November 1, 2021

New Auditor’s Reporting Standards: What You Need to Know!

You’re likely aware that the AICPA's Auditing Standards Board (ASB) new auditor's reporting standards set to go into effect for audits with years ending on or after December 15, 2021.

This is a big deal, with a big upside: The new suite of standards is designed to enhance the relevance and transparency of the auditor’s report. And, simply put, the new rules make good sense: CPAs and their clients will benefit from implementing the new standards because they were created to provide greater value to users of audit reports by making the auditor’s opinion more transparent.


In addition, changes to language in the report are meant to provide more valuable information and more distinctly define the responsibilities of both the auditor and management. Another objective of the new standards was to align generally accepted auditing standards (U.S. GAAS) with the standards issued by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB) of the International Federation of Accountants (IFAC) and the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB).


The bottom line? The new auditor's reporting standards are intended to improve the transparency and relevance of the communication in the auditor’s report.


Here are five key changes that practitioners should pay particular attention to:

One of the biggest changes: With the new standard, SAS 134-140 address the auditor’s responsibility to form an opinion on the financial statements. As a result, the auditor’s opinion has been moved to the first part of the report, to be followed by a Basis for Opinion section. This new section focuses on the obligations relating to independence and clarifies that there are other ethical requirements of the audit engagement.


The new guide also requires enhanced reporting of going concern. This includes a description of management’s responsibilities to evaluate whether conditions of events raise substantial doubt about an entity’s ability to continue as a going concern.


There is an expanded description of the auditor’s responsibilities for the audit, including the auditor’s communications with those charged with governance.


When engaged by management to include key audit matters (KAMs) in the auditor's report, Section 701 addresses both the auditor’s judgement about what to communicate in the auditor’s report and the form and content of such communication.


The definition of materiality has been revised as follows: Misstatements, including omissions, are considered to be material if there is a substantial likelihood that, individually or in the aggregate, they would influence the judgment made by a reasonable user based on the financial statements.


This is only a quick snapshot of the new reporting standards. Now that adopting the standard is imminent for those who have calendar year-end audit clients, it’s important to take the time to review it thoroughly in order to adequately prepare for implementation. But there’s no need to go at it alone. At Collemi Consulting & Advisory Services, LLC, we’ve been spending the past year walking our CPA firm clients through the new standards to quickly get them up to speed with expert guidance.

Learn More
By Jennifer Ruf March 24, 2025
As audit season is in high gear, it’s important for auditors to step back and plan how they are going to audit a client’s books and records. What are the red flags you’re looking for when it comes time to throw open the books and look through a huge swath of journal entries to pluck out the ones that are questionable, and need to be questioned? First off, it’s important to understand how journal entries are created at the company being audited. For an auditor, that means looking at the internal control environment to understand how a journal entry is created: Who’s authorized to create one and who can create one. You have to understand the process. How does it start and how is the entry eventually recorded onto the financial reporting system? Once you know that, you can determine whether someone can come in and override the system, or if someone can pretend to be someone else and start recording journal entries onto the system. That will help you figure out what to look for to decide what entries to pull out and ask management to get back up information to support and validate those entries. Finding the needle The key here is not to just go through the mechanics, but to really go through the exercise so you can determine if management is playing games in the recording of those transactions. You have to be able to get comfortable with that, and that means you need to be able to document what you’re looking for. Because what the auditor is really doing is looking for a “needle in the haystack”, to identify the transactions that don’t look right, that don’t make sense in the ordinary course of business. For example, if the business is not open on weekends, are transactions being posted on a Saturday or Sunday, or even on holidays? If you see rounded numbers or accounts that are seldom used, those can be red flags as well. Sometimes it can be as simple as asking managers and others like accounting, data entry and IT personnel if they’ve observed any unusual accounting entries. Depending on the size of the company and scope of the work, you might need to use computerized audit software program — some of them with AI built in — that can scan the entries to identify anomalies. Red flags When an auditor is looking for evidence of management override of controls, they can look for some of these 12 red flags indicators: ● Top-side entries ● Entries made to unrelated, unusual or seldom-used accounts ● Entries made by individuals who typically don't make entries. ● Entries recorded at the end of the period ● Post-closing entries with no explanations ● Entries made before or during the preparation of financial statements with no account numbers ● Entries that contain rounded numbers or a consistent ending number ● Entries processed outside the normal course of business ● Accounts that contain transactions that are complex or unusual in nature ● Accounts that contain significant estimates and period-end adjustments ● Accounts that have been prone to errors in the past ● Accounts that contain intercompany transactions When testing non-standard journal entries and other adjustments, you should look for documentary evidence indicating that they were properly supported and approved by management. Finally, remember that while most fraudulent entries are made at the end of a reporting period, you shouldn't ignore the rest of the year  Collemi Consulting leverages nearly three decades of experience to provide trusted technical accounting and auditing expertise when you need it the most. We regularly work with CPA firm leadership to help them reduce risk and maximize efficiencies. To schedule an appointment, contact us at (732) 792-6101.
December 20, 2024
Are you prepared?
A woman's hands holding a microphone
December 9, 2024
Conquer your fear of public speaking and present like a pro
Man with hand by his ear straining to listen.
December 4, 2024
Boost your business by becoming adept at active listening.
More Posts