Audit - Assurance and Compliance Malaysian Loan

Question: Describe about the Audit, Assurance and Compliance for Malaysian Loan. Answer: 1. Liability of King and Queen regarding EFL Liability of EFL on King and Queen will be imposed if as an auditor they fail to take reasonable care and skills in their audit work, and it adversely affects immediate clients and persons related to them (Mainardi, 2011). Fail to take care of due diligence is a violation of professional standards of the audit. In accordance with the audit standards of Australia, Auditor must operate with prudence and must exercise sufficient skills and care related to their profession. For this aspect, the case of Pacific Acceptance Corporation V Forsyth and others (1970) WN (NSW) 29 can be considered. In this case, Moffit J had cited that it is beyond the question that in a situation where auditor in a capacity of their profession when they enter into a contractual relationship with a client they make an implied promise that they will perform their task with due diligence in all situation as they then exist. The statement provided by Moffit J clearly shows that auditor has a legal obligation to perform their task with proper skills. Negligence can be defined as an action which is considered to be careless which results in a breach of contractual duty or in the absence of contractual relationship then duty of care. In a situation where the auditor is not satisfied their duties, they are considered to be negligent in conducting audit work (Windmller, 2010). As a consequence, they are legally liable for the loss occurred due to their negligent actions. In the case of King and Queen, reference of ASA 200 can be taken. In accordance with the provisions covered in this ASA, the auditor is liable to consider the proposed use of loan by management by considering their financial report. This obligation is applicable despite the fact that framework of the financial report does not take explicit requirement for a finance company to take an appropriate assessment of companys ability to borrow and continuation of debt (Lenard and Alam 2010). By considering the above-described provisions and case laws, King and Queen have a responsibility to obtain an understanding of company along with the events and conditions in which they operate. Violation by King and Queen of this provision imposes substantial doubt on the capability of the firm in performing procedures of the audit. On the basis of above-described aspects, King and Queen will be liable to EFL as they are in a faulty position to provide accurate credentials regarding the financial report. Further, the case study shows unqualified report without mentioning the fact of reducing debtor and inventory turnover. The auditor does not carry out detail proceedings which lead to misleading opinion. Further, by considering opinion on auditors, EFL had provided the loan to Impulse and report is misleading so auditors are liable to EFL. Henceforth, EFL is entitled to sue King Queen for the damages occurred to them as they fail to provide accurate credentials. Impact on advice if they intended to make a loan to Impulse and were relying on the 2012 audited financial report Yes in that situation there will be the difference in the advice it is because EFL had made a specific request to audit firms that they are making their decision by considering audited statement provided by King Queen. In such situation, EFL had cleared their intention to the audit firm, and they had provided their specific comments on regarding their query. Furthermore, in this case, provision of negligence will also not apply as there is a contractual relationship between the parties (Kaptein, 2012). EFL had evaluated the financial performance of Impulse Pty Ltd, so they were about the solvency position of the company and were require to make a decision with prudence. However, they failed to do so and had provided a loan to Impulse Pty Ltd. In this case, thus liability cannot be imposed on King and Queen Audit firm. 2. Actual and perceived independence Auditor independence can be defined as independence from parties that have an interest in financial statements that are proposed to be audited. This approach is applicable in the case of both external auditor and internal auditor (Chen, Elder and Liu, 2005). Independence is essential for audit work else auditor opinion will be biased, and stakeholders will not be able to make viable decisions as they do not about financial facts of the company. Independence of auditor requires integrity and objective approach in order to satisfy the work. There are two vital aspects regarding the independence of the auditor, which are essential to be understood i.e. Real independence and perceived independence (Haber, 2005). Both these two forms are essential to attain goals of independence. The real independence is concerned with a mind state in which the auditor is and also on how auditor reacts in or deals with a specified situation. An auditor being independent possess the capability of undertaking independent decision even though there exists a perceived lack of independence, or wherein an auditor is put in a compromising spot by the directors of the company. There are difficulties in identifying auditors true interdependence, as it is impossible to acknowledge person mental state and individual integrity (Palmon and et.al., 2010). Auditors objectivity should be beyond questionings. It has been seen important that an auditor needs to appear independent also and not just act independently. If the auditor is independent but certain factors direct people otherwise situation, this could potentially indicate that the auditing report doesnt represent a factual and rational view (Windmller, 2000.). The perceived independence further lowers the possibility for an auditor to do else than independently, which thus adds credibility to the overall auditing report. Provided the relevance of independence and fairness within internal audit functions it is a highly important factor to be considered in this opinion. The credibility and viability of the entire auditing function are in question if, by taking part in the specific activity, auditors are taking a chance with their autonomy. As per the SPPIA (Standards for the Professional practice of Internal Auditing), the requisites for independence and fairness can be stated in brief as follows: internal auditors must be independent of the activities they are auditing (Bakar, Rahman and Rashid, 2005). This form of independence allows internal auditors to put forth their work without any ambiguity. In the absence of independence, desirable results cannot be gained from internal auditing. Independence is gained from organisational objectivity and status. While objectivity directs towards the independent mental attitude that is required to be maintained in conducting various audits. Evaluation of independent situations Situation 1: In the current situation, Bob utilises the financial information of Club Casino to complete its university assignments. He does copy the information but eradicates all references, which are in connection with the Club Casino. As an audit assistant, it is his mere duty to maintain