdrawal of financial support by debtors and other creditors.

· Negative operating cash flows indicated by historical or prospective financial statements.

· Adverse key financial ratios.

· Substantial operating losses or significant deterioration in the value of assets used to generate cash flows.

· Arrears or discontinuance of dividends.

· Inability to pay creditors on due dates.

· Inability to comply with the terms of loan agreements.

· Change from credit to cash-on-delivery transactions with suppliers.

· Inability to obtain financing for essential new product development or other essential investments.

Management's Responsibility Operating

· Loss of key management without replacement.

· Loss of a major market, franchise, license, or principal supplier.

· Labour difficulties or shortages of important supplies.

Management's Responsibility Other

· Non-compliance with capital or other statutory requirements.

· Pending legal or regulatory proceedings against the entity that may, if successful, result in claims that are unlikely to be satisfied.

· Changes in legislation or government policy expected to adversely affect the entity.

The significance of such events or conditions often can be mitigated by other factors. For example, the effect of an entity being unable to make its normal debt repayments may be counter-balanced by management's plans to maintain adequate cash flows by alternative means, such as by disposal of assets, rescheduling of loan repayments, or obtaining additional capital. Similarly, the loss of a principal supplier may be mitigated by the availability of a suitable alternative source of supply.

Auditor's Responsibility

98. The auditor's responsibility is to consider the appropriateness of management's use of the going concern assumption in the preparation of the financial statements, and consider whether there are material uncertainties about the entity's ability to continue as a going concern that need to be disclosed in the financial statements. The auditor considers the appropriateness of management's use of the going concern assumption even if the financial reporting framework used in the preparation of the financial statements does not include an explicit requirement for management to make a specific assessment of the entity's ability to continue as a going concern.

109. The auditor cannot predict future events or conditions that may cause an entity to cease to continue as a going concern. Accordingly, the absence of any reference to going concern uncertainty in an auditor's report cannot be viewed as a guarantee as to the entity's ability to continue as a going concern.

Planning Considerations

1110. In planning the audit, the auditor should consider whether there are events or conditions which may cast significant doubt on the entity's ability to continue as a going concern.

112. The auditor should remain alert for evidence of events or conditions which may cast significant doubt on the entity's ability to continue as a going concern throughout the audit. If such events or conditions are identified, the auditor should, in addition to performing the procedures in paragraph 256, consider whether they affect the auditor's assessments of the components of audit risk.

123. The auditor considers events and conditions relating to the going concern assumption during the planning process, because this consideration allows for more timely discussions with management, review of management's plans and resolution of any identified going concern issues.

134. In some cases, management may have already made a preliminary assessment at the early stages of the audit. If so, the auditor reviews that assessment to determine whether management has identified events or conditions, such as those discussed in paragraph 78, and management's plans to address them.

145. If management has not yet made a preliminary assessment, the auditor discusses with management the basis for their intended use of the going concern assumption, and inquires of management whether events or conditions, such as those discussed in paragraph 78, exist. The auditor may request management to begin making its assessment, particularly when the auditor has already identified events or conditions relating to the going concern assumption.

156. The auditor considers the effect of identified events or conditions when making preliminary assessments of the components of audit risk and, therefore, their existence may affect the nature, timing and extent of the auditor's procedures.

Evaluating Management's Assessment

167. The auditor should evaluate management's assessment of the entity's ability to continue as a going concern.

178. The auditor should consider the same period as that used by management in making its assessment as required by Accounting Standards.under the financial reporting framework. If management's assessment of the entity's ability to continue as a going concern covers less than twelve months from the balance sheet date, the auditor should ask management to extend its assessment period to twelve months from the balance sheet date.

189. Management's assessment of the entity's ability to continue as a going concern is a key part of the auditor's consideration of the going concern assumption. As noted in paragraph 67, Accounting Standards specify that management is required to take into account all available information for at least twelve months from the balance sheet date. most financial reporting frameworks requiring an explicit management assessment specify the period for which management is required to take into account all available information.4

1920. In evaluating management's assessment, the auditor considers the process management followed to make its assessment, the assumptions on which the assessment is based and management's plans for future action. The auditor considers whether the assessment has taken into account all relevant information of which the auditor is aware as a result of the audit procedures.

201. As noted in paragraph 56, when there is a history of profitable operations and a ready access to financial resources, management may make its assessment without detailed analysis. In such circumstances, the auditor's conclusion about the appropriateness of this assessment normally is also made without the need for performing detailed procedures. When events or conditions have been identified which may cast significant doubt about the entity's ability to continue as a going concern, however, the auditor performs additional audit procedures, as described in paragraph 256.
______________
4 For example, IAS 1 defines this as a period that should be at least, but is not limited to, twelve months from the balance sheet date.

Period Beyond Management's Assessment

212. The auditor should inquire of management as to its knowledge of events or conditions beyond the period of assessment used by management that may cast significant doubt on the entity's ability to continue as a going concern.

223. The auditor is alert to the possibility that there may be known events, scheduled or otherwise, or conditions that will occur beyond the period of assessment used by management that may bring into question the appropriateness of management's use of the going concern assumption in preparing the financial statements. The auditor may become aware of such known events or conditions during the planning and conduct of the audit, including subsequent events procedures.

234. Since the degree of uncertainty associated with the outcome of an event or condition increases as the event or condition is further into the future, in considering such events or conditions, the indications of going concern issues will need to be significant before the auditor considers taking further action. The auditor may need to ask management to determine the potential significance of the event or condition on their going concern assessment.

245. The auditor does not have a responsibility to design procedures other than inquiry of management to test for indications of events or conditions which cast significant doubt on the entity's ability to continue as a going concern beyond the period assessed by management which, as discussed in paragraph 178, would be at least twelve months from the balance sheet date.

Additional Audit Procedures When Events or Conditions are Identified

256. When events or conditions have been identified which may cast significant doubt on the entity's ability to continue as a going concern, the auditor should:

(a) review management's plans for future actions based on its going concern assessment;

(b) gather sufficient appropriate audit evidence to confirm or dispel whether or not a material uncertainty exists through carrying out procedures considered necessary, including considering the effect of any plans of management and other mitigating factors; and

(c) seek written representations from management regarding its plans for future action.

267. Events or conditions which may cast significant doubt on the entity's ability to continue as a going concern may be identified during the planning of the engagement or in the course of performing audit procedures. The process of considering events or conditions continues as the audit progresses. When the auditor believes such events or conditions may cast significant doubt on the entity's ability to continue as a going concern, certain procedures may take on added significance. The auditor inquires of management as to its plans for future action, including its plans to liquidate assets, borrow money or restructure debt, reduce or delay expenditures, or increase capital. The auditor also considers whether any additional facts or information are available since the date on which management made its assessment. The auditor obtains sufficient appropriate audit evidence that management's plans are feasible and that the outcome of these plans will improve the situation.

278. Procedures that are relevant in this regard may include:

· Analyzing and discussing cash flow, profit and other relevant forecasts with management.
· Analyzing and discussing the entity's latest available interim financial statements.
· Reviewing the terms of debentures and loan agreements and determining whether any have been breached.
· Reading minutes of the meetings of shareholders, the board of directors and important committees for reference to financing difficulties.
· Inquiring of the entity's lawyer regarding the existence of litigation and claims and the reasonableness of management's assessments of their outcome and the estimate of their financial implications.
· Confirming the existence, legality and enforceability of arrangements to provide or maintain financial support with related and third parties and assessing the financial ability of such parties to provide additional funds.
· Considering the entity's plans to deal with unfilled customer orders.
· Reviewing events after period end to identify those that either mitigate or otherwise affect the entity's ability to continue as a going concern.

289. When analysis of cash flow is a significant factor in considering the future outcome of events or conditions the auditor considers:

· the reliability of the entity's system for generating such information, and

· whether there is adequate support for the assumptions underlying the forecast.

In addition the auditor compares:

(a) the prospective financial information for recent prior periods with historical results, and

(b) the prospective financial information for the current period with results achieved to date.

Audit Conclusions and Reporting

2930. Based on the audit evidence obtained, the auditor should determine if, in the auditor's judgment, a material uncertainty exists related to events or conditions that alone or in aggregate, may cast significant doubt on the entity's ability to continue as a going concern.

301. A material uncertainty exists when the magnitude of its potential impact is such that, in the auditor's judgment, clear disclosure of the nature and implications of the uncertainty is necessary for the presentation of the financial statements not to be misleading.

