The object of the audit is the accounts. These are drawn up at the contract partner's head office and cover financial transactions conducted for the project at the contract partner's head office, as well as all expenses and income arising from the performance of the project in the partner country.
Section 54(a) of the Local Government Municipal Systems Act (MSA), 2000 (Act 32 of 2000) (as amended by Act 7 of 2011) and Section 55(3) of the Local Government Municipal Finance Management Act (MFMA, 2003) (Act 56 of 2003) make provision for the accountability functions of the municipal manager. In terms of Section 65, each municipality must establish an internal audit unit to assist the municipal council in improving oversight within a municipality. While section 165(2)(b) of the MFMA, 2003 provides for the establishment of an independent audit committee consisting of at least three persons with appropriate experience, the majority of committee members should not be employed by the municipality. In terms of Section 66(1) of the MFMA, 2003 each municipality must have an audit committee that does not form part of the administration. The purpose of the audit committee is to identify risks to which a municipality could be exposed, and to advise the Municipal Council. The Municipal Finance Management Act, Circular 32 of 2006 provides the guidelines for the establishment of the Municipal Public Accounts Committee (MPAC), while sections 79 and 80 of the Local Government Structures Act (Act 117 of 1998) make provision for the establishment of portfolio committees to exercise oversight of service delivery projects.
These regulations provide that the Accounts Commission, the Auditor General and Audit Scotland are all relevant public authorities for the purposes of section 54 and section 1193 of the Companies Act 2006 241 . Accordingly, the approval of the Scottish Ministers is required for the registration of a company or LLP with a name which gives the impression that the company or LLP is associated with the Accounts Commission, the Auditor General or Audit Scotland 242 . Prior to granting approval the Scottish Ministers must also seek the opinion of the Accounts Commission, the Auditor General or Audit Scotland (respectively) as to whether or not such approval should be granted 243 .
Expression of interest is invited from the C&AG empanelled Chartered Accountants Firms (Partnership/Sole Proprietorship firm with one full time FCA) in the prescribed format for short listing for the engagement of Audit of the accounts of Sarba Siksha Abhjian Programmes being implemented in the state of Assam Assam Assam as per enclosed Terms of Assam Reference(TOR).
Without affecting our audit opinion, we draw attention to Notes 2.1) and 3.1.c) to the consolidated annual accounts, which indicate that at 31 December 2015 the consolidated balance sheet for the Group present negative working capital (excluding the effect of non-current assets and related liabilities held-for-sale). Note 3.1.c) also mentions that as part of the Strategic Plan that is expected to be implemented in the coming months the Management of the Group has prepared projected cash flows for the coming year that demonstrate its capacity to satisfy its short-term obligations, although some of the assumptions taken into account may not be under the control of the Group, which indicates the existence of a significant uncertainty regarding the capacity of the Group to realize its assets and settle its liabilities in the amounts and the classification under which they are stated in the accompanying consolidated annual accounts, which have been prepared on a going-concern basis. The Parent Company's Directors understand that the relevant assumptions taken into account in its projections will be substantially fulfilled and therefore the use of the going-concern principle, in the indicated terms and circumstances, is adequate.
In addition to the reconciliation of subsidiary income systems with the general ledger, referred to above, a number of other issues relating to debtors were raised at audit. These included errors in amounts accrued at year-end, disputed accounts and uncollectible amounts not written off. I have recommended that the Finance Department closely monitor performance of the accountable officers for the collection of income and the accuracy of the financial records in each case. The recent introduction of monthly reporting on debtors to the Senior Management Co-ordination Group should also be of assistance in this process. I have also recommended a review of the levels of bad and doubtful debts provision in all major income areas.
classification of receivables, its recognition and initial evaluation; develop a series of proposals and recommendations on management of accounts receivable in the company, in order to reduce its volume and the impact on the financial position. The subject of research is the order of movement of accounting, auditing and analysis of accounts receivable.
The second factor which affects the level of audit fees charged is the risk of the client. I expect riskier firms to be charged higher audit fees as additional compensation for the higher risk the auditor bears (Simunic and Stein 1996). To control for this, the model includes the firm‟s current ratio ( ) and the proportion of the firm‟s assets which are classified as current assets ( ). The model also includes the relative amount of the firm‟s assets that are accounts receivable and inventory ( ). Both of these are considered risky accounts and it could be argued that they are two of the most difficult accounts to audit because of the estimation involved in estimating bad debt expense and writing down inventory. In addition, the model includes controls for firm performance ( and ), leverage ( ), and whether or not the firm is in the growth stage ( ). Finally, I includes controls for whether or not the firm received a going concern opinion ( ) or an opinion that the firm‟s internal controls are ineffective ( ). I expect that firms receiving going concern opinions will be charged higher audit fees as compensation for the additional risk. Extant research has shown that firms with internal control weaknesses are charged higher audit fees (Hogan and Wilkins 2008; Blankley et al. 2012).
