Completing the Audit
Completion procedures ensure the audit evidence is sufficient before the report is issued. Key steps include: subsequent events review (ASA/ISA 560) covering events up to the date of the auditor's report, and considering events after that date; going concern assessment (ASA/ISA 570) including management's assessment, cash flow forecasts, and whether a material uncertainty exists; written representations (ASA/ISA 580) from management confirming responsibilities and completeness of information; evaluation of uncorrected misstatements (ASA/ISA 450) and their aggregation; and the overall analytical review to confirm consistency.
Also review related party transactions, litigation and claims, segment information, and the audit file assembly within the required timeframe (typically 60 days after the report date). Consider fraud indicators and whether the audit has identified any material inconsistency.
Traps: assuming subsequent events review ends at the report date (it extends to the date of the report, with limited procedures after); treating going concern as only a management responsibility; ignoring uncorrected misstatements below materiality individually but material in aggregate; and forgetting written representations are required even when no issues arise.
Rule of thumb: aggregate uncorrected misstatements and compare to overall materiality. If management refuses to correct a material misstatement, consider a qualified or adverse opinion.
Reporting and Communication
The auditor's report follows a standardised structure under ASA/ISA 700 series: title, addressee, opinion, basis for opinion, key audit matters (for listed entities under ISA 701), responsibilities of management and the auditor, and the auditor's signature, date and location. Understand modified opinions: qualified (material but not pervasive), adverse (material and pervasive), and disclaimer (inability to obtain sufficient evidence, material and pervasive).
Distinguish modifications to the opinion from emphasis of matter and other matter paragraphs (which do not modify the opinion). Understand going concern reporting: material uncertainty paragraph vs modified opinion. Know the requirements for comparative information and other information (ISA 720).
Communication with those charged with governance (ASA/ISA 260) includes significant findings, independence matters, and planned scope. Communicate deficiencies in internal control (ASA/ISA 265) in writing to management and those charged with governance.
Traps: confusing an emphasis of matter paragraph with a qualified opinion; misjudging pervasiveness; assuming KAMs apply to all entities (they are mandatory for listed entities); and failing to communicate control deficiencies in writing.
Rule of thumb: pervasiveness determines qualified vs adverse/disclaimer. If the effect is confined to one area, it is qualified; if it affects the financial statements as a whole, it is adverse or a disclaimer.
Other Assurance and Related Services Engagements
Beyond the financial statement audit, candidates must know review engagements (ASA/ISRE 2400 and 2410): limited assurance, primarily inquiry and analytical procedures, negative-form conclusion. Understand agreed-upon procedures (ASA/ISRS 4400): the practitioner performs procedures agreed with the parties and reports factual findings, expressing no assurance. Know compilation engagements (no assurance, assisting management to prepare information).
Other assurance engagements include assurance over sustainability/ESG reports, compliance, key performance indicators, and internal control (e.g. SOC reports, ASAE 3402). Understand the difference between reasonable and limited assurance in these contexts and the applicable standards (ASAE 3000 series).
Traps: assuming a review provides reasonable assurance; treating agreed-upon procedures as assurance; confusing compilation (no assurance) with review (limited assurance); and overlooking that the practitioner must be independent for assurance engagements but independence requirements differ for related services.
Rule of thumb: match the conclusion form to the engagement: audit = positive reasonable assurance; review = negative limited assurance; AUP = factual findings only; compilation = no assurance.