Audit Conclusions and Reporting

Going Concern Assumption Appropriate but a Material Uncertainty Exists

312. If the use of the going concern assumption is appropriate but a material uncertainty exists, the auditor considers whether the financial statements:

(a) adequately describe the principal events or conditions that give rise to the significant doubt on the entity's ability to continue in operation and management's plans to deal with these events or conditions.
(b) state clearly that there is a material uncertainty related to events or conditions which may cast significant doubt on the entity's ability to continue as a going concern and, therefore, that it may be unable to realize its assets and discharge its liabilities in the normal course of business.

323. If adequate disclosure is made in the financial statements, the auditor should express an unqualified opinion but modify the auditor's report by adding an emphasis of matter paragraph that highlights the existence of a material uncertainty relating to the event or condition that may cast significant doubt on the entity's ability to continue as a going concern and draws attention to the note in the financial statements that discloses the matters set out in paragraph 312. In assessing the adequacy of the financial statement disclosure, the auditor considers whether the information explicitly draws the reader's attention to the possibility that the entity may be unable to continue realiszing its assets and discharging its liabilities in the normal course of business. The following is an example of such a paragraph when the auditor is satisfied as to the adequacy of the note disclosure:

"Without qualifying our opinion, we draw attention to Note X in the financial statements which indicates that the Company incurred a net loss of ZZZ during the year ended December 31, 20X1 and, as of that date, the Company's current liabilities exceeded its total assets by ZZZ. These conditions, along with other matters as set forth in Note X, indicate the existence of a material uncertainty which may cast significant doubt about the Company's ability to continue as a going concern."

In extreme cases, such as situations involving multiple material uncertainties that are significant to the financial statements, the auditor may consider it appropriate to express a disclaimer of opinion instead of adding an emphasis of matter paragraph.

334. If adequate disclosure is not made in the financial statements, the auditor should express a qualified or adverse opinion, as appropriate (see ICSA 700, 'The Auditor's Report on Financial Statements', paragraphs 45-46). The report should include specific reference to the fact that there is a material uncertainty that may cast significant doubt about the entity's ability to continue as a going concern. The following is an example of the relevant paragraphs when a qualified opinion is to be expressed:

"The Company's financing arrangements expire and amounts outstanding are payable on March 19, 20X1. The Company has been unable to re-negotiate or obtain replacement financing. This situation indicates the existence of a material uncertainty which may cast significant doubt on the Company's ability to continue as a going concern and therefore it may be unable to realisze its assets and discharge its liabilities in the normal course of business. The financial statements (and notes thereto) do not disclose this fact.


In our opinion, except for the omission of the information included in the preceding paragraph, the financial statements give a true and fair view of (present fairly, in all material respects,) the financial position of the Company at December 31, 20X0 and the results of its operations and its cash flows for the year then ended in accordance with Cambodian Accounting Standards. "

The following is an example of the relevant paragraphs when an adverse opinion is to be expressed:

"The Company's financing arrangements expired and the amount outstanding was payable on December 31, 20X0. The Company has been unable to re-negotiate or obtain replacement financing and is considering filing for bankruptcy. These events indicate a material uncertainty which may cast significant doubt on the Company's ability to continue as a going concern and therefore it may be unable to realisze its assets and discharge its liabilities in the normal course of business. The financial statements (and notes thereto) do not disclose this fact.

In our opinion, because of the omission of the information mentioned in the preceding paragraph, the financial statements do not give a true and fair view of (or do not present fairly) the financial position of the Company as at December 31, 20X0, and of its results of operations and its cash flows for the year then ended in accordance with Cambodian Accounting Standards.....(and do not comply with )"

Audit Conclusions and Reporting Going Concern Assumption Inappropriate

345. If, in the auditor's judgment, the entity will not be able to continue as a going concern, the auditor should express an adverse opinion if the financial statements have been prepared on a going concern basis. If, on the basis of the additional procedures carried out and the information obtained, including the effect of management's plans, the auditor's judgment is that the entity will not be able to continue as a going concern, the auditor concludes, regardless of whether or not disclosure has been made, that the going concern assumption used in the preparation of the financial statements is inappropriate and expresses an adverse opinion.

356. When the entity's management has concluded that the going concern assumption used in the preparation of the financial statements is not appropriate, the financial statements need to be prepared on an alternative authoritative basis. If on the basis of the additional procedures carried out and the information obtained the auditor determines the alternative basis is appropriate, the auditor can issue an unqualified opinion if there is adequate disclosure but may require an emphasis of matter in the auditor's report to draw the user's attention to that basis.

Audit Conclusions and Reporting Management Unwilling to Make or Extend its Assessment

367. If management is unwilling to make or extend its assessment when requested to do so by the auditor, the auditor should consider the need to modify the auditor's report as a result of the limitation on the scope of the auditor's work. In certain circumstances, such as those described in paragraphs 145, 178 and 234, the auditor may believe that it is necessary to ask management to make or extend its assessment. If management is unwilling to do so, it is not the auditor's responsibility to rectify the lack of analysis by management, and a modified report may be appropriate because it may not be possible for the auditor to obtain sufficient appropriate evidence regarding the use of the going concern assumption in the preparation of the financial statements.

378. In some circumstances, the lack of analysis by management may not preclude the auditor from being satisfied about the entity's ability to continue as a going concern. For example, the auditor's other procedures may be sufficient to assess the appropriateness of management's use of the going concern assumption in the preparation of the financial statements because the entity has a history of profitable operations and a ready access to financial resources. In other circumstances, however, the auditor may not be able to confirm or dispel, in the absence of management's assessment, whether or not events or conditions exist which indicate there may be a significant doubt on the entity's ability to continue as a going concern, or the existence of plans management has put in place to address them or other mitigating factors. In these circumstances, the auditor modifies the auditor's report as discussed in ICSA 700 "The Auditor's Report on Financial Statements" paragraphs 36 - 44.

Significant Delay in the Signature or Approval of Financial Statements

389. When there is significant delay in the signature or approval of the financial statements by management after the balance sheet date, the auditor considers the reasons for the delay. When the delay could be related to events or conditions relating to the going concern assessment, the auditor considers the need to perform additional audit procedures, as described in paragraph 256, as well as the effect on the auditor's conclusion regarding the existence of a material uncertainty, as described in paragraph 2930.

Effective Date

40. This ISA is effective for audits of financial statements for periods ending on or after December 31, 2000.


Public Sector Perspective

1. The appropriateness of the use of the going concern assumption in the preparation of the financial statements is generally not in question when auditing either a central government or those public sector entities having funding arrangements backed by a central government. However, where such arrangements do not exist, or where central government funding of the entity may be withdrawn and the existence of the entity may be at risk, this ICSA will provide useful guidance. As governmentsIf government entities are corporatizsed andor privatiszed government entities, going concern issues will become increasinglymore relevant to the public sector.

Introduction

1. The purpose of this InternationalCambodian Standard on Auditing (ICSA) is to establish standards and provide guidance on the auditor’s responsibility regarding subsequent events. In this ICSA, the term 'subsequent events' is used to refer to both events occurring between period end and the date of the auditor’s report, and facts discovered after the date of the auditor’s report.
2. The auditor should consider the effect of subsequent events on the financial statements and on the auditor’s report.
3. The CambodianInternational Accounting Standard on10, Contingencies and Events Occurring After the Balance Sheet Date, deals with the treatment in financial statements of events, both favourable and unfavourable, occurring after period end and identifies two types of events:
(a) those that provide further evidence of conditions that existed at period end; and
(b) those that are indicative of conditions that arose subsequent to period end.
Events Occurring up to the Date of the Auditor’s Report

