Aud4033 Isa - 220

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 17

ISA 220

Issued March 2009;


updated January 2020

International Standard on Auditing™

Quality Control for an Audit of


Financial Statements
INTERNATIONAL STANDARD ON AUDITING 220
QUALITY CONTROL FOR AN AUDIT OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
The Malaysian Institute of Accountants has approved this standard in January 2020 for
publication. This standard should be read in conjunction with the Preface to the Malaysian
Quality Control, Auditing, Review, Other Assurance and Related Services Pronouncements;
and the Malaysian Approved Preface to the International Quality Control, Auditing, Review,
Other Assurance, and Related Services Pronouncements; Glossary of Terms; and
International Framework for Assurance Engagements.
The status of International Standards on Auditing is set out in the Preface to the Malaysian
Quality Control, Auditing, Review, Other Assurance and Related Services Pronouncements.

Applicability
International Standards on Auditing are to be applied in the audit of historical financial
information.

Notes and Exceptions


The Institute wishes to highlight that where reference is made in the Standard to the Code of
Ethics for Professional Accountants issued by the International Ethics Standards Board for
Accountants, it should be deemed as reference to the By-Laws (on Professional Ethics,
Conduct and Practice) of the Malaysian Institute of Accountants.

Changes of substance from March 2009


1. Conforming amendments have been made to this Standard as a result of:
(a) ISA 610 (Revised 2013), Using the Work of Internal Auditors and those
amendments are effective for audits of financial statements for periods ending on
or after December 15, 2014. The conforming amendments are set out in ISA 610
(Revised 2013) issued in July 2013.
(b) The new and revised Auditor Reporting Standards and those amendments are
effective for audits of financial statements for periods ending on or after 15
December 2016. The conforming amendments are set out in Conforming
Amendments issued in April 2015. The new and revised Auditor Reporting
Standards comprise:
• ISA 700 (Revised), Forming an Opinion and Reporting on Financial
Statements
• ISA 701, Communicating Key Audit Matters in the Independent Auditor’s
Report
• ISA 705 (Revised), Modifications to the Opinion in the Independent Auditor’s
Report
• ISA 706 (Revised), Emphasis of Matter Paragraphs and Other Matter
Paragraphs in the Independent Auditor’s Report
• ISA 570 (Revised), Going Concern
• ISA 260 (Revised), Communication with Those Charged with Governance
(c) ISA 250 (Revised), Consideration of Laws and Regulations in an Audit of Financial
Statements and those amendments are effective for audits of financial statements
for periods beginning on or after 15 December 2017. The conforming amendments
are set out in ISA 250 (Revised) issued in November 2016.
2. Changes made as appropriate, for cross-referencing and other changes as necessary.

1
Effective Date in Malaysia

This ISA is effective for audits of financial statements for periods


beginning on or after 1 January 2010.

Copyright © December 2018 by the International Federation of Accountants (IFAC). All rights
reserved. Used with permission of IFAC. Contact Permissions@ifac.org for permission to
reproduce, store or transmit, or to make other similar uses of this document.

2
INTERNATIONAL STANDARD ON AUDITING 220
QUALITY CONTROL FOR AN AUDIT OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Effective for audits of financial statements for periods
beginning on or after 1 January 2010)

CONTENTS
Paragraph
Introduction
Scope of this ISA ..................................................................................................................... 1
System of Quality Control and Role of Engagement Teams .................................................. 2−4
Effective Date .......................................................................................................................... 5
Objective ................................................................................................................................ 6
Definitions .............................................................................................................................. 7
Requirements
Leadership Responsibilities for Quality on Audits ................................................................... 8
Relevant Ethical Requirements ............................................................................................... 9−11
Acceptance and Continuance of Client Relationships and Audit
Engagements .................................................................................................................... 12−13
Assignment of Engagement Teams ........................................................................................ 14
Engagement Performance ...................................................................................................... 15−22
Monitoring ................................................................................................................................ 23
Documentation ........................................................................................................................ 24−25
Application and Other Explanatory Material
System of Quality Control and Role of Engagement Teams .................................................. A1−A2
Leadership Responsibilities for Quality on Audits ................................................................... A3
Relevant Ethical Requirements ............................................................................................... A4−A7
Acceptance and Continuance of Client Relationships and Audit
Engagements .................................................................................................................... A8−A10
Assignment of Engagement Teams ........................................................................................ A11−A13
Engagement Performance ...................................................................................................... A14−A33
Monitoring ................................................................................................................................ A34−A36
Documentation ........................................................................................................................ A37

International Standard on Auditing (ISA) 220, Quality Control for an Audit of Financial Statements,
should be read in conjunction with ISA 200, Overall Objectives of the Independent Auditor and the
Conduct of an Audit in Accordance with International Standards on Auditing.

