Psa 200 Free Essays

Evaluating 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‚¬ ¦.. Successful 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 comparable 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 By and large 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 obligation to plan and actualize reactions to the dangers of material misquote recognized and evaluated 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 budget summary review. Successful Date 2. This PSA is compelling for reviews of fiscal reports for periods starting on or after December 15, 2009. Target 3. The goal of the inspector is to acquire adequate suitable review proof about the evaluated dangers of material error, through planning and actualizing proper reactions to those dangers. Definitions 4. For motivations behind the PSAs, the accompanying terms have the implications ascribed underneath: (a) Substantive methodology †A review strategy intended to distinguish material errors at the affirmation level. Considerable strategies include: (I) Tests of subtleties (of classes of exchanges, account adjusts, and divulgences), and ii) Substantive expository methodology. (b) Test of controls †A review technique intended to assess the working adequacy of controls in forestalling, or distinguishing and adjusting, material misquotes at the attestation level. Necessities Overall Responses 5. The reviewer will structure and execute in general reactions to address the surveyed dangers of material error at the fiscal summary level. (Ref: Para. A1-A3) 3 PSA 330 (Redrafted) Audit Proce dures Responsive to the Assessed Risks of Material Misstatement at the Assertion Level 6. The reviewer will plan and perform further review methodology whose nature, timing, and degree depend on and are receptive to the surveyed dangers of material misquote at the statement level. (Ref: Para. A4-A8) 7. In structuring the further review strategies to be played out, the reviewer will: (a) Consider the purposes behind the evaluation given to the danger of material error at the statement level for each class of exchanges, account parity, and exposure, including: (I) The probability of material misquote because of the specific qualities of the applicable class of exchanges, account equalization, or divulgence (I. . , the innate hazard); and (ii) Whether the hazard appraisal assesses important controls (I. e. , the control chance), in this way requiring the reviewer to get review proof to decide if the controls are working successfully (I. e. , the inspector expects to depend on the working viability of controls in deciding the nature, timing and degree of considerable techniqu es); and (Ref: Para. A9-A18) (b) Obtain progressively influential review proof the higher the auditor’s appraisal of hazard. (Ref: Para. A19) Tests of Controls 8. The evaluator will structure and perform trial of controls to get adequate fitting review proof with regards to the working viability of applicable controls when: (a) The auditor’s appraisal of dangers of material error at the declaration level incorporates a desire that the controls are working successfully (I. e. , the evaluator means to depend on the working viability of controls in deciding the nature, timing and degree of meaningful methods); or (b) Substantive techniques alone can't give adequate suitable review proof at the declaration level. Ref: Para. A20-A24) 9. In planning and performing trial of controls, the examiner will acquire progressively convincing review proof the more prominent the dependence the reviewer puts on the viability of a control. (Ref: Para. A25) 4 PSA 330 (Redrafted) Nature and Extent of Tests of Controls 10. In structuring and performing trial of controls, the examiner will: (a) Perform other review systems in blend with request to get review proof 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 (circuitous controls), and assuming this is the case, regardless of whether it is important to get review proof supporting the powerful activity of those aberrant 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 reviewer plans to depend on those controls, subject to aragraphs 12 and 15 underneath, so as to give a suitable premise to the auditor’s expected dependence. (Ref: Para. A32) Using review proof acquired during a break period 12. At the point when the evaluator acquires review proof about the working adequacy of controls d uring a between time period, the inspector will: (an) Obtain review proof about huge changes to those controls resulting to the interval 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 got in past reviews 13. In deciding if it is suitable to utilize review proof about the working adequacy of controls got in past reviews, and, assuming this is the case, the length of the timespan that may slip by before retesting a control, the evaluator will think about the accompanying: 5 PSA 330 (Redrafted) (a) The viability of different components of inside control, including the control condition, the entity’s observing of controls, and the entity’s hazard appraisal process; b) The dangers emerging from the qualities of the control, including whether it is manual or computerized; (c) The viability of general IT-controls; (d) The adequacy 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 essentially influence the use of the control; (e) Whether the absence of an adjustment in a specific con trol represents a hazard because of evolving conditions; and f) The dangers of material misquote and the degree of dependence on the control. (Ref: Para. A35) 14. In the event that the evaluator intends to utilize review proof from a past review about the working viability of explicit controls, the reviewer will set up the proceeding with importance of that proof by acquiring review proof about whether noteworthy changes in those controls have happened ensuing to the past review. The evaluator will get this proof by performing request joined with perception or examination, to affirm the comprehend