4. The auditor should perform procedures designed to obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence that all events up to the date of the auditor’s report that may require adjustment of, or disclosure in, the financial statements have been identified. These procedures are in addition to routine procedures which may be applied to specific transactions occurring after period end to obtain audit evidence as to account balances as at period end, for example, the testing of inventory cut-off and payments to creditors. The auditor is not, however, expected to conduct a continuing review of all matters to which previously applied procedures have provided satisfactory conclusions.
5. The procedures to identify events that may require adjustment of, or disclosure in, the financial statements would be performed as near as practicable to the date of the auditor’s report and ordinarily include the following:
· Reviewing procedures management has established to ensure that subsequent events are identified.
· Reading minutes of the meetings of shareholders, the board of directors and audit and executive committees held after period end and inquiring about matters discussed at meetings for which minutes are not yet available.
· Reading the entity’s latest available interim financial statements or management accounts and, as considered necessary and appropriate, budgets, cash flow forecasts and other related management reports.
· Inquiring, or extending previous oral or written inquiries, of the entity’s lawyers concerning litigation and claims.
· Inquiring of management as to whether any subsequent events have occurred which might affect the financial statements. Examples of inquiries of management on specific matters are:
– The current status of items that were accounted for on the basis of preliminary or inconclusive data.
– Whether new commitments, borrowings or guarantees have been entered into.
– Whether sales of assets have occurred or are planned.
– Whether the issue of new shares or debentures or an agreement to merge or liquidate has been made or is planned.
– Whether any assets have been appropriated by government or destroyed, for example, by fire or flood.
– Whether there have been any developments regarding risk areas and contingencies.
– Whether any unusual accounting adjustments have been made or are contemplated.
– Whether any events have occurred or are likely to occur which will bring into question the appropriateness of accounting policies used in the financial statements as would be the case, for example, if such events call into question the validity of the going concern assumption.
6. When a component, such as a division, branch or subsidiary, is audited by another auditor, the auditor would consider the other auditor’s procedures regarding events after period end and the need to inform the other auditor of the planned date of the auditor’s report.
7. When the auditor becomes aware of events which materially affect the financial statements, the auditor should consider whether such events are properly accounted for and adequately disclosed in the financial statements.
Facts Discovered After the Date of the Auditor’s Report but Before the Financial Statements are Issued

8. The auditor does not have any responsibility to perform procedures or make any inquiry regarding the financial statements after the date of the auditor’s report. During the period from the date of the auditor’s report to the date the financial statements are issued, the responsibility to inform the auditor of facts which may affect the financial statements rests with management.
9. When, after the date of the auditor’s report but before the financial statements are issued, the auditor becomes aware of a fact which may materially affect the financial statements, the auditor should consider whether the financial statements need amendment, should discuss the matter with management, and should take the action appropriate in the circumstances.
10. When management amends the financial statements, the auditor would carry out the procedures necessary in the circumstances and would provide management with a new report on the amended financial statements. The new auditor’s report would be dated not earlier than the date the amended financial statements are signed or approved and, accordingly, the procedures referred to in paragraphs 4 and 5 would be extended to the date of the new auditor’s report.
11. When management does not amend the financial statements in circumstances where the auditor believes they need to be amended and the auditor’s report has not been released to the entity, the auditor should express a qualified opinion or an adverse opinion.
12. When the auditor’s report has been released to the entity, the auditor would notify those persons ultimately responsible for the overall direction of the entity not to issue financial statements and the auditor’s report thereon to third parties. If the financial statements are subsequently released, the auditor needs to take action to prevent reliance on the auditor’s report. The action taken will depend on the auditor’s legal rights and obligations and the recommendations of the auditor’s lawyer.
Facts Discovered After the Financial Statements Have Been Issued

13. After the financial statements have been issued, the auditor has no obligation to make any inquiry regarding such financial statements.
14. When, after the financial statements have been issued, the auditor becomes aware of a fact which existed at the date of the auditor’s report and which, if known at that date, may have caused the auditor to modify the auditor’s report, the auditor should consider whether the financial statements need revision, should discuss the matter with management, and should take the action appropriate in the circumstances.
15. When management revises the financial statements, the auditor would carry out the audit procedures necessary in the circumstances, would review the steps taken by management to ensure that anyone in receipt of the previously issued financial statements together with the auditor’s report thereon is informed of the situation, and would issue a new report on the revised financial statements.
16. The new auditor’s report should include an emphasis of a matter paragraph referring to a note to the financial statements that more extensively discusses the reason for the revision of the previously issued financial statements and to the earlier report issued by the auditor. The new auditor’s report would be dated not earlier than the date the revised financial statements are approved and, accordingly, the procedures referred to in paragraphs 4 and 5 would ordinarily be extended to the date of the new auditor’s report. Local regulations of some countries permit the auditor to restrict the audit procedures regarding the revised financial statements to the effects of the subsequent event that necessitated the revision. In such cases, the new auditor’s report would contain a statement to that effect.
17. When management does not take the necessary steps to ensure that anyone in receipt of the previously issued financial statements together with the auditor’s report thereon is informed of the situation and does not revise the financial statements in circumstances where the auditor believes they need to be revised, the auditor would notify those persons ultimately responsible for the overall direction of the entity that action will be taken by the auditor to prevent future reliance on the auditor’s report. The action taken will depend on the auditor’s legal rights and obligations and the recommendations of the auditor’s lawyers.
18. It may not be necessary to revise the financial statements and issue a new auditor’s report when issue of the financial statements for the following period is imminent, provided appropriate disclosures are to be made in such statements.
Offering of Securities to the Public

19. In cases involving the offering of securities to the public, the auditor should consider any legal and related requirements applicable to the auditor in all jurisdictions in which the securities are being offered. For example, the auditor may be required to carry out additional audit procedures to the date of the final offering document. These procedures would ordinarily include carrying out the procedures referred to in paragraphs 4 and 5 up to a date at or near the effective date of the final offering document and reading the offering document to assess whether the other information in the offering document is consistent with the financial information with which the auditor is associated.

Introduction

1. The purpose of this InternationalCambodian Standard on Auditing (ICSA) is to establish standards and provide guidance on the quantity and quality of audit evidence to be obtained when auditing financial statements, and the procedures for obtaining that audit evidence.
2. The auditor should obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence to be able to draw reasonable conclusions on which to base the audit opinion.
3. Audit evidence is obtained from an appropriate mix of tests of control and substantive procedures. In some circumstances, evidence may be obtained entirely from substantive procedures.
4. 'Audit evidence' means the information obtained by the auditor in arriving at the conclusions on which the audit opinion is based. Audit evidence will comprise source documents and accounting records underlying the financial statements and corroborating information from other sources.
5. 'Tests of control' means tests performed to obtain audit evidence about the suitability of design and effective operation of the accounting and internal control systems.
6. 'Substantive procedures' means tests performed to obtain audit evidence to detect material misstatements in the financial statements, and are of two types:
(a) tests of details of transactions and balances; and
(b) analytical procedures.
Sufficient Appropriate Audit Evidence

7. Sufficiency and appropriateness are interrelated and apply to audit evidence obtained from both tests of control and substantive procedures. Sufficiency is the measure of the quantity of audit evidence; appropriateness is the measure of the quality of audit evidence and its relevance to a particular assertion and its reliability. Ordinarily, the auditor finds it necessary to rely on audit evidence that is persuasive rather than conclusive and will often seek audit evidence from different sources or of a different nature to support the same assertion.
8. In forming the audit opinion, the auditor does not ordinarily examine all of the information available because conclusions can be reached about an account balance, class of transactions or control by way of using judgmental or statistical sampling procedures.
9. The auditor’s judgment as to what is sufficient appropriate audit evidence is influenced by such factors as the:
· Auditor’s assessment of the nature and level of inherent risk at both the financial statement level and the account balance or class of transactions level.
· Nature of the accounting and internal control systems and the assessment of control risk.
· Materiality of the item being examined.
· Experience gained during previous audits.
· Results of audit procedures, including fraud or error which may have been found.
· Source and reliability of information available.
10. When obtaining audit evidence from tests of control, the auditor should consider the sufficiency and appropriateness of the audit evidence to support the assessed level of control risk.
11. The aspects of the accounting and internal control systems about which the auditor would obtain audit evidence are:
(a) design: the accounting and internal control systems are suitably designed to prevent and/or detect and correct material misstatements; and
(b) operation: the systems exist and have operated effectively throughout the relevant period.
12. When obtaining audit evidence from substantive procedures, the auditor should consider the sufficiency and appropriateness of audit evidence from such procedures together with any evidence from tests of control to support financial statement assertions.
13. Financial statement assertions are assertions by management, explicit or otherwise, that are embodied in the financial statements. They can be categorized as follows:
(a) existence: an asset or a liability exists at a given date;
(b) rights and obligations: an asset or a liability pertains to the entity at a given date;
(c) occurrence: a transaction or event took place which pertains to the entity during the period;
(d) completeness: there are no unrecorded assets, liabilities, transactions or events, or undisclosed items;
(e) valuation: an asset or liability is recorded at an appropriate carrying value;
(f) measurement: a transaction or event is recorded at the proper amount and revenue or expense is allocated to the proper period; and
(g) presentation and disclosure: an item is disclosed, classified, and described in accordance with the applicable financial reporting framework and Standards.
14. Ordinarily, audit evidence is obtained regarding each financial statement assertion. Audit evidence regarding one assertion, for example, existence of inventory, will not compensate for failure to obtain audit evidence regarding another, for example, valuation. The nature, timing and extent of substantive procedures will vary depending on the assertions. Tests can provide audit evidence about more than one assertion, for example, collection of receivables may provide audit evidence regarding both existence and valuation.
15. The reliability of audit evidence is influenced by its source: internal or external, and by its nature: visual, documentary or oral. While the reliability of audit evidence is dependent on individual circumstance, the following generalizsations will help in assessing the reliability of audit evidence:
· Audit evidence from external sources (for example, confirmation received from a third party) is more reliable than that generated internally.
· Audit evidence generated internally is more reliable when the related accounting and internal control systems are effective.
· Audit evidence obtained directly by the auditor is more reliable than that obtained from the entity.
· Audit evidence in the form of documents and written representations is more reliable than oral representations.
16. Audit evidence is more persuasive when items of evidence from different sources or of a different nature are consistent. In these circumstances, the auditor may obtain a cumulative degree of confidence higher than would be obtained from items of audit evidence when considered individually. Conversely, when audit evidence obtained from one source is inconsistent with that obtained from another, the auditor determines what additional procedures are necessary to resolve the inconsistency.
17. The auditor needs to consider the relationship between the cost of obtaining audit evidence and the usefulness of the information obtained. However, the matter of difficulty and expense involved is not in itself a valid basis for omitting a necessary procedure.
18. When in substantial doubt as to a material financial statement assertion, the auditor would attempt to obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence to remove such doubt. If unable to obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence, however, the auditor should express a qualified opinion or a disclaimer of opinion.
Procedures for Obtaining Audit Evidence