3
QUALITY CONTROL FOR AN AUDIT OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

Introduction
Scope of this ISA
1. This International Standard on Auditing (ISA) deals with the specific responsibilities of the
auditor regarding quality control procedures for an audit of financial statements. It also
addresses, where applicable, the responsibilities of the engagement quality control reviewer.
This ISA is to be read in conjunction with relevant ethical requirements.

System of Quality Control and Role of Engagement Teams


2. Quality control systems, policies and procedures are the responsibility of the audit firm. Under
ISQC 1, the firm has an obligation to establish and maintain a system of quality control to provide
it with reasonable assurance that:
(a) The firm and its personnel comply with professional standards and applicable legal and
regulatory requirements; and
(b) Reports issued by the firm or engagement partners are appropriate in the
circumstances.1
This ISA is premised on the basis that the firm is subject to ISQC 1 or to national requirements
that are at least as demanding. (Ref: Para. A1)
3. Within the context of the firm’s system of quality control, engagement teams have a
responsibility to implement quality control procedures that are applicable to the audit
engagement and provide the firm with relevant information to enable the functioning of that part
of the firm’s system of quality control relating to independence.
4. Engagement teams are entitled to rely on the firm’s system of quality control, unless information
provided by the firm or other parties suggests otherwise. (Ref: Para. A2)

Effective Date
5. This ISA is effective for audits of financial statements for periods beginning on or after 1 January
2010.

Objective
6. The objective of the auditor is to implement quality control procedures at the engagement level
that provide the auditor with reasonable assurance that:
(a) The audit complies with professional standards and applicable legal and regulatory
requirements; and
(b) The auditor’s report issued is appropriate in the circumstances.

Definitions
7. For purposes of the ISAs, the following terms have the meanings attributed below:
(a) Engagement partner2 – The partner or other person in the firm who is responsible for the
audit engagement and its performance, and for the auditor’s report that is issued on
behalf of the firm, and who, where required, has the appropriate authority from a
professional, legal or regulatory body.
(b) Engagement quality control review – A process designed to provide an objective
evaluation, on or before the date of the auditor’s report, of the significant judgments the
engagement team made and the conclusions it reached in formulating the auditor’s
report. The engagement quality control review process is for audits of financial
statements of listed entities and those other audit engagements, if any, for which the firm
has determined an engagement quality control review is required.

1
ISQC 1, Quality Control for Firms that Perform Audits and Reviews of Financial Statements, and Other Assurance and
Related Services Engagements, paragraph 11
2
“Engagement partner,” “partner,” and “firm” should be read as referring to their public sector equivalents where relevant.

4
QUALITY CONTROL FOR AN AUDIT OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(c) Engagement quality control reviewer – A partner, other person in the firm, suitably
qualified external person, or a team made up of such individuals, none of whom is part
of the engagement team, with sufficient and appropriate experience and authority to
objectively evaluate the significant judgments the engagement team made and the
conclusions it reached in formulating the auditor’s report.
(d) Engagement team – All partners and staff performing the engagement, and any individuals
engaged by the firm or a network firm who perform audit procedures on the engagement.
This excludes an auditor’s external expert engaged by the firm or a network firm.3 The term
“engagement team” also excludes individuals within the client’s internal audit function who
provide direct assistance on an audit engagement when the external auditor complies with
the requirements of ISA 610 (Revised 2013).4

(e) Firm – A sole practitioner, partnership or corporation or other entity of professional


accountants.

(f) Inspection – In relation to completed audit engagements, procedures designed to


provide evidence of compliance by engagement teams with the firm’s quality control
policies and procedures.

