Presumptively Mandatory????UGHH

  • Creator
    Topic
  • #162391
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    Hey guys,

    I need some help here. Becker keeps using presumptively mandatory (“should”) for review and compilations for engagement letter. So is it safe to assume when asked if engagement letter is required on MCQ for either the answer would be “NO”? For some reason this is so confusing to me.

    Thanks a million!

Viewing 4 replies - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
  • Author
    Replies
  • #304746
    hopefulcpa28
    Member

    Answer is YES. Engagement letter is ALWAYS required.

    Representation letter is required for Audit, Review, etc. BUT NOT FOR COMPILATION.

    #304747
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    Thanks, hopefulcpa28. GL with your studies and test!

    #304748
    KasiaS
    Participant

    If you get a question like that, it won't be a straight forward “No”. It'll say the engagement is required UNLESS the accountant can properly justify the departure. That's the basic meaning of “presumprively mandatory”.

    FAR 88 (07/15/11)
    BEC 83 (08/31/11)
    AUD 81 (10/15/11)
    REG 83 (11/26/11)

    Used NIU Correspondence CPA Review

    #304749
    mla1169
    Participant

    I understood that a written agreement is mandatory but it does not specifically need to be an Engagement letter, although an engagement letter is the most typically used form of written agreement.

    FAR- 77
    AUD -49, 71, 84
    REG -56,75!
    BEC -75

    Massachusetts CPA (non reporting) since 3/12.

Viewing 4 replies - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
  • The topic ‘Presumptively Mandatory????UGHH’ is closed to new replies.