19. The auditor obtains audit evidence by one or more of the following procedures: inspection, observation, inquiry and confirmation, computation and analytical procedures. The timing of such procedures will be dependent, in part, upon the periods of time during which the audit evidence sought is available.
Inspection
20. 20. Inspection consists of examining records, documents, or tangible assets. Inspection of records and documents provides audit evidence of varying degrees of reliability depending on their nature and source and the effectiveness of internal controls over their processing. Three major categories of documentary audit evidence, which provide different degrees of reliability to the auditor, are:

(a) documentary audit evidence created and held by third parties;
(b) documentary audit evidence created by third parties and held by the entity; and
(c) documentary audit evidence created and held by the entity.
Inspection of tangible assets provides reliable audit evidence with respect to their existence but not necessarily as to their ownership or value.
Observation
21. Observation consists of looking at a process or procedure being performed by others, for example, the observation by the auditor of the counting of inventories by the entity’s personnel or the performance of control procedures that leave no audit trail.
Inquiry and Confirmation
22. Inquiry consists of seeking information of knowledgeable persons inside or outside the entity. Inquiries may range from formal written inquiries addressed to third parties to informal oral inquiries addressed to persons inside the entity. Responses to inquiries may provide the auditor with information not previously possessed or with corroborative audit evidence.
23. Confirmation consists of the response to an inquiry to corroborate information contained in the accounting records. For example, the auditor ordinarily seeks direct confirmation of receivables by communication with debtors.
Computation
24. Computation consists of checking the arithmetical accuracy of source documents and accounting records or of performing independent calculations.
Analytical Procedures
25. Analytical procedures consist of the analysis of significant ratios and trends including the resulting investigation of fluctuations and relationships that are inconsistent with other relevant information or deviate from predicted amounts.
Public Sector Perspective

1. When carrying out audits of public sector entities, the auditor will need to take into account the legislative framework and any other relevant regulations, ordinances or ministerial directives which affect the audit mandate and any special auditing requirements. Such requirements might affect, for example, the extent of the auditor’s discretion in establishing materiality and judgments on the nature and scope of audit procedures to be applied. Paragraph 9 of this ICSA has to be applied only after giving consideration to such restrictions on the auditor’s judgment.

Introduction

1. The purpose of this InternationalCambodian Standard on Auditing (ICSA) is to establish standards and provide guidance on the concept of materiality and its relationship with audit risk.
2. The auditor should consider materiality and its relationship with audit risk when conducting an audit.
3. 'Materiality' is defined in the International Accounting Standards Committee’s 'Framework for the Preparation and Presentation of Financial Statements' in the following terms:
'Information is material if its omission or misstatement could influence the economic decisions of users taken on the basis of the financial statements. Materiality depends on the size of the item or error judged in the particular circumstances of its omission or misstatement. Thus, materiality provides a threshold or cut - off point rather than being a primary qualitative characteristic which information must have if it is to be useful.'
Materiality

4. The objective of an audit of financial statements is to enable the auditor to express an opinion whether the financial statements are prepared, in all material respects, in accordance with Cambodian Accounting Standardsan identified financial reporting framework. The assessment of what is material is a matter of professional judgment.
5. In designing the audit plan, the auditor establishes an acceptable materiality level so as to detect quantitatively material misstatements. However, both the amount (quantity) and nature (quality) of misstatements need to be considered. Examples of qualitative misstatements would be the inadequate or improper description of an accounting policy when it is likely that a user of the financial statements would be misled by the description, and failure to disclose the breach of regulatory requirements when it is likely that the consequent imposition of regulatory restrictions will significantly impair operating capability.
6. The auditor needs to consider the possibility of misstatements of relatively small amounts that, cumulatively, could have a material effect on the financial statements. For example, an error in a month end procedure could be an indication of a potential material misstatement if that error is repeated each month.
7. The auditor considers materiality at both the overall financial statement level and in relation to individual account balances, classes of transactions and disclosures. Materiality may be influenced by considerations such as legal and regulatory requirements and considerations relating to individual financial statement account balances and relationships. This process may result in different materiality levels depending on the aspect of the financial statements being considered.
8. Materiality should be considered by the auditor when:
(a) determining the nature, timing and extent of audit procedures; and
(b) evaluating the effect of misstatements.
The Relationship between Materiality and Audit Risk

9. When planning the audit, the auditor considers what would make the financial statements materially misstated. The auditor’s assessment of materiality, related to specific account balances and classes of transactions, helps the auditor decide such questions as what items to examine and whether to use sampling and analytical procedures. This enables the auditor to select audit procedures that, in combination, can be expected to reduce audit risk to an acceptably low level.
10. There is an inverse relationship between materiality and the level of audit risk, that is, the higher the materiality level, the lower the audit risk and vice versa. The auditor takes the inverse relationship between materiality and audit risk into account when determining the nature, timing and extent of audit procedures. For example, if, after planning for specific audit procedures, the auditor determines that the acceptable materiality level is lower, audit risk is increased. The auditor would compensate for this by either:
(a) reducing the assessed level of control risk, where this is possible, and supporting the reduced level by carrying out extended or additional tests of control; or
(b) reducing detection risk by modifying the nature, timing and extent of planned substantive procedures.
Materiality and Audit Risk in Evaluating Audit Evidence
11. The auditor’s assessment of materiality and audit risk may be different at the time of initially planning the engagement from at the time of evaluating the results of audit procedures. This could be because of a change in circumstances or because of a change in the auditor’s knowledge as a result of the audit. For example, if the audit is planned prior to period end, the auditor will anticipate the results of operations and the financial position. If actual results of operations and financial position are substantially different, the assessment of materiality and audit risk may also change. Additionally, the auditor may, in planning the audit work, intentionally set the acceptable materiality level at a lower level than is intended to be used to evaluate the results of the audit. This may be done to reduce the likelihood of undiscovered misstatements and to provide the auditor with a margin of safety when evaluating the effect of misstatements discovered during the audit.
Evaluating the Effect of Misstatements

12. In evaluating the fair presentation of the financial statements the auditor should assess whether the aggregate of uncorrected misstatements that have been identified during the audit is material.
13. The aggregate of uncorrected misstatements comprises:
(a) specific misstatements identified by the auditor including the net effect of uncorrected misstatements identified during the audit of previous periods; and
(b) the auditor’s best estimate of other misstatements which cannot be specifically identified (i.e., projected errors).
14. The auditor needs to consider whether the aggregate of uncorrected misstatements is material. If the auditor concludes that the misstatements may be material, the auditor needs to consider reducing audit risk by extending audit procedures or requesting management to adjust the financial statements. In any event, management may want to adjust the financial statements for the misstatements identified.
15. If management refuses to adjust the financial statements and the results of extended audit procedures do not enable the auditor to conclude that the aggregate of uncorrected misstatements is not material, the auditor should consider the appropriate modification to the auditor’s report in accordance with ICSA 700 'The Auditor’s Report on Financial Statements.'
16. If the aggregate of the uncorrected misstatements that the auditor has identified approaches the materiality level, the auditor would consider whether it is likely that undetected misstatements, when taken with aggregate uncorrected misstatements could exceed materiality level. Thus, as aggregate uncorrected misstatements approach the materiality level the auditor would consider reducing the risk by performing additional audit procedures or by requesting management to adjust the financial statements for identified misstatements.
Public Sector Perspective

1. In assessing materiality, the public sector auditor must, in addition to exercising professional judgment, consider any legislation or regulation which may impact that assessment. In the public sector, materiality is also based on the 'context and nature' of an item and includes, for example, sensitivity as well as value. Sensitivity covers a variety of matters such as compliance with authorities, legislative concern or public interest.