(g) Listed entity – An entity whose shares, stock or debt are quoted or listed on a recognized
stock exchange, or are marketed under the regulations of a recognized stock exchange
or other equivalent body.
(h) Monitoring – A process comprising an ongoing consideration and evaluation of the firm’s
system of quality control, including a periodic inspection of a selection of completed
engagements, designed to provide the firm with reasonable assurance that its system of
quality control is operating effectively.
(i) Network firm – A firm or entity that belongs to a network.
(j) Network – A larger structure:
(i) That is aimed at cooperation, and
(ii) That is clearly aimed at profit or cost-sharing or shares common ownership, control
or management, common quality control policies and procedures, common
business strategy, the use of a common brand name, or a significant part of
professional resources.
(k) Partner – Any individual with authority to bind the firm with respect to the performance of
a professional services engagement.
(l) Personnel – Partners and staff.
(m) Professional standards – International Standards on Auditing (ISAs) and relevant ethical
requirements.
(n) Relevant ethical requirements – Ethical requirements to which the engagement team and
engagement quality control reviewer are subject, which ordinarily comprise Parts A and
B of the International Ethics Standards Board for Accountants’ Code of Ethics for
Professional Accountants (IESBA Code) related to an audit of financial statements
together with national requirements that are more restrictive.
(o) Staff – Professionals, other than partners, including any experts the firm employs.
(p) Suitably qualified external person – An individual outside the firm with the competence and
capabilities to act as an engagement partner, for example, a partner of another firm, or an
employee (with appropriate experience) of either a professional accountancy body whose
members may perform audits of historical financial information or of an organization that

3
ISA 620, Using the Work of an Auditor’s Expert, paragraph 6(a), defines the term “auditor’s expert.”
4
ISA 610 (Revised 2013), Using the Work of Internal Auditors, establishes limits on the use of direct assistance. It also
acknowledges that the external auditor may be prohibited by law or regulation from obtaining direct assistance from internal
auditors. Therefore, the use of direct assistance is restricted to situations where it is permitted.

5
QUALITY CONTROL FOR AN AUDIT OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

provides relevant quality control services.

Requirements
Leadership Responsibilities for Quality on Audits
8. The engagement partner shall take responsibility for the overall quality on each audit
engagement to which that partner is assigned. (Ref: Para. A3)

Relevant Ethical Requirements


9. Throughout the audit engagement, the engagement partner shall remain alert, through
observation and making inquiries as necessary, for evidence of non-compliance with relevant
ethical requirements by members of the engagement team. (Ref: Para. A4–A5)
10. If matters come to the engagement partner’s attention through the firm’s system of quality
control or otherwise that indicate that members of the engagement team have not complied
with relevant ethical requirements, the engagement partner, in consultation with others in the
firm, shall determine the appropriate action. (Ref: Para. A5)

Independence
11. The engagement partner shall form a conclusion on compliance with independence
requirements that apply to the audit engagement. In doing so, the engagement partner shall:
(Ref: Para. A5)
(a) Obtain relevant information from the firm and, where applicable, network firms, to identify and
evaluate circumstances and relationships that create threats to independence;
(b) Evaluate information on identified breaches, if any, of the firm’s independence policies and
procedures to determine whether they create a threat to independence for the audit
engagement; and
(c) Take appropriate action to eliminate such threats or reduce them to an acceptable level by
applying safeguards, or, if considered appropriate, to withdraw from the audit engagement,
where withdrawal is possible under applicable law or regulation. The engagement partner
shall promptly report to the firm any inability to resolve the matter for appropriate action. (Ref:
Para. A6–A7)

Acceptance and Continuance of Client Relationships and Audit Engagements


12. The engagement partner shall be satisfied that appropriate procedures regarding the
acceptance and continuance of client relationships and audit engagements have been
followed, and shall determine that conclusions reached in this regard are appropriate. (Ref:
Para. A8–A10)
13. If the engagement partner obtains information that would have caused the firm to decline the
audit engagement had that information been available earlier, the engagement partner shall
communicate that information promptly to the firm, so that the firm and the engagement partner
can take the necessary action. (Ref: Para. A10)

Assignment of Engagement Teams


14. The engagement partner shall be satisfied that the engagement team, and any auditor’s
experts who are not part of the engagement team, collectively have the appropriate
competence and capabilities to:
(a) Perform the audit engagement in accordance with professional standards and applicable
legal and regulatory requirements; and
(b) Enable an auditor’s report that is appropriate in the circumstances to be issued. (Ref:
Para. A11–A13)

6
QUALITY CONTROL FOR AN AUDIT OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

Engagement Performance
Direction, Supervision and Performance
15. The engagement partner shall take responsibility for:
(a) The direction, supervision and performance of the audit engagement in compliance with
professional standards and applicable legal and regulatory requirements; and (Ref: Para.
A14–A16, A21)
(b) The auditor’s report being appropriate in the circumstances.

