Connect Access Card for Principles of Auditing & Other Assurance Services
21st Edition
ISBN: 9781260299366
Author: Ray Whittington, Kurt Pany
Publisher: McGraw-Hill Education
expand_more
expand_more
format_list_bulleted
Question
Chapter 2, Problem 10RQ
To determine
Explain the circumstances that might prevent the issue of the unmodified opinion.
Expert Solution & Answer
Want to see the full answer?
Check out a sample textbook solution
Students have asked these similar questions
During a recent discussion with the top management of GreenTree Company, a large publicly-traded entity, the external auditors, Wood's CPA firm has been apprised that the management of GreenTree may have knowingly allowed misstatements in the firm's most recent financial statements to be published. GreenTree's management are inquiring of the auditor as to management's potential liability in such a situation. The best response to this question by the external auditor would be which of the following?
The board of directors of Danson Company limited asked Jameel & Soften, a Private Auditing Firm to audit Danson’s financial statements for the year ended 31st December 2019. Jameel & Soften explained the need to make an enquiry of the predecessor auditor and requested permission to do so. Danson’s board of directors refused to honor the request on the grounds that relations with the predecessor had deteriorated so significantly that Jameel & Soften would receive biased and defamatory information from the predecessor.Requireda. What is the purpose of the communication between the successor and the predecessor auditor?b. How does communication aid in assessing audit risk?c. What position should Jameel & Soften assume in the present situation? How should they respond to Danson’s refusal to permit communication with the predecessor auditor?
The board of directors of Danson Company limited asked Jameel & Soften, a Private Auditing Firm to audit Danson’s financial statements for the year ended 31st December 2019. Jameel & Soften explained the need to make an enquiry of the predecessor auditor and requested permission to do so. Danson’s board of directors refused to honor the request on the grounds that relations with the predecessor had deteriorated so significantly that Jameel & Soften would receive biased and defamatory information from the predecessor.
Required
What is the purpose of the communication between the successor and the predecessor auditor?
How does communication aid in assessing audit risk?
What position should Jameel & Soften assume in the present situation? How should they respond to Danson’s refusal to permit communication with the predecessor auditor?
Chapter 2 Solutions
Connect Access Card for Principles of Auditing & Other Assurance Services
Ch. 2 - Prob. 1RQCh. 2 - Prob. 2RQCh. 2 - Prob. 3RQCh. 2 - Prob. 4RQCh. 2 - Prob. 5RQCh. 2 - Prob. 6RQCh. 2 - Prob. 7RQCh. 2 - Prob. 8RQCh. 2 - Prob. 9RQCh. 2 - Prob. 10RQ
Ch. 2 - Prob. 11RQCh. 2 - Prob. 12RQCh. 2 - Prob. 13RQCh. 2 - Prob. 14RQCh. 2 - Prob. 15RQCh. 2 - Prob. 16RQCh. 2 - Prob. 17RQCh. 2 - Prob. 18RQCh. 2 - Prob. 19RQCh. 2 - Prob. 20RQCh. 2 - Prob. 21RQCh. 2 - Prob. 22RQCh. 2 - Prob. 23RQCh. 2 - Prob. 24RQCh. 2 - Prob. 25QRACh. 2 - Prob. 26QRACh. 2 - Jane Lee, a director of a nonpublic corporation...Ch. 2 - Prob. 28QRACh. 2 - Prob. 29QRACh. 2 - Prob. 30AOQCh. 2 - Prob. 30BOQCh. 2 - Prob. 30COQCh. 2 - Prob. 30DOQCh. 2 - Prob. 30EOQCh. 2 - Prob. 30FOQCh. 2 - Prob. 30GOQCh. 2 - Prob. 30HOQCh. 2 - Prob. 30IOQCh. 2 - Prob. 30JOQCh. 2 - Prob. 30KOQCh. 2 - Prob. 30LOQCh. 2 - Prob. 31OQCh. 2 - Prob. 32OQCh. 2 - Prob. 33OQCh. 2 - Prob. 34OQCh. 2 - Prob. 35OQCh. 2 - Joe Rezzo, a college student majoring in...Ch. 2 - Prob. 37PCh. 2 - Hide-It (HI), a family-owned business based in...Ch. 2 - Prob. 39RDC
Knowledge Booster
Similar questions
- A group of investors sued Anderson, Olds, and Watershed, CPAs (AOW) for alleged damages suffered when the entity in which they held common stock went bankrupt. To avoidliability under the common law, AOW must demonstrate which of the following?a. The investors actually suffered a loss.b. The investors relied on the financial statements audited by AOW.c. The investors’ loss was a direct result of their reliance on the audited financial statements.d. The audit was conducted in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards andwith due professional care.arrow_forwardMark Williams, CPA, was engaged by Jackson Financial Development Company to audit the financial statements of Apex Construction Company, a small closely held