Introduction

1. The purpose of this InternationalCambodian Standard on Auditing (ICSA) is to establish standards and provide guidance on planning an audit of financial statements. This ICSA is framed in the context of recurring audits. In a first audit, the auditor may need to extend the planning process beyond the matters discussed herein.
2. The auditor should plan the audit work so that the audit will be performed in an effective manner.
3. 'Planning' means developing a general strategy and a detailed approach for the expected nature, timing and extent of the audit. The auditor plans to perform the audit in an efficient and timely manner.
Planning the Work

4. Adequate planning of the audit work helps to ensure that appropriate attention is devoted to important areas of the audit, that potential problems are identified and that the work is completed expeditiously. Planning also assists in proper assignment of work to assistants and in coordination of work done by other auditors and experts.
5. The extent of planning will vary according to the size of the entity, the complexity of the audit and the auditor’s experience with the entity and knowledge of the business.
6. Obtaining knowledge of the business is an important part of planning the work. The auditor’s knowledge of the business assists in the identification of events, transactions and practices which may have a material effect on the financial statements.
7. The auditor may wish to discuss elements of the overall audit plan and certain audit procedures with the entity’s audit committee, management and staff to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the audit and to coordinate audit procedures with work of the entity’s personnel. The overall audit plan and the audit program, however, remain the auditor’s responsibility.
The Overall Audit Plan

8. The auditor should develop and document an overall audit plan describing the expected scope and conduct of the audit. While the record of the overall audit plan will need to be sufficiently detailed to guide the development of the audit program, its precise form and content will vary depending on the size of the entity, the complexity of the audit and the specific methodology and technology used by the auditor.
9. Matters to be considered by the auditor in developing the overall audit plan include:
Knowledge of the Business
General economic factors and industry conditions affecting the entity’s business.
Important characteristics of the entity, its business, its financial performance and its reporting requirements including changes since the date of the prior audit.
The general level of competence of management.
Understanding the Accounting and Internal Control Systems
The accounting policies adopted by the entity and changes in those policies.
The effect of new accounting or auditing pronouncements.
The auditor’s cumulative knowledge of the accounting and internal control systems and the relative emphasis expected to be placed on tests of control and substantive procedures.
Risk and Materiality
The expected assessments of inherent and control risks and the identification of significant audit areas.
The setting of materiality levels for audit purposes.
The possibility of material misstatement, including the experience of past periods, or fraud.
The identification of complex accounting areas including those involving accounting estimates.
Nature, Timing and Extent of Procedures
Possible change of emphasis on specific audit areas.
The effect of information technology on the audit.
The work of internal auditing and its expected effect on external audit procedures.
Coordination, Direction, Supervision and Review
The involvement of other auditors in the audit of components, for example, subsidiaries, branches and divisions.
The involvement of experts.
The number of locations.
Staffing requirements.
Other Matters
The possibility that the going concern assumption may be subject to question.
Conditions requiring special attention, such as the existence of related parties.
The terms of the engagement and any statutory responsibilities.
The nature and timing of reports or other communication with the entity that are expected under the engagement.

Changes to the Overall Audit Plan and Audit Program

102. The overall audit plan and the audit program should be revised as necessary during the course of the audit. Planning is continuous throughout the engagement because of changes in conditions or unexpected results of audit procedures. The reasons for significant changes would be recorded.
The Audit Program

110. The auditor should develop and document an audit program setting out the nature, timing and extent of planned audit procedures required to implement the overall audit plan. The audit program serves as a set of instructions to assistants involved in the audit and as a means to control and record the proper execution of the work. The audit program may also contain the audit objectives for each area and a time budget in which hours are budgeted for the various audit areas or procedures.
121. In preparing the audit program, the auditor would consider the specific assessments of inherent and control risks and the required level of assurance to be provided by substantive procedures. The auditor would also consider the timing of tests of controls and substantive procedures, the coordination of any assistance expected from the entity, the availability of assistants and the involvement of other auditors or experts. The other matters noted in paragraph 9 may also need to be considered in more detail during the development of the audit program.

Introduction

1. The purpose of this InternationalCambodian Standard on Auditing (ICSA) is to establish standards and provide guidance on:

(a) agreeing the terms of the engagement with the client; and
(b) the auditor’s response to a request by a client to change the terms of an engagement to one that provides a lower level of assurance.

2. The auditor and the client should agree on the terms of the engagement. The agreed terms would need to be recorded in an audit engagement letter or other suitable form of contract.

3. This ICSA is intended to assist the auditor in the preparation of engagement letters relating to audits of financial statements. The guidance is also applicable to related services. When other services such as tax, accounting, or management advisory services are to be provided, separate engagement letters are usuallymay be appropriate.

4. In some countries,Even though the objective and scope of an audit and the auditor’s obligations are generally are established by law and Cambodian Standards on Auditing,. Even in those situations the auditor and client willmay still find audit engagement letters to be useful to clearly state the terms of the audit engagementinformative for their clients.

Audit Engagement Letters

5. It is in the interest of both client and auditor that the auditor sends an engagement letter, preferably before the commencement of the engagement, to help in avoiding misunderstandings with respect to the engagement. The engagement letter documents and confirms the auditor’s acceptance of the appointment, the objective and scope of the audit, the extent of the auditor’s responsibilities to the client and the form of any reports.

Principal Contents

6. The form and content of audit engagement letters may vary for each client, but they would generally include reference to:

· The objective of the audit of financial statements.
· Management’s responsibility for the financial statements.
· The scope of the audit, including reference to applicable legislation, regulations, or pronouncements of professional bodies to which the auditor adheres.
· The form of any reports or other communication of results of the engagement.
· The fact that because of the test nature and other inherent limitations of an audit, together with the inherent limitations of any accounting and internal control system, there is an unavoidable risk that even some material misstatement may remain undiscovered.
· Uthe requirement for unrestricted access to whatever records, documentation and other information requested in connection with the audit.

7. The auditor may also wish to include in the letter:

· Arrangements regarding the planning of the audit.
· Expectation of receiving from management written confirmation concerning representations made in connection with the audit.
· Request for the client to confirm the terms of the engagement by acknowledging receipt of the engagement letter.
· Description of any other letters or reports the auditor expects to issue to the client.
· Basis on which fees are computed and any billing arrangements.

8. When relevant, the following points could also be made:

· Arrangements concerning the involvement of other auditors and experts in some aspects of the audit.
· Arrangements concerning the involvement of internal auditors and other client staff.
· Arrangements to be made with the predecessor auditor, if any, in the case of an initial audit.
· Any restriction of the auditor’s liability when such possibility exists.
· A reference to any further agreements between the auditor and the client.

An example of an audit engagement letter is set out in the Appendix.

Audits of Components

9. When the auditor of a parent entity is also the auditor of its subsidiary, branch or division (component), the factors that influence the decision whether to send a separate engagement letter to the component include:

· Who appoints the auditor of the component.
· Whether a separate audit report is to be issued on the component.
· Legal requirements.
· The extent of any work performed by other auditors.
· Degree of ownership by parent.
· Degree of independence of the component’s management.

Recurring Audits

10. On recurring audits, the auditor should consider whether circumstances require the terms of the engagement to be revised and whether there is a need to remind the client of the existing terms of the engagement.

11. The auditor may decide not to send a new engagement letter each period. However, the following factors may make it appropriate to send a new letter:

· Any indication that the client misunderstands the objective and scope of the audit.
· Any revised or special terms of the engagement.
· A recent change of senior management, board of directors or ownership.
· A significant change in nature or size of the client’s business.
· Legal requirements.