Reviews
16. The engagement partner shall take responsibility for reviews being performed in accordance
with the firm’s review policies and procedures. (Ref: Para. A17–A18, A21)
17. On or before the date of the auditor’s report, the engagement partner shall, through a review
of the audit documentation and discussion with the engagement team, be satisfied that
sufficient appropriate audit evidence has been obtained to support the conclusions reached
and for the auditor’s report to be issued. (Ref: Para. A19–A21)

Consultation
18. The engagement partner shall:
(a) Take responsibility for the engagement team undertaking appropriate consultation on
difficult or contentious matters;
(b) Be satisfied that members of the engagement team have undertaken appropriate
consultation during the course of the engagement, both within the engagement team and
between the engagement team and others at the appropriate level within or outside the
firm;
(c) Be satisfied that the nature and scope of, and conclusions resulting from, such
consultations are agreed with the party consulted; and
(d) Determine that conclusions resulting from such consultations have been implemented.
(Ref: Para. A22–A23)

Engagement Quality Control Review


19. For audits of financial statements of listed entities, and those other audit engagements, if any,
for which the firm has determined that an engagement quality control review is required, the
engagement partner shall:
(a) Determine that an engagement quality control reviewer has been appointed;
(b) Discuss significant matters arising during the audit engagement, including those
identified during the engagement quality control review, with the engagement quality
control reviewer; and
(c) Not date the auditor’s report until the completion of the engagement quality control
review. (Ref: Para. A24–A26)
20. The engagement quality control reviewer shall perform an objective evaluation of the significant
judgments made by the engagement team, and the conclusions reached in formulating the
auditor’s report. This evaluation shall involve:
(a) Discussion of significant matters with the engagement partner;
(b) Review of the financial statements and the proposed auditor’s report;
(c) Review of selected audit documentation relating to the significant judgments the
engagement team made and the conclusions it reached; and

7
QUALITY CONTROL FOR AN AUDIT OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(d) Evaluation of the conclusions reached in formulating the auditor’s report and
consideration of whether the proposed auditor’s report is appropriate. (Ref: Para. A27–
A29, A31–A33)
21. For audits of financial statements of listed entities, the engagement quality control reviewer, on
performing an engagement quality control review, shall also consider the following:
(a) The engagement team’s evaluation of the firm’s independence in relation to the audit
engagement;
(b) Whether appropriate consultation has taken place on matters involving differences of
opinion or other difficult or contentious matters, and the conclusions arising from those
consultations; and
(c) Whether audit documentation selected for review reflects the work performed in relation
to the significant judgments and supports the conclusions reached. (Ref: Para. A30–A33)

Differences of Opinion
22. If differences of opinion arise within the engagement team, with those consulted or, where
applicable, between the engagement partner and the engagement quality control reviewer, the
engagement team shall follow the firm’s policies and procedures for dealing with and resolving
differences of opinion.

Monitoring
23. An effective system of quality control includes a monitoring process designed to provide the firm
with reasonable assurance that its policies and procedures relating to the system of quality control
are relevant, adequate, and operating effectively. The engagement partner shall consider the results
of the firm’s monitoring process as evidenced in the latest information circulated by the firm and, if
applicable, other network firms and whether deficiencies noted in that information may affect the
audit engagement. (Ref: Para A34–A36)

Documentation
24. The auditor shall include in the audit documentation: 5
(a) Issues identified with respect to compliance with relevant ethical requirements and how
they were resolved.
(b) Conclusions on compliance with independence requirements that apply to the audit
engagement, and any relevant discussions with the firm that support these conclusions.
(c) Conclusions reached regarding the acceptance and continuance of client relationships
and audit engagements.
(d) The nature and scope of, and conclusions resulting from, consultations undertaken during
the course of the audit engagement. (Ref: Para. A37)
25. The engagement quality control reviewer shall document, for the audit engagement reviewed,
that:
(a) The procedures required by the firm’s policies on engagement quality control review have
been performed;
(b) The engagement quality control review has been completed on or before the date of the
auditor’s report; and
(c) The reviewer is not aware of any unresolved matters that would cause the reviewer to believe
that the significant judgments the engagement team made and the conclusions it reached
were not appropriate.

