Analytical Procedures (AU-C 520)
Analytical
procedures consist of absolute comparisons of dollar balances with prior years’
account balances, or with budgets, ratio comparisons and trend analysis, and
computations based on financial or operational data designed to predict the
balance in a general ledger account. Analytical procedures also extend beyond
numerically-based procedures to become a part of an auditor’s thought process. Challenging
financial information or the lack of such information that appears unusual,
maintaining a positive, healthy skepticism when considering client responses to
inquiries, and searching for the cause of a problem beyond its symptoms are
examples of analytical thinking. The term “professional skepticism” is used in
the literature to describe this kind of thinking. It is loosely defined as
neither blindly trusting every client or, on the other hand, considering each
client dishonest as information is gathered.
The most common
analytical procedures are corroborative in their nature. Their primary
purpose is to corroborate evidence gathered from other tests designed to enable
an auditor to evaluate financial statement assertions.
When the results of
analytical procedures contribute evidence to evaluate financial statement
assertions, related tests of balances can be reduced at least to a limited
extent. The extent of the reductions of tests of balances depends on the
effectiveness of the analytical procedures. Determination of the effectiveness
of a procedure must be based on the procedure’s contribution of evidence for evaluating
the financial statement assertions. Computations designed to predict the
balance in a general ledger account based on audited financial or operational
data, e.g. quantity reconciliations and reasonableness tests, are the most
effective analytical procedures. Corroborating procedures performed at lower
levels of detail are more effective than corroborating procedures based on
balances of financial statement classifications.
Examples of
analytical procedures, in the order of their effectiveness, are:
1. Quantity reconciliations:
Multiplying the number
of units sold times sales price or the number of employees times weekly or monthly
salaries, for example, can contribute evidence that will enable an auditor to
evaluate substantially all the financial statement assertions for the
applicable general ledger account. Only a few other tests of balances would ordinarily
be necessary for the affected accounts if the data used in the computations has
been audited.
To
achieve maximum effectiveness, the reliability of the underlying data for these
procedures must be established by other tests. For example, performing a
quantity reconciliation for copy sales by a quick-copy business would simply
require multiplying the number of copies sold times sales price. The number of
copies could be obtained from the client’s copy log; however, beginning and
ending numbers from the meter would need to be physically obtained to establish
the reliability of the log. To determine the meter had not been altered, it may
also be necessary to trace the number of copies to billings for copy machine
rentals from the supplier. Copy prices would have to be determined by
references to sales tickets or price lists.
2. Reasonableness tests:
Depreciation
computations performed by computing depreciation by financial statement
classification and method, based on average lives and one-half year for
additions and disposals, is an example of a reasonableness test. Computing
interest expense based on average note balances and interest rates is another
example.
Different from
quantity reconciliations, reasonableness tests are based on averages and
estimates. Reasonableness tests are not as effective as quantity
reconciliations in providing evidence to evaluate financial statement
assertions. Since they are usually applied to smaller account balances,
however, other tests of balances may not be necessary. Other limited tests of
controls or balances may be necessary to complete the evaluation of the
relevant assertions for material balances.
3.
Corroborating procedures:
The most common
analytical procedures, such as absolute dollar comparisons of account balances
and ratio analysis, provide evidence that corroborates other tests of controls
and balances. While using corroborating analytical procedures may enable some
modification of the nature, extent and timing of tests of balances procedures, more
tests of balances procedures will ordinarily be necessary for satisfactory evaluation
of the financial statement assertions.
The lower the level of
detail of the corroborating procedures, the more effective they are. Gross
profit margin computed by product line, for example, is more effective than
when computed using amounts in financial statement classifications. Risks of
material misstatements, in other words, are more easily identified using
corroborating procedures at lower levels of detail.
SAS No. 56,
redrafted in AU-C 520, Analytical
Procedures, instructs auditors to perform analytical
procedures during the planning phase of an engagement to help identify
potential risks of misstatements. SAS No. 109, redrafted in AU-C 315, re-emphasizes the use of analytical procedures
as risk assessment procedures. Analytical procedures should also be used during
the review phase of an engagement to evaluate the results of an auditor’s
completed work.
Minimum analytical procedures performed during planning may
consist of comparing material unadjusted, current year account balances with
prior year final balances. Significant variances usually indicate the need for
adjusting journal entries. These differences should be investigated, documented
in the working papers and, if necessary, adjustments proposed to correct errors
or post year-end adjustments.
Placing high reliance on corroborating or predictive
procedures requires, simply, that all variances are investigated and
appropriate corrective action is taken by an auditor. From the investigation,
the auditor may determine that the variance is not indicative of a problem or,
on the other hand, that it is caused by an error or conditions that could cause
errors in financial information. The auditor may, or may not, determine
adjustments are necessary.
If analytical procedures can be performed extensively for high
reliance during planning, related tests of balances procedures should be
reduced. If extensive analytical procedures cannot be performed until engagement
completion, as in the case of small clients with weak accounting systems, past
experience can be relied upon to anticipate favorable results and plan for
reductions in tests of balances. To repeat this significant time-savings
opportunity, reductions in tests of balances evidence may be achieved by
placing high reliance on analytical procedures performed during the risk
assessment process.
Substantive tests of the details of general ledger account
balances include the following:
·
Physical examination of assets.
·
Confirmation of account balances.
·
Inspection of support for transactions and
balances.
·
Observation of the work of client personnel.
·
Inquiries of client personnel.
·
Tests of the mechanical accuracy of balances.
The substantive tests of balances make the most substantial
contributions of evidence for evaluating the financial statement assertions. The
larger the engagement, the higher the costs of obtaining most evidence from the
tests of balances will likely be. When the client has good internal control
procedures or a good accounting system, high reliance on tests of balances may
not be the most efficient audit strategy. On some engagements, auditing in the
least amount of time may best be accomplished by a combination of evidence from
risk assessment procedures including tests of controls and/or systems
walk-through procedures, analytical procedures and tests of balances. The
auditor should always endeavor to design an audit strategy that produces
necessary evidence in the least amount of time.
More Information
- Small
Audits Made Easy and Profitable
- Performing
Auditing Tests of Balances Procedures
- Staff
Training Series for Entry-Level Accountants, New In-Charge Accountants and
Engagement Leaders
- Key
Accounting Issues for Non-Profit Organizations
- A
Practical Potpourri of Time Savings on Audits
- The
Financial Reporting Framework for Small- and Medium-Sized Entities
My exclusive presentation of webcasts on CPE
Credit.com and self-study courses covering various applications of auditing
standards can be accessed by clicking the appropriate box on the left side of
my home page, www.cpafirmsupport.com.
Registered users accessing webcasts or self-study courses on my website receive
a 20% discount on CPE materials presented by myself and numerous other authors
on a variety of professional topics.
My assistance in CPA firm quality control
consulting, audit planning and peer review preparation can be obtained by
sending an email using the “Contact Us” tab on my home page.