Acceptance of a Change in Engagement

12. An auditor who, before the completion of the engagement, is requested to change the engagement to one which provides a lower level of assurance, should consider the appropriateness of doing so.

13. A request from the client for the auditor to change the engagement may result from a change in circumstances affecting the need for the service, a misunderstanding as to the nature of an audit or related service originally requested or a restriction on the scope of the engagement, whether imposed by management or caused by circumstances. The auditor would consider carefully the reason given for the request, particularly the implications of a restriction on the scope of the engagement.

14. A change in circumstances that affects the entity’s requirements or a misunderstanding concerning the nature of service originally requested would ordinarily be considered a reasonable basis for requesting a change in the engagement. In contrast a change would not be considered reasonable if it appeared that the change relates to information that is incorrect, incomplete or otherwise unsatisfactory.

15. Before agreeing to change an audit engagement to a related service, an auditor who was engaged to perform an audit in accordance with ICSAs would consider, in addition to the above matters, any legal or contractual implications of the change.

16. If the auditor concludes, that there is reasonable justification to change the engagement and if the audit work performed complies with the ICSAs applicable to the changed engagement, the report issued would be that appropriate for the revised terms of engagement. In order to avoid confusing the reader, the report would not include reference to:

(a) (a) the original engagement; or

(b) any procedures that may have been performed in the original engagement, except where the engagement is changed to an engagement to undertake agreed - upon procedures and thus reference to the procedures performed is a normal part of the report.

17. Where the terms of the engagement are changed, the auditor and the client should agree on the new terms.

18. The auditor should not agree to a change of engagement where there is no reasonable justification for doing so. An example might be an audit engagement where the auditor is unable to obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence regarding receivables and the client asks for the engagement to be changed to a review engagement (which gives less assurance than an audit) to avoid a qualified audit opinion or a disclaimer of opinion.

19. If the auditor is unable to agree to a change of the engagement and is not permitted to continue the original engagement, the auditor should withdraw and consider whether there is any obligation, either contractual or otherwise, to report to other parties, such as the board of directors or shareholders, the circumstances necessitating the withdrawal.

Public Sector Perspective

1. The purpose of the engagement letter is to inform the auditee of the nature of the engagement and to clarify the responsibilities of the parties involved. The legislation and regulations governing the operations of public sector audits generally mandate the appointment of a public sector auditor and the use of audit engagement letters may not be a widespread practice. Nevertheless, a letter setting out the nature of the engagement or recognizing an engagement not indicated in the legislative mandate may be useful to both parties. Public sector auditors have to give serious consideration to issuing audit engagements letters when undertaking an audit.

2. Paragraphs 12 to 19 of this ICSA deal with the action a private sector auditor may take when there are attempts to change an audit engagement to one which provides a lower level of assurance. In the public sector specific requirements may exist within the legislation governing the audit mandate; for example, the auditor may be required to report directly to a minister, the legislature or the public if management (including the department head) attempts to limit the scope of the audit.

Appendix - Example of an Audit Engagement Letter

The following letter is for use as a guide in conjunction with the considerations outlined in this ICSA and will need to be varied according to individual requirements and circumstances.

To the Board of Directors or the appropriate representative of senior management:

You have requested that we audit the balance sheet of ..................... as of ..............., and the related statements of income and cash flows for the year then ending. We are pleased to confirm our acceptance and our understanding of this engagement by means of this letter. Our audit will be made with the objective of our expressing an opinion on the financial statements.

We will conduct our audit in accordance with InternationalCambodian Standards on Auditing (or refer to relevant national standards or practices). Those Standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatements. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation.

Because of the test nature and other inherent limitations of an audit, together with the inherent limitations of any accounting and internal control system, there is an unavoidable risk that even some material misstatements may remain undiscovered.

In addition to our report on the financial statements, we expect to provide you with a separate letter concerning any material weaknesses in accounting and internal control systems which come to our notice.

We remind you that the responsibility for the preparation of financial statements including adequate disclosure is that of the management of the company. This includes the maintenance of adequate accounting records and internal controls, the selection and application of accounting policies, and the safeguarding of the assets of the company. As part of our audit process, we will request from management written confirmation concerning representations made to us in connection with the audit.

We look forward to full cooperation with your staff and we trust that they will make available to us whatever records, documentation and other information are requested in connection with our audit. Our fees, which will be billed as work progresses, are based on the time required by the individuals assigned to the engagement plus out - of - pocket expenses. Individual hourly rates vary according to the degree of responsibility involved and the experience and skill required.

This letter will be effective for future years unless it is terminated, amended or superseded.
Please sign and return the attached copy of this letter to indicate that it is in accordance with your understanding of the arrangements for our audit of the financial statements.

XYZ & Co.
Acknowledged on behalf of
ABC Company by
(signed)
......................
Name and Title
Date

Introduction

1. The purpose of this International Standard on Auditing (ISA) is to establish standards and provide guidance on the objective and general principles governing an audit of financial statements. This ISA is to be read in conjunction with ISA 120 'Framework of International Standards on Auditing.'

Objective of an Audit

2. The objective of an audit of financial statements is to enable the auditor to express an opinion whether the financial statements are prepared, in all material respects, in accordance with an identified financial reporting framework. The phrases used to express the auditor’s opinion are 'give a true and fair view' or 'present fairly, in all material respects,' which are equivalent terms.

3. Although the auditor’s opinion enhances the credibility of the financial statements, the user cannot assume that the opinion is an assurance as to the future viability of the entity nor the efficiency or effectiveness with which management has conducted the affairs of the entity.

General Principles of an Audit

4. The auditor should comply with the 'Code of Ethics for Professional Accountants' issued by the International Federation of Accountants. Ethical principles governing the auditor’s professional responsibilities are:

(a) independence;
(b) integrity;
(c) objectivity;
(d) professional competence and due care;
(e) confidentiality;
(f) professional behavior; and
(g) technical standards.

5. The auditor should conduct an audit in accordance with ISAs. These contain basic principles and essential procedures together with related guidance in the form of explanatory and other material.

6. The auditor should plan and perform the audit with an attitude of professional skepticism recognizing that circumstances may exist which cause the financial statements to be materially misstated. For example, the auditor would ordinarily expect to find evidence to support management representations and not assume they are necessarily correct.

Scope of an Audit

7. The term 'scope of an audit' refers to the audit procedures deemed necessary in the circumstances to achieve the objective of the audit. The procedures required to conduct an audit in accordance with ISAs should be determined by the auditor having regard to the requirements of ISAs, relevant professional bodies, legislation, regulations and, where appropriate, the terms of the audit engagement and reporting requirements.

Reasonable Assurance

8. An audit in accordance with ISAs is designed to provide reasonable assurance that the financial statements taken as a whole are free from material misstatement. Reasonable assurance is a concept relating to the accumulation of the audit evidence necessary for the auditor to conclude that there are no material misstatements in the financial statements taken as a whole. Reasonable assurance relates to the whole audit process.

9. However, there are inherent limitations in an audit that affect the auditor’s ability to detect material misstatements. These limitations result from factors such as:

· The use of testing.
· The inherent limitations of any accounting and internal control system (for example, the possibility of collusion).
· The fact that most audit evidence is persuasive rather than conclusive.

10. Also, the work undertaken by the auditor to form an opinion is permeated by judgment, in particular regarding:

(a) the gathering of audit evidence, for example, in deciding the nature, timing and extent of audit procedures; and
(b) the drawing of conclusions based on the audit evidence gathered, for example, assessing the reasonableness of the estimates made by management in preparing the financial statements.

11. Further, other limitations may affect the persuasiveness of evidence available to draw conclusions on particular financial statement assertions (for example, transactions between related parties). In these cases certain ISAs identify specified procedures which will, because of the nature of the particular assertions, provide sufficient appropriate audit evidence in the absence of:

(a) unusual circumstances which increase the risk of material misstatement beyond that which would ordinarily be expected; or
(b) any indication that a material misstatement has occurred.

Responsibility for the Financial Statements

12. While the auditor is responsible for forming and expressing an opinion on the financial statements, the responsibility for preparing and presenting the financial statements is that of the management of the entity. The audit of the financial statements does not relieve management of its responsibilities.