***

5
ISA 230, Audit Documentation, paragraphs 8-11, and A6

8
QUALITY CONTROL FOR AN AUDIT OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

Application and Other Explanatory Material


System of Quality Control and Role of Engagement Teams (Ref: Para. 2)
A1. ISQC 1, or national requirements that are at least as demanding, deals with the firm’s
responsibilities to establish and maintain its system of quality control for audit engagements.
The system of quality control includes policies and procedures that address each of the
following elements:
• Leadership responsibilities for quality within the firm;
• Relevant ethical requirements;
• Acceptance and continuance of client relationships and specific engagements;
• Human resources;
• Engagement performance; and
• Monitoring.
National requirements that deal with the firm’s responsibilities to establish and maintain a system of
quality control are at least as demanding as ISQC 1 when they address all the elements referred to
in this paragraph and impose obligations on the firm that achieve the aims of the requirements set
out in ISQC 1.

Reliance on the Firm’s System of Quality Control (Ref: Para. 4)


A2. Unless information provided by the firm or other parties suggest otherwise, the engagement
team may rely on the firm’s system of quality control in relation to, for example:
• Competence of personnel through their recruitment and formal training.
• Independence through the accumulation and communication of relevant independence
information.
• Maintenance of client relationships through acceptance and continuance systems.
• Adherence to applicable legal and regulatory requirements through the monitoring
process.

Leadership Responsibilities for Quality on Audits (Ref: Para. 8)


A3. The actions of the engagement partner and appropriate messages to the other members of the
engagement team, in taking responsibility for the overall quality on each audit engagement,
emphasize:
(a) The importance to audit quality of:
(i) Performing work that complies with professional standards and applicable legal
and regulatory requirements;
(ii) Complying with the firm’s quality control policies and procedures as applicable;
(iii) Issuing auditor’s reports that are appropriate in the circumstances; and
(iv) The engagement team’s ability to raise concerns without fear of reprisals; and
(b) The fact that quality is essential in performing audit engagements.

Relevant Ethical Requirements


Compliance with Relevant Ethical Requirements (Ref: Para. 9)
A4. The IESBA Code establishes the fundamental principles of professional ethics, which include:
(a) Integrity;
(b) Objectivity;
(c) Professional competence and due care;

9
QUALITY CONTROL FOR AN AUDIT OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(d) Confidentiality; and


(e) Professional behavior.

Definition of “Firm,” “Network” and “Network Firm” (Ref: Para. 9–11)


A5. The definitions of “firm,” “network” or “network firm” in relevant ethical requirements may differ from
those set out in this ISA. For example, the IESBA Code defines the “firm” as:
(a) A sole practitioner, partnership or corporation of professional accountants;
(b) An entity that controls such parties through ownership, management or other means; and
(c) An entity controlled by such parties through ownership, management or other means.
The IESBA Code also provides guidance in relation to the terms “network” and “network firm.”
In complying with the requirements in paragraphs 9–11, the definitions used in the relevant
ethical requirements apply in so far as is necessary to interpret those ethical requirements.

Threats to Independence (Ref: Para. 11(c))


A6. The engagement partner may identify a threat to independence regarding the audit
engagement that safeguards may not be able to eliminate or reduce to an acceptable level. In
that case, as required by paragraph 11(c), the engagement partner reports to the relevant
person(s) within the firm to determine appropriate action, which may include eliminating the
activity or interest that creates the threat, or withdrawing from the audit engagement, where
withdrawal is possible under applicable law or regulation.

Considerations Specific to Public Sector Entities


A7. Statutory measures may provide safeguards for the independence of public sector auditors.
However, public sector auditors or audit firms carrying out public sector audits on behalf of the
statutory auditor may, depending on the terms of the mandate in a particular jurisdiction, need
to adapt their approach in order to promote compliance with the spirit of paragraph 11. This
may include, where the public sector auditor’s mandate does not permit withdrawal from the
engagement, disclosure through a public report, of circumstances that have arisen that would,
if they were in the private sector, lead the auditor to withdraw.

Acceptance and Continuance of Client Relationships and Audit Engagements (Ref: Para. 12)
A8. ISQC 1 requires the firm to obtain information considered necessary in the circumstances
before accepting an engagement with a new client, when deciding whether to continue an
existing engagement, and when considering acceptance of a new engagement with an existing
client.6 Information such as the following assists the engagement partner in determining
whether the conclusions reached regarding the acceptance and continuance of client
relationships and audit engagements are appropriate:
• The integrity of the principal owners, key management and those charged with governance
of the entity;
• Whether the engagement team is competent to perform the audit engagement and has the
necessary capabilities, including time and resources;
• Whether the firm and the engagement team can comply with relevant ethical requirements;
and
• Significant matters that have arisen during the current or previous audit engagement, and
their implications for continuing the relationship.
A9. Law, regulation, or relevant ethical requirements 7 may require the auditor to request, prior to
accepting the engagement, the predecessor auditor to provide known information regarding
any facts or circumstances that, in the predecessor auditor’s judgment, the auditor needs to be

