I85PREP
⌘ K
CPA Rwanda study materials
CPA Rwanda study resources

Ethical Pressure and Confidentiality in a Rwandan Audit Engagement

CPA Rwanda · Put your knowledge to work in context.

All case studies

Ethical Pressure and Confidentiality in a Rwandan Audit Engagement

You are the audit manager on the statutory audit of Gasabo Manufacturing Ltd, a Rwandan company with a December year-end. Two weeks before the audit report is due, the following occurs:

  1. The CFO, who is also the majority shareholder's brother-in-law, tells you that a RWF 120 million related-party loan to a company owned by the CEO was omitted from the financial statements. He asks you not to raise it because 'the board will fix it next year'.
  2. The CEO offers to double your firm's fee if the audit is completed before the bank's covenant test date.
  3. Your audit senior has just been offered a job by Gasabo's financial controller, starting after the audit.
  4. The RRA has informally asked you for information about Gasabo's tax position, which you obtained during the audit.

Your firm is a mid-tier firm and Gasabo represents 18% of annual fee income.

1. Analyse each of the four situations against the IESBA Code of Ethics, identifying the threat and the appropriate response.

Read the worked answer

Situation 1 - Omitted related-party loan (RWF 120m):

  • The loan is material and involves a related party (CEO). Omission is a misstatement and potentially fraud under ISA 240.
  • Threat: Intimidation and self-interest (fee dependence, 18% of income).
  • Response: The auditor cannot agree to conceal a material misstatement. The matter must be communicated to those charged with governance (the board/audit committee), not just the CFO. If the board refuses to correct, the auditor must consider modification of the opinion (ISA 705) and, where fraud is suspected, consider legal or regulatory reporting obligations. The CFO's family relationship with the majority shareholder heightens the risk.

Situation 2 - Fee offer to accelerate the audit:

  • Threat: Self-interest (contingent fee) and intimidation.
  • Response: Contingent fees for audit work are prohibited under the IESBA Code. The offer must be declined and documented. The pressure to meet the covenant date creates a self-interest threat to objectivity; the audit must follow its planned procedures regardless of the bank deadline. Report the offer to those charged with governance.

Situation 3 - Senior offered a job by the client:

  • Threat: Self-interest and familiarity (employment with audit client).
  • Response: The senior must be removed from the engagement immediately. A cooling-off period applies; the firm should review the senior's work for the period before the offer. The financial controller role is a key audit position, so the threat is significant.

Situation 4 - RRA request for information:

  • Threat: Confidentiality breach.
  • Response: The auditor may not disclose client information to the RRA without the client's consent or a legal obligation. The auditor should decline, inform the client, and seek legal advice on whether any statutory override applies. Confidentiality continues after the engagement ends.

Overall: The 18% fee dependence is itself a self-interest threat requiring safeguards (engagement quality review, independent partner). The combination of pressures may mean the firm should consider whether it can continue the engagement.

2. Recommend the actions the firm should take before signing the audit report, and explain the consequences of signing without resolving these issues.

Read the worked answer

Actions before signing:

  1. Escalate to those charged with governance: Write to the board/audit committee setting out the omitted loan, the fee offer, and the employment issue. Document the communication.
  2. Insist on adjustment: The RWF 120m loan must be recognised and disclosed as a related-party transaction. If management refuses, obtain written representations and consider the effect on the opinion.
  3. Decline the fee offer in writing and confirm the audit timetable is driven by professional requirements, not the covenant date.
  4. Remove the senior from the engagement and perform a review of their work.
  5. Decline the RRA request and notify the client; take legal advice.
  6. Engagement quality review: Given fee dependence and the fraud indicators, appoint an independent EQCR reviewer.
  7. Consider withdrawal: If the board will not act and the misstatement is material, the firm should consider resigning and reporting to the regulator where required.

Consequences of signing without resolution:

  • Professional: Breach of the IESBA Code and ISA 240/700/705; disciplinary action by the Institute of Certified Public Accountants of Rwanda; potential loss of licence.
  • Legal: Potential liability to shareholders, the bank, and other users for a misleading audit report; possible criminal exposure for knowingly concealing fraud.
  • Reputational: Loss of credibility and client base.

Judgement: The auditor's duty is to the users of the financial statements, not to the fee. Signing under pressure would be indefensible.