Public Sector Perspective

1. Irrespective of whether an audit is being conducted in the private or public sector, the basic principles of auditing remain the same. What may differ for audits carried out in the public sector is the audit objective and scope. These factors are often attributable to differences in the audit mandate and legal requirements or the form of reporting (for example, public sector entities may be required to prepare additional financial reports).

2. When carrying out audits of public sector entities, the auditor will need to take into account the specific requirements of any other relevant regulations, ordinances or ministerial directives which affect the audit mandate and any special auditing requirements, including the need to have regard to issues of national security. Audit mandates may be more specific than those in the private sector, and often encompass a wider range of objectives and a broader scope than is ordinarily applicable for the audit of private sector financial statements. The mandates and requirements may also effect, for example, the extent of the auditor’s discretion in establishing materiality, in reporting fraud and error, and in the form of the audit report. Differences in audit approach and style may also exist. However, these differences would not constitute a difference in the basic principles and essential procedures.

Introduction

1. The purpose of this InternationalCambodian Standard on Auditing (ICSA) is to establish standards and provide guidance regarding documentation in the context of the audit of financial statements.

2. The auditor should document matters which are important in providing evidence to support the audit opinion and evidence that the audit was carried out in accordance with ICSAs.

3. 'Documentation' means the material (working papers) prepared by and for, or obtained and retained by the auditor in connection with the performance of the audit. Working papers may be in the form of data stored on paper, film, electronic media or other media.

4. Working papers:

(a) assist in the planning and performance of the audit;
(b) assist in the supervision and review of the audit work; and
(c) record the audit evidence resulting from the audit work performed to support the auditor’s opinion.

Form and Content of Working Papers

5. The auditor should prepare working papers which are sufficiently complete and detailed to provide an overall understanding of the audit.

6. The auditor should record in the working papers information on planning the audit work, the nature, timing and extent of the audit procedures performed, the results thereof, and the conclusions drawn from the audit evidence obtained. Working papers would include the auditor’s reasoning on all significant matters which require the exercise of judgment, together with the auditor’s conclusion thereon. In areas involving difficult questions of principle or judgment, working papers will record the relevant facts that were known by the auditor at the time the conclusions were reached.

7. The extent of working papers is a matter of professional judgment since it is neither necessary nor practical to document every matter the auditor considers. In assessing the extent of working papers to be prepared and retained, it may be useful for the auditor to consider what would be necessary to provide another auditor who has no previous experience with the audit with an understanding of the work performed and the basis of the principle decisions taken but not the detailed aspects of the audit. That other auditor may only be able to obtain an understanding of detailed aspects of the audit by discussing them with the auditors who prepared the working papers.

8. The form and content of working papers are affected by matters such as the:

· Nature of the engagement.
· Form of the auditor’s report.
· Nature and complexity of the business.
· Nature and condition of the entity’s accounting and internal control systems.
· Needs in the particular circumstances for direction, supervision and review of work performed by assistants.
· Specific audit methodology and technology used in the course of the audit.

9. Working papers are designed and organizsed to meet the circumstances and the auditor’s needs for each individual audit. The use of standardizsed working papers (for example, checklists, specimen letters, standard organizsation of working papers) may improve the efficiency with which such working papers are prepared and reviewed. They facilitate the delegation of work while providing a means to control its quality.

10. To improve audit efficiency, the auditor may utilisze schedules, analyses and other documentation prepared by the entity. In such circumstances, the auditor would need to be satisfied that those materials have been properly prepared.

11. Working papers ordinarily include:

· Information concerning the legal and organizsational structure of the entity.
· Extracts or copies of important legal documents, agreements and minutes.
· Information concerning the industry, economic environment and legislative environment within which the entity operates.
· Evidence of the planning process including audit programs and any changes thereto.
· Evidence of the auditor’s understanding of the accounting and internal control systems.
· Evidence of inherent and control risk assessments and any revisions thereof.
· Evidence of the auditor’s consideration of the work of internal auditing and conclusions reached.
· Analyses of transactions and balances.
· Analyses of significant ratios and trends.
· A record of the nature, timing and extent of audit procedures performed and the results of such procedures.
· Evidence that the work performed by assistants was supervised and reviewed.
· An indication as to who performed the audit procedures and when they were performed.
· Details of procedures applied regarding components whose financial statements are audited by another auditor.
· Copies of communications with other auditors, experts and other third parties.
· Copies of letters or notes concerning audit matters communicated to or discussed with the entity, including the terms of the engagement and material weaknesses in internal control.
· Letters of representation received from the entity.
· Conclusions reached by the auditor concerning significant aspects of the audit, including how exceptions and unusual matters, if any, disclosed by the auditor’s procedures were resolved or treated.
· Copies of the financial statements and auditor’s report.

12. In the case of recurring audits, some working paper files may be classified as 'permanent' audit files which are updated with new information of continuing importance, as distinct from current audit files which contain information relating primarily to the audit of a single period.

Confidentiality, Safe Custody, Retention and Ownership of Working Papers

13. The auditor should adopt appropriate procedures for maintaining the confidentiality and safe custody of the working papers and for retaining them for a period sufficient to meet the needs of the practice and in accordance with legal and professional requirements of record retention.

14. Working papers are the property of the auditor. Although portions of or extracts from the working papers may be made available to the entity at the discretion of the auditor, they are not a substitute for the entity’s accounting records.

Introduction

1. The purpose of this InternationalCambodian Standard on Auditing (ICSA) is to establish standards and provide guidance on the auditor’s responsibility to consider fraud and error in an audit of financial statements.

2. When planning and performing audit procedures and in evaluating and reporting the results thereof, the auditor should consider the risk of material misstatements in the financial statements resulting from fraud or error.

3. The term 'fraud' refers to an intentional act by one or more individuals among management, employees, or third parties, which results in a misrepresentation of financial statements. Fraud may involve:

· Manipulation, falsification or alteration of records or documents.
· Misappropriation of assets.
· Suppression or omission of the effects of transactions from records or documents.
· Recording of transactions without substance.
· Misapplication of accounting policies.

4. The term 'error' refers to unintentional mistakes in financial statements, such as:

· Mathematical or clerical mistakes in the underlying records and accounting data.
· Oversight or misinterpretation of facts.
· Misapplication of accounting policies.

Responsibility of Management

5. The responsibility for the prevention and detection of fraud and error rests with management through the implementation and continued operation of adequate accounting and internal control systems. Such systems reduce but do not eliminate the possibility of fraud and error.

Responsibility of the Auditor

6. The auditor is not and cannot be held responsible for the prevention of fraud and error. The fact that an annual audit is carried out may, however, act as a deterrent.

Risk Assessment

7. In planning the audit, the auditor should assess the risk that fraud and error may cause the financial statements to contain material misstatements and should inquire of management as to any fraud or significant error which has been discovered.

8. In addition to weaknesses in the design of the accounting and internal control systems and noncompliance with identified internal controls, conditions or events which increase the risk of fraud and error include:

· Questions with respect to the integrity or competence of management.
· Unusual pressures within or on an entity.
· Unusual transactions.
· Problems in obtaining sufficient appropriate audit evidence.

Examples of these conditions or events are set out in the Appendix to this ICSA.

Detection

9. Based on the risk assessment, the auditor should design audit procedures to obtain reasonable assurance that misstatements arising from fraud and error that are material to the financial statements taken as a whole are detected.

10. Consequently, the auditor seeks sufficient appropriate audit evidence that fraud and error which may be material to the financial statements have not occurred or that, if they have occurred, the effect of fraud is properly reflected in the financial statements or the error is corrected. The likelihood of detecting errors ordinarily is higher than that of detecting fraud, since fraud is ordinarily accompanied by acts specifically designed to conceal its existence.

11. Due to the inherent limitations of an audit (see paragraphs 12 - 14) there is an unavoidable risk that material misstatements in the financial statements resulting from fraud and, to a lesser extent, error may not be detected. The subsequent discovery of material misstatement of the financial statements resulting from fraud or error existing during the period covered by the auditor’s report does not, in itself, indicate that the auditor has failed to adhere to the basic principles and essential procedures of an audit. Whether the auditor has adhered to these principles and procedures is determined by the adequacy of the audit procedures undertaken in the circumstances and the suitability of the auditor’s report based on the results of those audit procedures.

Inherent Limitations of an Audit

12. An audit is subject to the unavoidable risk that some material misstatements of the financial statements will not be detected, even though the audit is properly planned and performed in accordance with ICSAs.