6
ISQC 1, paragraph 27(a)
7
See, for example, Section 210.14 of the IESBA Code.

10
QUALITY CONTROL FOR AN AUDIT OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

aware of before deciding whether to accept the engagement. In some circumstances, the
predecessor auditor may be required, on request by the proposed successor auditor, to provide
information regarding identified or suspected non-compliance with laws and regulations to the
proposed successor auditor. For example, where the predecessor auditor has withdrawn from
the engagement as a result of identified or suspected non-compliance with laws and
regulations, the IESBA Code requires that the predecessor auditor, on request by a proposed
successor auditor, provides all such facts and other information concerning such non-
compliance that, in the predecessor auditor’s opinion, the proposed successor auditor needs
to be aware of before deciding whether to accept the audit appointment. 8

Considerations Specific to Public Sector Entities (Ref: Para. 12–13)


A10. In the public sector, auditors may be appointed in accordance with statutory procedures.
Accordingly, certain of the requirements and considerations regarding the acceptance and
continuance of client relationships and audit engagements as set out in paragraphs 12, 13, A8
and A9 may not be relevant. Nonetheless, information gathered as a result of the process
described may be valuable to public sector auditors in performing risk assessments and in
carrying out reporting responsibilities.

Assignment of Engagement Teams (Ref: Para. 14)


A11. An engagement team includes a person using expertise in a specialized area of accounting or
auditing, whether engaged or employed by the firm, if any, who performs audit procedures on
the engagement. However, a person with such expertise is not a member of the engagement
team if that person’s involvement with the engagement is only consultation. Consultations are
addressed in paragraphs 18, A22 and A23.
A12. When considering the appropriate competence and capabilities expected of the engagement
team as a whole, the engagement partner may take into consideration such matters as the
team’s:
• Understanding of, and practical experience with, audit engagements of a similar nature
and complexity through appropriate training and participation.
• Understanding of professional standards and applicable legal and regulatory
requirements.
• Technical expertise, including expertise with relevant information technology and
specialized areas of accounting or auditing.
• Knowledge of relevant industries in which the client operates.
• Ability to apply professional judgment.
• Understanding of the firm’s quality control policies and procedures.

Considerations Specific to Public Sector Entities


A13. In the public sector, additional appropriate competence may include skills that are necessary
to discharge the terms of the audit mandate in a particular jurisdiction. Such competence may
include an understanding of the applicable reporting arrangements, including reporting to the
legislature or other governing body or in the public interest. The wider scope of a public sector
audit may include, for example, some aspects of performance auditing or a comprehensive
assessment of compliance with law, regulation or other authority and preventing and detecting
fraud and corruption.

Engagement Performance
Direction, Supervision and Performance (Ref: Para. 15(a))
A14. Direction of the engagement team involves informing the members of the engagement team of
matters such as:

8
See, for example, Section 225.31 of the IESBA Code.

11
QUALITY CONTROL FOR AN AUDIT OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

• Their responsibilities, including the need to comply with relevant ethical requirements,
and to plan and perform an audit with professional skepticism as required by ISA 200. 9
• Responsibilities of respective partners where more than one partner is involved in the
conduct of an audit engagement.
• The objectives of the work to be performed.
• The nature of the entity’s business.
• Risk-related issues.
• Problems that may arise.
• The detailed approach to the performance of the engagement.
Discussion among members of the engagement team allows less experienced team members to
raise questions with more experienced team members so that appropriate communication can
occur within the engagement team.
A15. Appropriate teamwork and training assist less experienced members of the engagement team
to clearly understand the objectives of the assigned work.
A16. Supervision includes matters such as:
• Tracking the progress of the audit engagement.
• Considering the competence and capabilities of individual members of the engagement
team, including whether they have sufficient time to carry out their work, whether they
understand their instructions and whether the work is being carried out in accordance
with the planned approach to the audit engagement.
• Addressing significant matters arising during the audit engagement, considering their
significance and modifying the planned approach appropriately.
• Identifying matters for consultation or consideration by more experienced engagement
team members during the audit engagement.