the confidentiality of any company financial details. As per ASA 230, it is important for an auditor to adopt procedures that direct towards sustaining the confidentiality, integrity, safe custody, retrievability and accessibility of audit documents. Further 210.13 of professional standards direct that an existing Accountant is obliged to maintain confidentiality (Auditing Standard ASA 700, 2013). It is to be confirmed that whether the auditor is allowed to discuss the affairs of client depends upon the type of engagement. Thus, It is important to check: Whether client has obtained the requisite permission to do so, or There is any legal or ethical requirement to such disclosure, It is the utmost duty of an auditor to maintain the secrecy of documents and not be a defaulter in any case. In the current scenario if Bob wants to make use of information it is his responsibility to inform and do so with the prior permission of Club Casino. Situation 2: In this case, Wendy being the engagement partner of Ace Limited audits for a substantial period of time. When the company secretary of Ace retired, it took six moths for them to find a replacement. On request of Ace Limited, Wendy performed the duties of company secretary for till the period of time the position was vacant, i.e., six months. As per the ASA 220.2, the engagement partners have the appropriate capability and competence to perform the audit engagement as per the Australian Auditing Standards. They can also enable audit report wherein there are any circumstances. They are responsible for the supervision and direction of the entire audit work further discharging the responsibilities wherever required. The duties of Company Secretary range from administrative duties like the company maintenance of records and personal management, to duties as diverse ensuring company compliances (Barth, Landsman and Lang, 2008). If an engagement partner serves as a Company secretary as an Assurance client, it may create advocacy threats but if they perform routinely administrative services to support the functions of company secretarial or in the case where they provide advice it does not bring any threat in relation to independence. Thus, if Wendy has performed all the administrative functions and posed no threat to independence, it can act as company secretary in such circumstances. Situation 3: In this situation, it has been seen that Leo belongs to an audit firm whos major client is Precision Machinery Limited. Leo is the first-born son of the factory foreman of Precision Machinery Limited. During vacation, Leo has been appointed to audit Precision Machinery regarding its internal controls in reference to the system of cash payments. As per 100.5, a member of Public practice in professional competency is required to follow the following principles: Integrity: to be honest in serving all professional and business relationships. Objectivity: not permitting any bias decision or conflicting interests overriding its professional decisions (APES 110 Code of Ethics for Professional Accountants, 2010). Maintaining professional competence and skill to serve them in accordance with the professional standards The threat is perceived when a Member acknowledges or reasonably expects to acknowledge the circumstances or relationship, which is likely to result in compromising compliance in accordance with the fundamental principles. As per the standards of 100.12, in the current situation there is a Familiarity threat because of Leo, i.e., auditor (member) is in close relationship with Precision Machinery Limited, i.e., the client. The Member is likely to be sympathetic towards its interests. Thus, it is advisable not to allow Leo to audit the internal controls of the cash payment system of Precision Machinery limited, as it is likely to pose familiarity threat causing ambiguity in the auditing. Situation 4 Lastly, the case of Chan Associates who are the auditors of Classic Reproduction Pty Limited, huge furniture wholesaler is facing financial crises. The Classic Reproduction is unable to pay the audit fee for past 3 years to the Chan Associates. The audit company threatens to resign from the company on non-payment of outstanding fees of Classic reproduction. As per the professional standards of 290.223, there is the persistence of self-interest threat when an Audit client does not pay the fees for a long duration. Especially wherein a significant part of it remains unpaid before the issue of the audit report. Other than that in cases where the report has been issued, the presence and relevance of threat are assessed, and safeguard is applied to eliminate the threat or reduce to some extent (Barton, 2005). The Audit firm in such cases have the right to determine the overdue of fees equivalent to a loan to its client, or as a result of the essentials of past dues, it is suitable for the firm to decide whether it wants to continue its audit engagement or not. In the current case, Chan and Associate have the right to pose a threat to the company to discontinue its services with the firm due to the outstanding payments. Furthermore, also has the right to receive payment in the form of furniture and shares as the outstanding fees can be considered as a loan to Classic Reproduction Pty Limited. Reference Journals Bakar, N.B.A., Rahman, A.R.A. and Rashid, H.M.A., 2015. Factors influencing auditor independence: Malaysian loan officers' perceptions.Managerial Auditing Journal.20(8). Pp.804-822. Barth, M.E., Landsman, W.R. and Lang, M.H., 2008. International accounting standards and accounting quality.Journal of accounting research.46(3). Pp.467-498. Barton, A., 2008. Professional accounting standards and the public sectora mismatch.Abacus.41(2). Pp.138-158. Chen, K.Y., Elder, R.J. and Liu, J.L., 2010. Auditor independence, audit quality and auditor-client negotiation outcomes: some evidence from Taiwan.Journal of Contemporary Accounting Economics.1(2). Pp.119-146. Haber, J.R., 2012. Does being the auditor impair independence?.The CPA Journal,75(6), p.12. Palmon, D. and et.al. 2010. A theoretical model of cognitive factors that affect auditors' performance and perceived independence.International Journal of Behavioural Accounting and Finance.1(3). pp.239-267. Windmller, R., 2010. The auditor market and auditor independence.European Accounting Review.9(4). Pp.639-642. Kaptein, P. S., 2012. Ethics Management: Auditing and Developing the Ethical Content of Organizations. Springer Science Business Media. Lenard, M. J. and Alam, P., 2010. A Historical Perspective on Fraud Detection: From Bankruptcy Models to Most Effective Indicators of Fraud in Recent Incidents.Journal of Forensing Investigative Accounting, 1(1), 1-27. Mainardi, L. R., 2011. Harnessing the Power of Continuous Auditing:Developing and Implementing a Practical Methodology. John Wiley Sons. Online APES 110 Code of Ethics for Professional Accountants, 2010. [PDF]. Available from https://www.apesb.org.au/uploads/standards/apesb_standards/standard1.pdf. [Accessed on 30th November 2016]. Auditing Standard ASA 700, 2013. [PDF]. Available from https://www.auasb.gov.au/admin/file/content102/c3/Jul13_Compiled_Auditing_Standard_ASA_700.pdf. [Accessed on 30th November 2016].