13. The risk of not detecting a material misstatement resulting from fraud is higher than the risk of not detecting a material misstatement resulting from error, because fraud ordinarily involves acts designed to conceal it, such as collusion, forgery, deliberate failure to record transactions, or intentional misrepresentations being made to the auditor. Unless the audit reveals evidence to the contrary, the auditor is entitled to accept representations as truthful and records and documents as genuine. However, in accordance with ICSA 200 'Objective and General Principles Governing an Audit of Financial Statements,' the auditor should plan and perform the audit with an attitude of professional skcepticism, recognizsing that conditions or events may be found that indicate that fraud or error may exist.

14. While the existence of effective accounting and internal control systems reduces the probability of misstatement of financial statements resulting from fraud and error, there will always be some risk of internal controls failing to operate as designed. Furthermore, any accounting and internal control system may be ineffective against fraud involving collusion among employees or fraud committed by management. Certain levels of management may be in a position to override controls that would prevent similar frauds by other employees; for example, by directing subordinates to record transactions incorrectly or to conceal them, or by suppressing information relating to transactions.

Procedures When There is an Indication That Fraud or Error May Exist

15. When the application of audit procedures designed from the risk assessment indicates the possible existence of fraud or error, the auditor should consider the potential effect on the financial statements. If the auditor believes the indicated fraud or error could have a material effect on the financial statements, the auditor should perform appropriate modified or additional procedures.

16. The extent of such modified or additional procedures depends on the auditor’s judgment as to:

(a) the types of fraud and error indicated;
(b) the likelihood of their occurrence; and
(c) the likelihood that a particular type of fraud or error could have a material effect on the financial statements.

Unless circumstances clearly indicate otherwise, the auditor cannot assume that an instance of fraud or error is an isolated occurrence. If necessary, the auditor adjusts the nature, timing and extent of substantive procedures.

17. Performing modified or additional procedures would ordinarily enable the auditor to confirm or dispel a suspicion of fraud or error. Where suspicion of fraud or error is not dispelled by the results of modified or additional procedures, the auditor should discuss the matter with management and consider whether the matter has been properly reflected or corrected in the financial statements. The auditor should consider the possible impact on the auditor’s report.

18. The auditor should consider the implications of fraud and significant error in relation to other aspects of the audit, particularly the reliability of management representations. In this regard, the auditor reconsiders the risk assessment and the validity of management representations, in case of fraud and error not detected by internal controls or not included in management representations. The implications of particular instances of fraud or error discovered by the auditor will depend on the relationship of the perpetration and concealment, if any, of the fraud or error to specific control procedures and the level of management or employees involved.

Reporting of Fraud and Error

To Management

19. The auditor should communicate factual findings to management as soon as practicable if:

(a) the auditor suspects fraud may exist, even if the potential effect on the financial statements would be immaterial; or
(b) fraud or significant error is actually found to exist.

20. In determining an appropriate representative of the entity to whom to report occurrences of possible or actual fraud or significant error, the auditor would consider all the circumstances. With respect to fraud, the auditor would assess the likelihood of senior management involvement. In most cases involving fraud, it would be appropriate to report the matter to a level in the organizsation structure of the entity above that responsible for the persons believed to be implicated. When those persons ultimately responsible for the overall direction of the entity are doubted, the auditor would ordinarily seek legal advice to assist in the determination of procedures to follow.

To Users of the Auditor’s Report on the Financial Statements

21. If the auditor concludes that the fraud or error has a material effect on the financial statements and has not been properly reflected or corrected in the financial statements, the auditor should express a qualified or an adverse opinion.

22. If the auditor is precluded by the entity from obtaining sufficient appropriate audit evidence to evaluate whether fraud or error that may be material to the financial statements, has, or is likely to have, occurred, the auditor should express a qualified opinion or a disclaimer of opinion on the financial statements on the basis of a limitation on the scope of the audit.

23. If the auditor is unable to determine whether fraud or error has occurred because of limitations imposed by the circumstances rather than by the entity, the auditor should consider the effect on the auditor’s report.

To Regulatory and Enforcement Authorities

24. The auditor’s duty of confidentiality would ordinarily preclude reporting fraud or error to a third party. However, in certain circumstances, the duty of confidentiality is overridden by statute, law or by courts of law (for example, in some countries the auditor is required to report fraud or error by financial institutions to the supervisory authorities). The auditor may need to seek legal advice in such circumstances, giving due consideration to the auditor’s responsibility to the public interest.

Withdrawal from the Engagement

25. The auditor may conclude that withdrawal from the engagement is necessary when the entity does not take the remedial action regarding fraud that the auditor considers necessary in the circumstances, even when the fraud is not material to the financial statements. Factors that would affect the auditor’s conclusion include the implications of the involvement of the highest authority within the entity, which may affect the reliability of management representations, and the effects on the auditor of continuing association with the entity. In reaching such conclusion, the auditor would ordinarily seek legal advice.


26. As stated in the 'Code of Ethics for Professional Accountants' issued by the International Federation of Accountants,Where there is to be a change of auditor, on receipt of an inquiry from the proposed auditor, the existing auditor should advise whether there are any professional reasons why the proposed auditor should not accept the appointment. The extent to which an existing auditor can discuss the affairs of a client with a proposed auditor will depend on whether the client’s permission to do so has been obtained and/or the legal or ethical requirements that apply in each country relating to such disclosure. If there are any such reasons or other matters which need to be disclosed, the existing auditor would, taking account of the legal and ethical constraints including where appropriate permission of the client, give details of the information and discuss freely with the proposed auditor all matters relevant to the appointment. If permission from the client to discuss its affairs with the proposed auditor is denied by the client, that fact should be disclosed to the proposed auditor.

Public Sector Perspective

1. In respect of paragraph 9 of this ICSA, it has to be noted that the nature and the scope of the public sector audit may be affected by legislation, regulation, ordinances and ministerial directives relating to the detection of fraud and error. These requirements may lessen the auditor’s ability to exercise judgment. In addition to any formally mandated responsibility to detect fraud, the use of 'public monies' tends to impose a higher profile on fraud issues, and auditors may need to be responsive to public 'expectations' regarding detection of fraud. It also has to be recognized that reporting responsibilities as discussed in paragraphs 19 and 20 of this ICSA, may be subject to specific provisions of the audit mandate or related legislation or regulation.

Appendix - Examples of Conditions or Events which Increase the Risk of Fraud or Error

Questions with respect to the integrity or competence of management

· Management is dominated by one person (or a small group) and there is no effective oversight board or committee.
· There is a complex corporate structure where complexity does not seem to be warranted.
· There is a continuing failure to correct major weaknesses in internal controls where such corrections are practicable.
· There is a high turnover rate of key accounting and financial personnel.
· There is a significant and prolonged understaffing of the accounting department.
· There are frequent changes of legal counsel or auditors.

Unusual pressures within or on an entity

· The industry is declining and failures are increasing.
· There is inadequate working capital due to declining profits or too rapid expansion.
· The quality of earnings is deteriorating, for example, increased risk taking with respect to credit sales, changes in business practice or selection of accounting policy alternatives that improve income.
· The entity needs a rising profit trend, due to the demands of shareholdersto support the market price of its shares due to a contemplated public offering, a takeover or other reason.
· The entity has a significant investment in an industry or product line noted for rapid change.
· The entity is heavily dependent on one or a few products or customers.
· Financial pressure on top managers.
· Pressure is exerted on accounting personnel to complete financial statements in an unusually short time period.



Unusual transactions

· Unusual transactions, especially near the year - end, that have a significant effect on earnings.
· Complex transactions or accounting treatments.
· Transactions with related parties.
· Payments for services (for example, to lawyers, consultants or agents) that appear excessive in relation to the services provided.

Problems in obtaining sufficient appropriate audit evidence

· Inadequate records, for example, incomplete files, excessive adjustments to books and accounts, transactions not recorded in accordance with normal procedures and out of balance control accounts.
· Inadequate documentation of transactions, such as lack of proper authorizsation, supporting documents not available and alteration to documents (any of these documentation problems assume greater significance when they relate to large or unusual transactions).
· An excessive number of differences between accounting records and third party confirmations, conflicting audit evidence and unexplainable changes in operating ratios.
· Evasive or unreasonable responses by management to audit inquiries.

Some factors unique to a computer information systems environment which relate to the conditions and events in described above include:

· Inability to extract information from computer files due to lack of, or noncurrent, documentation of record contents or programs.
· Large numbers of program changes that are not documented, approved and tested.
· Inadequate overall balancing of computer transactions and data bases to the financial accounts.