corporation. Williams was told when he was engaged that Jackson Financial needed reliable financial statements that would be used to determine whether to purchase a substantial amount of Apex Construction’s convertible debentures at the price asked by the estate of one of Apex’s former directors. Williams performed his audit in a negligent manner. As a result of his negligence, he failed to discover substantial defalcations by Carl Brown, the Apex controller. Jackson Financial purchased the debentures, but it would not have done so if the defalcations had been discovered. After discovery of the fraud, Jackson Financial promptly sold them for the highest price offered in the market at a $70,000 loss. If Apex Construction also sues Williams for negligence, what are the probable legal defenses Williams’s attorney would raise?…arrow_forwardMark Williams, CPA, was engaged by Jackson Financial Development Company to audit the financial statements of Apex Construction Company, a small closely held corporation. Williams was told when he was engaged that Jackson Financial needed reliable financial statements that would be used to determine whether to purchase a substantial amount of Apex Construction’s convertible debentures at the price asked by the estate of one of Apex’s former directors. Williams performed his audit in a negligent manner. As a result of his negligence, he failed to discover substantial defalcations by Carl Brown, the Apex controller. Jackson Financial purchased the debentures, but it would not have done so if the defalcations had been discovered. After discovery of the fraud, Jackson Financial promptly sold them for the highest price offered in the market at a $70,000 loss. What liability does Williams have to Jackson Financial? Explainarrow_forward
- Mark Williams, CPA, was engaged by Jackson Financial Development Company to audit the financial statements of Apex Construction Company, a small closely held corporation. Williams was told when he was engaged that Jackson Financial needed reliable financial statements that would be used to determine whether to purchase a substantial amount of Apex Construction’s convertible debentures at the price asked by the estate of one of Apex’s former directors. Williams performed his audit in a negligent manner. As a result of his negligence, he failed to discover substantial defalcations by Carl Brown, the Apex controller. Jackson Financial purchased the debentures, but it would not have done so if the defalcations had been discovered. After discovery of the fraud, Jackson Financial promptly sold them for the highest price offered in the market at a $70,000 loss. Will the negligence of Mark Williams, CPA, prevent him from recovering on a liability insurance policy covering the practice of…arrow_forwardThe following relates to the Menendez–Halliburton situation described in the text.(a) How would you characterize Halliburton’s accounting for revenue from ethical and professional perspectives?(b) Once KPMG learned that Menendez had provided a complaint to Halliburton’s audit committee highlighting questionable accounting and auditing practices, the KPMG audit partner instructed the audit team members to avoid communications with Menendez. How would you characterize those actions ethically and professionally?arrow_forwardThe board of directors of Danson Company limited asked Jameel & Soften, a Private AuditingFirm to audit Danson’s financial statements for the year ended 31st December 2019. Jameel &Soften explained the need to make an enquiry of the predecessor auditor and requestedpermission to do so. Danson’s board of directors refused to honor the request on the grounds thatrelations with the predecessor had deteriorated so significantly that Jameel & Soften wouldreceive biased and defamatory information from the predecessor. a. What is the purpose of the communication between the successor and the predecessorauditor?b. How does communication aid in assessing audit risk?c. What position should Jameel & Soften assume in the present situation? How should theyrespond to Danson’s refusal to permit communication with the predecessor auditor?arrow_forward