Reviews
Review Responsibilities (Ref: Para. 16)
A17. Under ISQC 1, the firm’s review responsibility policies and procedures are determined on the
basis that work of less experienced team members is reviewed by more experienced team
members.10
A18. A review consists of consideration whether, for example:
• The work has been performed in accordance with professional standards and applicable legal
and regulatory requirements;
• Significant matters have been raised for further consideration;
• Appropriate consultations have taken place and the resulting conclusions have been
documented and implemented;
• There is a need to revise the nature, timing and extent of work performed;
• The work performed supports the conclusions reached and is appropriately documented;
• The evidence obtained is sufficient and appropriate to support the auditor’s report; and
• The objectives of the engagement procedures have been achieved.

9
ISA 200, Overall Objectives of the Independent Auditor and the Conduct of an Audit in Accordance with International
Standards on Auditing, paragraph 15
10
ISQC 1, paragraph 33

12
QUALITY CONTROL FOR AN AUDIT OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

The Engagement Partner’s Review of Work Performed (Ref: Para. 17)


A19. Timely reviews of the following by the engagement partner at appropriate stages during the
engagement allow significant matters to be resolved on a timely basis to the engagement
partner’s satisfaction on or before the date of the auditor’s report:
• Critical areas of judgment, especially those relating to difficult or contentious matters
identified during the course of the engagement;
• Significant risks; and
• Other areas the engagement partner considers important.
The engagement partner need not review all audit documentation, but may do so. However, as
required by ISA 230, the partner documents the extent and timing of the reviews. 11
A20. An engagement partner taking over an audit during the engagement may apply the review
procedures as described in paragraph A19 to review the work performed to the date of a change in
order to assume the responsibilities of an engagement partner.

Considerations Relevant Where a Member of the Engagement Team with Expertise in a Specialized
Area of Accounting or Auditing Is Used (Ref: Para. 15–17)
A21. Where a member of the engagement team with expertise in a specialized area of accounting
or auditing is used, direction, supervision and review of that engagement team member’s work
may include matters such as:
• Agreeing with that member the nature, scope and objectives of that member’s work; and the
respective roles of, and the nature, timing and extent of communication between that member
and other members of the engagement team.
• Evaluating the adequacy of that member’s work including the relevance and reasonableness
of that member’s findings or conclusions and their consistency with other audit evidence.

Consultation (Ref: Para. 18)


A22. Effective consultation on significant technical, ethical and other matters within the firm or, where
applicable, outside the firm can be achieved when those consulted:
• Are given all the relevant facts that will enable them to provide informed advice; and
• Have appropriate knowledge, seniority and experience.
A23. It may be appropriate for the engagement team to consult outside the firm, for example, where the
firm lacks appropriate internal resources. They may take advantage of advisory services provided
by other firms, professional and regulatory bodies, or commercial organizations that provide
relevant quality control services.

Engagement Quality Control Review


Completion of the Engagement Quality Control Review before Dating of the Auditor’s Report (Ref:
Para. 19(c))
A24. ISA 700 (Revised) requires the auditor’s report to be dated no earlier than the date on which the
auditor has obtained sufficient appropriate evidence on which to base the auditor’s opinion on the
financial statements.12 In cases of an audit of financial statements of listed entities or when an
engagement meets the criteria for an engagement quality control review, such a review assists
the auditor in determining whether sufficient appropriate evidence has been obtained.
A25. Conducting the engagement quality control review in a timely manner at appropriate stages
during the engagement allows significant matters to be promptly resolved to the engagement
quality control reviewer’s satisfaction on or before the date of the auditor’s report.

11
ISA 230, paragraph 9(c)
12
ISA 700 (Revised), Forming an Opinion and Reporting on Financial Statements, paragraph 49

13
QUALITY CONTROL FOR AN AUDIT OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

A26. Completion of the engagement quality control review means the completion by the engagement
quality control reviewer of the requirements in paragraphs 20–21, and where applicable,
compliance with paragraph 22. Documentation of the engagement quality control review may be
completed after the date of the auditor’s report as part of the assembly of the final audit file. ISA
230 establishes requirements and provides guidance in this regard.13

Nature, Timing and Extent of Engagement Quality Control Review (Ref: Para. 20)
A27. Remaining alert for changes in circumstances allows the engagement partner to identify situations
in which an engagement quality control review is necessary, even though at the start of the
engagement, such a review was not required.
A28. The extent of the engagement quality control review may depend, among other things, on the
complexity of the audit engagement, whether the entity is a listed entity, and the risk that the
auditor’s report might not be appropriate in the circumstances. The performance of an
engagement quality control review does not reduce the responsibilities of the engagement
partner for the audit engagement and its performance.
A29. When ISA 70114 applies, the conclusions reached by the engagement team in formulating the
auditor’s report include determining:
• The key audit matters to be included in the auditor’s report;
• The key audit matters that will not be communicated in the auditor’s report in accordance
with paragraph 14 of ISA 701, if any; and
• If applicable, depending on the facts and circumstances of the entity and the audit, that
there are no key audit matters to communicate in the auditor’s report.
In addition, the review of the proposed auditor’s report in accordance with paragraph 20(b)
includes consideration of the proposed wording to be included in the Key Audit Matters section.

