[jeff]

Free Study Planner, Notes, Audio, Flashcards: https://www.another71.com/cpa-exam-study-plan/

Free CPA Exam Survival Guide: https://www.another71.com/cpa-exam-survival-guide/

Jeff Elliott, CPA (KS) | Another71 | NINJA CPA | NINJA CMA | NINJA CPE

[willpassby2014]

Not necessarily. A significant deficiency when found should be communicated to those charged with governance and auditor will perform audit procedures to provide reasonable assurance that financial statements are free from misstatements. Signifiant deciceincy need not lead to qualified opinion . You can have a unmodified opinion with SD in I/C if corrective actions are taken

BEC Passed
FAR Passed
AUD Passed
REG Passed

[ijustwant76]

@EktaSingh, Jeff does a nice job of explaining here:

https://www.another71.com/clarity-project-cpa-exam-2013/

[Anonymous]

@willpassby2014, thank you.

Another question: For nonissuers, communication to those charged w/ governance for significant deficiencies / material weaknesses should be communicated by the report release date (according to Becker A-5). For a becker sim, an answer stated:

“it is recommended to communicate sig. deficiencies to mgmt BY the report release date, although an additional 60 day window is allowed.” However, the 60 day window only applies to Control Deficiencies in the becker chart.

Can anyone clarify?

[willpassby2014]

Bristol and Associates is the auditor of group financial statements produced by Wilmington Myers Corporation. A large portion of the company’s inventory is located 2,000 miles away so the taking of that physical inventory is observed by another CPA firm. Bristol and Associates wants to make reference to the work of the other (component) firm. Can reference be made to the work done by the component auditor in this case?

A Yes, because the work was performed by a CPA firm.

B No, because an audit was not performed.

C Yes, because making reference to another CPA firm is always allowed.

D No, because the auditor of group financial statements must observe the physical inventory.

BEC Passed
FAR Passed
AUD Passed
REG Passed

[willpassby2014]

cpa student

Material weakness and significant deficiencies are part of Control deficiencies. so 60 day period apply to both

BEC Passed
FAR Passed
AUD Passed
REG Passed

[Future Ninja]

@Jeff this is nice. i'm lovin' it. your audio and notes helped me big time. got 79ish on my first try. but may the rapper change outfit too? I like red jacket though. just a suggestion. ^_^

AUD - 79 (expired) retaking July 28,2016
FAR - 76 expiring July 31, 2016
BEC - 85
REG - 74,74,74,74,59,70,

[Anonymous]

What is the difference between a review under SSARS and a review under SAS for nonissuers?

[superstani]

Hey everyone i have a question. Would a negative conformation give more assurance or or less i have beckers and im getting two conflicting answers. Thanks

FAR-79
REG-79
BEC-81
AUD-82

[JaySt]

@superstani: Negative confirmations provide less than positive confirmations, if thats what you're asking?

CPA Excel Gold, Ninja Flashcards, Ninja Audio
AUD - 70, 79!
FAR - 64 Retake 4/30.
BEC - 71, 78!

[superstani]

@jayst: yes thanks you

FAR-79
REG-79
BEC-81
AUD-82

[superstani]

This was the question:

Under which of the following circusmstance would the use of the blank form of confirmations of accounts receivalbe most likely be perferable to positive confirmations?

Correct answer A. the reciepients are likely to sign the confrimations without devoting proper attention to them

Wrong answr C. The combined assessed level of Inherent risk and control risk is low

FAR-79
REG-79
BEC-81
AUD-82

[Fk]

@cpastudent22

For Public Co- Review can be only for Interim Financial statement and have to follow PCAOB Standard

For Non Public Co. Have to Follow GAAS . Review interim is an extension of Annual Audit.

1) Latest Annual Financial Statement must be audited.

2) CPA has audited the Annual Financial Statement and have been retain to audit current year audit or has been engaged to do the current period audit.

One more important point is that in SSARS the auditor will not consider Internal control where as in Review of Interim the auditor will consider internal control because the interim review is done as per the PCAOB AND SAS Standard.

[Martin]

who is using Roger?

Through God all things can happen!

“You never fail until you stop trying.”
― Albert Einstein
When I was young, I used to admire intelligent people;as I grow older, I admire kind people.
“Just keep swimming, just keep swimming.”

FAR= 72-84
Audit= 73-82
BEC= 74-75
Reg=77

[J.kms]

@Superstani

Negative confirmations provide less assurance than positive confirmations. When negative confirmations are not received back the balance is assumed to be fairly stated. If a customer does not return a negative confirmation because they don't have time/don't care but the balance is actually misstated, this will not be detected by the auditors confirmation process.

Positive confirmations require the customer to respond saying yes/no the balance is correct. For positive confirmations they can either list out the account balance/invoices related to the customer OR they can leave them blank. In a perfect scenario, Blank Positive Confirmations provide the MOST assurance. However, because the amount of work the customer must do in researching and finding the correct balance, using these types of confirmations increases the chance customers will not respond.

My interpretation of that question (it's from Becker right?) was that because of the chance the customers will just sign off on the positive confirmations without giving them any consideration, that will not provide the level of assurance desired from positive confirmations since the point is that you want the customers to actually investigate and agree with the balance. So you upgrade to the blank confirmations, forcing them to actually investigate what the balance is supposed to be.

I originally got this question wrong too.

AUD: 99 (11/26/2014)
BEC: 1/5/2015
REG: 2/27/2015
FAR: 5/18/2015

Using Becker Review, but will add Ninja MCQ for FAR&REG.

[J.kms]

I'm noticing the difference in financial statement assertions according to PCAOB (“CEOAPROVED”) and what I'm assuming are GAAS (“COVERU”).

For the most part they are the same with the exceptions that PCAOB does not include cutoff, accuracy, understandability, or classification but adds in presentation and disclosure.

Can somebody elaborate on this and how this will be tested? Thank you.

AUD: 99 (11/26/2014)
BEC: 1/5/2015
REG: 2/27/2015
FAR: 5/18/2015

Using Becker Review, but will add Ninja MCQ for FAR&REG.

[Author]

Replies