- The senior partner of Wojtysiak & Co., CPAs, has been approached by a small, publicly traded corporation wishing to change auditors. The Wojtysiak firm does not audit any other public companies. Because of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, Mike Wojtysiak, the senior partner, needs to know the regulatory issues facing his firm if it accepts the new engagement.RequiredDraft a report that outlines the Sarbanes–Oxley considerations for a firm such as the Wojtysiak firm. Locate the actual act (Public Law 107-204) or perform a thorough summary and review it prior to preparing the report.arrow_forwardA suggested format for the written representation has been sent by the auditors to the directors of Nananom. The directors have stated that they will not sign the written representation this year on the grounds that they believe the additional evidence that it provides is not required by the auditor. You are required to: i. Discuss the action the auditor may take as a result of the decision made by the directors, not to sign the written representation.arrow_forwardWhile conducting an audit, Larson Associates, CPAs, failed to detect material misstatements included in its client's financial statements. Larson's unqualified opinion was included with the financial statements in a registration statement and prospectus for a public offering of securities made by the client. Larson knew that its opinion and the financial statements would be used for this purpose. Which of the following statements is correct with regard to a suit against Larson and the client by a purchaser of the securities under Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1933? Larson will not be liable if the purchaser did not rely on the financial statements. Larson will not be liable if it had reasonable grounds to believe the financial statements were accurate. The purchaser must prove that Larson knew of the material misstatements. The purchaser must prove that Larson failed to conduct the audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards.arrow_forward
- The following scenarios may result in non-compliance with one or more of the principles in the code of ethics, by the auditor or accountants. John, a chartered accountant who is employed by a state-owned enterprise, appeared before a commission of enquiry into financial irregularities that occurred under his direction. John denied his involvement but there was proof made available which indicated he was lying. John acknowledged that he had lied and then went on to state that he was instructed to do so by his superiors. Discuss if the chartered accountants or registered auditors in each of the scenarios above, have failed to comply with any of the fundamental ethical principles in the code of conduct.arrow_forwardSam Jones has been the controller of Downtown Tires for 25 years. Ownership of the firm recently changed hands and the new owners are conducting an audit of the financial records. The audit has been unable to reproduce financial reports that were prepared by Sam. While there is no evidence of wrongdoing, the auditors are concerned that the discrepancies might contribute to poor decisions. Which of the following characteristics of useful information is absent in the situation described above? timelyaccessibleverifiablecompleterelevantarrow_forwardA CPA issued an unqualified opinion on the financial statements of a company that sold common stock in a public offering subject to the Securities Act of 1933. Based on a misstatement in the financial statements, the CPA is being sued by an investor who purchased shares of this public offering. Which of the following represents a viable defense? A) The investor has not proven CPA negligence. B) The CPA detected the misstatement after the audit report date. C) The audit work was adequate to support the CPA's opinion. D) The investor did not rely upon the financial statement.arrow_forward
arrow_back_ios
SEE MORE QUESTIONS
arrow_forward_ios
Recommended textbooks for you
Auditing: A Risk Based-Approach (MindTap Course L...AccountingISBN:9781337619455Author:Karla M Johnstone, Audrey A. Gramling, Larry E. RittenbergPublisher:Cengage Learning
Business/Professional Ethics Directors/Executives...AccountingISBN:9781337485913Author:BROOKSPublisher:Cengage
Auditing: A Risk Based-Approach to Conducting a Q...AccountingISBN:9781305080577Author:Karla M Johnstone, Audrey A. Gramling, Larry E. RittenbergPublisher:South-Western College Pub
Auditing: A Risk Based-Approach (MindTap Course L...
Accounting
ISBN:9781337619455
Author:Karla M Johnstone, Audrey A. Gramling, Larry E. Rittenberg
Publisher:Cengage Learning
Business/Professional Ethics Directors/Executives...
Accounting
ISBN:9781337485913
Author:BROOKS
Publisher:Cengage
Auditing: A Risk Based-Approach to Conducting a Q...
Accounting
ISBN:9781305080577
Author:Karla M Johnstone, Audrey A. Gramling, Larry E. Rittenberg
Publisher:South-Western College Pub