Engagement Quality Control Review of Listed Entities (Ref: Para. 21)


A30. Other matters relevant to evaluating the significant judgments made by the engagement team
that may be considered in an engagement quality control review of a listed entity include:
• Significant risks identified during the engagement in accordance with ISA 315 (Revised),15
and the responses to those risks in accordance with ISA 330,16 including the engagement
team’s assessment of, and response to, the risk of fraud in accordance with ISA 240.17
• Judgments made, particularly with respect to materiality and significant risks.
• The significance and disposition of corrected and uncorrected misstatements identified
during the audit.
• The matters to be communicated to management and those charged with governance and,
where applicable, other parties such as regulatory bodies.
These other matters, depending on the circumstances, may also be applicable for engagement
quality control reviews for audits of financial statements of other entities.

Considerations Specific to Smaller Entities (Ref: Para. 20–21)


A31. In addition to the audits of financial statements of listed entities, an engagement quality control
review is required for audit engagements that meet the criteria established by the firm that subjects
engagements to an engagement quality control review. In some cases, none of the firm’s audit
engagements may meet the criteria that would subject them to such a review.

13
ISA 230, paragraphs 14-16
14
ISA 701, Communicating Key Audit Matters in the Auditor’s Report
15
ISA 315 (Revised), Identifying and Assessing the Risks of Material Misstatement through Understanding the Entity and Its
Environment
16
ISA 330, The Auditor’s Responses to Assessed Risks
17
ISA 240, The Auditor’s Responsibilities Relating to Fraud in an Audit of Financial Statements

14
QUALITY CONTROL FOR AN AUDIT OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

Considerations Specific to Public Sector Entities (Ref: Para. 20–21)


A32. In the public sector, a statutorily appointed auditor (for example, an Auditor General, or other suitably
qualified person appointed on behalf of the Auditor General), may act in a role equivalent to that of
engagement partner with overall responsibility for public sector audits. In such circumstances,
where applicable, the selection of the engagement quality control reviewer includes consideration
of the need for independence from the audited entity and the ability of the engagement quality
control reviewer to provide an objective evaluation.
A33. Listed entities as referred to in paragraphs 21 and A30 are not common in the public sector.
However, there may be other public sector entities that are significant due to size, complexity
or public interest aspects, and which consequently have a wide range of stakeholders.
Examples include state owned corporations and public utilities. Ongoing transformations within
the public sector may also give rise to new types of significant entities. There are no fixed
objective criteria on which the determination of significance is based. Nonetheless, public
sector auditors evaluate which entities may be of sufficient significance to warrant performance
of an engagement quality control review.

Monitoring (Ref: Para. 23)


A34. ISQC 1 requires the firm to establish a monitoring process designed to provide it with reasonable
assurance that the policies and procedures relating to the system of quality control are relevant,
18
adequate and operating effectively.
A35. In considering deficiencies that may affect the audit engagement, the engagement partner may
have regard to measures the firm took to rectify the situation that the engagement partner considers
are sufficient in the context of that audit.
A36. A deficiency in the firm’s system of quality control does not necessarily indicate that a particular
audit engagement was not performed in accordance with professional standards and applicable
legal and regulatory requirements, or that the auditor’s report was not appropriate.

Documentation

Documentation of Consultations (Ref: Para. 24(d))

A37. Documentation of consultations with other professionals that involve difficult or contentious
matters that is sufficiently complete and detailed contributes to an understanding of:

• The issue on which consultation was sought; and


• The results of the consultation, including any decisions taken, the basis for those
decisions and how they were implemented.

18
ISQC 1, paragraph 48

15
Dewan Akauntan, Unit 33-01, Level 33, Tower A, The Vertical, Avenue 3
Bangsar South City, No.8, Jalan Kerinchi, 59200 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
[phone] +603 2722 9000 [fax] +603 2722 9100
[web] www.mia.org.my [email] technical@mia.org.my

You might also like