Psa 200 Free Essays

Inspecting and Assurance Standards Council Philippine Standard on Auditing 330 (Redrafted) THE AUDITOR’S RESPONSES TO ASSESSED RISKS PSA 330 (Redrafted) PHILIPPINE STANDARD ON AUDITING 330 (REDRAFTED) THE AUDITOR’S RESPONSES TO ASSESSED RISKS (Effective for reviews of fiscal reports for periods starting on or after December 15, 2009) CONTENTS Paragraph Introduction Scope of this PSA†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.. Viable Date†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦ Objective†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦. We will compose a custom article test on Psa 200 or on the other hand any comparative theme just for you Request Now . Definitions†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦ Requirements Generally Responses†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦. Review Procedures Responsive to the Assessed Risks of Material Misstatement at the Assertion Level†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.. Ampleness of Presentation and Disclosure†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦. Assessing the Sufficiency and Appropriateness of Audit Evidence†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦ Documentation†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.. 1 2 3 4 5 6-24 25 26-28 29-31 Application and Other Explanatory Material Overall Responses†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦. A1-A3 Audit Procedures Responsive to the Assessed Risks of Material Misstatement the Assertion Level†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦. A4-A54 Adequacy of Presentation and Disclosure†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦ A55 Evaluating the Sufficiency and Appropriateness of Audit Evidence†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦. A56-A58 Documentation†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.. A59 Acknowledgment Philippine Standard on Auditing (PSA) 330 (Redrafted), â€Å"The Auditor’s Responses to Assessed Risks† ought to be perused with regards to the â€Å"Preface to the Philippine Standards on Quality Control, Auditing, Review, Other Assurance and Related Services,† which sets out the authority of PSAs. 2 PSA 330 (Redrafted) Introduction Extent of this PSA 1. This Philippine Standard on Auditing (PSA) manages the auditor’s duty to structure and execute reactions to the dangers of material error recognized and surveyed by the evaluator as per PSA 315, â€Å"Identifying and Assessing Risks of Material Misstatement Through Understanding the Entity and Its Environment† in a fiscal report review. Compelling Date 2. This PSA is compelling for reviews of budget reports for periods starting on or after December 15, 2009. Target 3. The target of the evaluator is to acquire adequate proper review proof about the surveyed dangers of material error, through structuring and actualizing fitting reactions to those dangers. Definitions 4. For motivations behind the PSAs, the accompanying terms have the implications ascribed beneath: (a) Substantive method †A review technique intended to recognize material misquotes at the statement level. Considerable methodology include: (I) Tests of subtleties (of classes of exchanges, account adjusts, and divulgences), and ii) Substantive diagnostic techniques. (b) Test of controls †A review method intended to assess the working viability of controls in forestalling, or recognizing and rectifying, material misquotes at the attestation level. Necessities Overall Responses 5. The evaluator will structure and actualize generally speaking reactions to address the surveyed dangers of material misquote at the budget summary level. (Ref: Para. A1-A3) 3 PSA 330 (Redrafted) Audit Procedures Responsive to the Assessed Risks of Material Misstatement at the Assertion Level 6. The evaluator will plan and perform further review systems whose nature, timing, and degree depend on and are receptive to the surveyed dangers of material error at the statement level. (Ref: Para. A4-A8) 7. In planning the further review methods to be played out, the examiner will: (a) Consider the explanations behind the evaluation given to the danger of material misquote at the statement level for each class of exchanges, account parity, and exposure, including: (I) The probability of material error because of the specific attributes of the pertinent class of exchanges, account equalization, or revelation (I. . , the intrinsic hazard); and (ii) Whether the hazard evaluation assesses applicable controls (I. e. , the control hazard), in this way requiring the inspector to acquire review proof to decide if the controls are working successfully (I. e. , the examiner expects to depend on the working viability of controls in deciding the nature, timing and degree of meaningful methods); and (Ref: Para. A9-A18) (b) Obtain increasingly influential review proof the higher the auditor’s evaluation of hazard. (Ref: Para. A19) Tests of Controls 8. The reviewer will structure and perform trial of controls to acquire adequate suitable review proof with regards to the working viability of pertinent controls when: (a) The auditor’s evaluation of dangers of material error at the statement level incorporates a desire that the controls are working successfully (I. e. , the inspector means to depend on the working adequacy of controls in deciding the nature, timing and degree of meaningful methods); or (b) Substantive strategies alone can't give adequate fitting review proof at the affirmation level. Ref: Para. A20-A24) 9. In structuring and performing trial of controls, the examiner will get increasingly enticing review proof the more prominent the dependence the reviewer places on the viability of a control. (Ref: Para. A25) 4 PSA 330 (Redrafted) Nature and Extent of Tests of Controls 10. In planning and performing trial of controls, the evaluator will: (a) Perform other review strategies in mix with request to get review pro of about the working viability of the controls, including: (I) How the controls were applied at important occasions during the period under review. ii) The consistency with which they were applied. (iii) By whom or by what implies they were applied. (Ref: Para. A26-29) (b) Determine whether the controls to be tried rely on different controls (backhanded controls), and provided that this is true, regardless of whether it is important to acquire review proof supporting the compelling activity of those roundabout controls. (Ref: Para. A3031) Timing of Tests of Controls 11. The examiner will test controls for the specific time, or all through the period, for which the evaluator means to depend on those controls, subject to aragraphs 12 and 15 underneath, so as to give a suitable premise to the auditor’s proposed dependence. (Ref: Para. A32) Using review proof acquired during an interval period 12. At the point when the examiner acquires review proof about the working adequacy of controls during an interval period, the evaluator will: (an) Obtain review proof about noteworthy changes to those controls ensuing to the break time frame; and (b) Determine the extra review proof to be gotten for the rest of the period. (Ref: Para. A33-A34) Using review proof acquired in past reviews 13. In deciding if it is proper to utilize review proof about the working viability of controls acquired in past reviews, and, assuming this is the case, the length of the timeframe that may slip by before retesting a control, the reviewer will think about the accompanying: 5 PSA 330 (Redrafted) (a) The adequacy of different components of inside control, including the control condition, the entity’s checking of controls, and the entity’s hazard evaluation process; b) The dangers emerging from the qualities of the control, including whether it is manual or robotized; (c) The adequacy of general IT-controls; (d) The viability of the control and its application by the substance, remembering the nature and degree of deviations for the use of the control noted in past reviews, and whether there have been faculty changes that fundamentally influence the use of the control; (e) Whether the absence of an adjustment in a speci fic control represents a hazard because of evolving conditions; and f) The dangers of material error and the degree of dependence on the control. (Ref: Para. A35) 14. In the event that the examiner intends to utilize review proof from a past review about the working viability of explicit controls, the evaluator will set up the proceeding with importance of that proof by getting review proof about whether noteworthy changes in those controls have happened resulting to the past review. The examiner will get this proof by performing request joined with perception or examination, to affirm the comprehend