We conducted our audit in accordance with Auditing Standards issued by the Auditing Practices Board and the Audit Code of Practice issued by the Higher Education Funding Council for England. An audit includes examination, on a test basis, of evidence relevant to the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. It also includes an assessment of the significant estimates and judgements made by the University’s Council in the preparation of the financial statements and of whether the accounting policies are appropriate to the institution's circumstances, consistently applied and adequately disclosed.
It could be ethical if the current sales volume is to customers of unknown credit history. However, if the increase is from all known customers then it is unethical to increase the percentage solely to reduce the net income and therefore the tax liability. An audit of their tax returns will disclose the higher percentage and Jitters will need to justify the increase.
The Accounts Payable Manager should continue to work towards the goal of shredding documents. The Accounts Payable Manager should also work with the Associate Director of University Services to obtain approval from the New Mexico Commission of Public Records State Records Center and Archives for the destruction of scanned documents. Following this approval, a written records destruction procedure should be implemented. In addition, the Accounts Payable Manager should work with the Manager of Contract and Grant, Main, to determine if original documentation must be maintained for certain contracts or grants.
Abstract- The purpose of financial reports is to deliver reliable financial information that is useful for different categories of stakeholders to take well-informed decisions. The primary role of the audit committee is to supervise the internal process of preparing financial report and to ensure that the conflict of interest between management and shareholders is minimized so as to enhance the quality of financial report. The study examined the effect of Audit Committee Effectiveness on the growth of Firms Performance in Nigeria with emphasis on Eight Public Quoted Banks in Nigeria. The data were sourced from the annual reports and accounts of eight banks in Nigeria for 2011-2015 independent variables proxied on the size of audit committee, the frequency of meetings of audit committee and the financial literacy of audit committee members while profit before tax was the dependent variable. The data were analyzed using Ordinary Least Square (OLS) regression and E-view software package was used. The findings revealed that audit committee size, frequency of audit committee’s meetings and financial literacy of audit committee members have no significant effect on firms’ performance in Nigeria. The variables in the model is insignificant at the 5% critical level and the regression coefficient reveals that 5.31% of the total variation in firms performance is accounted for by audit committee size, 11.18% of the total variation in firms performance is accounted for by audit committee’s frequency of meeting and 8.16% of the total variation in firms’ performance is accounted for by the financial literacy of audit committee members. It is recommended that Nigerian banks should have a board committee members from diverse professional backgrounds and at least 5- member, at least 20% of the audit committee members should be financially literate for them to be able to interpret items on the financial report, at least four meetings should be held in a year by the audit committee so as to address issues of corporate governance every quarter and resolutions of audit committee meeting should be implemented to make the expenses incurred on them worthwhile.
However, using going-concern opinions as a proxy to measure audit quality is challenging, because the business failures of clients can be consequences of unforeseen business situations in the future (Tritscher, 2013). It may be related to business forecasting rather than analyzing facts obtained from historical financial reporting (Tritscher, 2013). Further, going-concern opinions can contribute to a client’ business failures when banks and suppliers refuse credits to this client (Tritscher, 2013). In addition, inappropriate going-concern opinions only contribute a small portion of low audit quality as many types of material misstatements are not related to a going-concern opinion (Tritscher, 2013). Therefore, whether going-concern opinions is an appropriate measure of audit quality depends on each cases (Tritscher, 2013). 2.2.2 Material misstatements. The two most commonly used misstatement measures in prior studies includes restatements and Accounting and Auditing Enforcement Releases (AAERs) (DeFond and Zhang, 2014). Accounting restatements refer to the corrections of material misstatements in the client’s previously issued financial statements (Alyousef and Almutairi, 2010). Restatements and AAERs are actually direct measures of audit quality because they indicate that the auditor issued an unqualified opinion on materially misstated financial statements, and the audit opinion is the auditor’s full responsibility and directly under his or her control (DeFond and Zhang, 2014). Empirical studies (e.g. Raghunandan et al., 2003) show that there is an implicit relationship between financial statement restatements and low audit quality. For instance, Raghunandan, Read, and Whisenant (2003) asserted that their examination of the relationship between non-audit fees and subsequent restatements indicates a direct relationship between non-audit fees and audit quality. Palmrose and Scholz (2000) studied auditor litigation resulting from restatements which are at the intersection of financial reporting quality and audit quality. Further, misstatements arise from not adequately identifying of high-risk accounts and transactions by the auditors (Palmrose and Scholz, 2000). Restatements in their sample identified accounting issues such as revenue recognition could have been identified by the auditors as high risk in their audit planning and performance.
Performance against key performance indicators: in many cases key indicators will appear in the financial statements and so need not be duplicated here. Entities will however need to make reference to them, and provide more detailed explanations where significant over- or under achievement is indicated. Additionally, those indicators routinely used by senior management in managing the business (be they financial or other measures) will probably feature here. Statutory basis: Entities should refer to the legislation under which they were set up, and refer to the accounts direction under which they are reporting. Further explanation: of items in the financial statements considered to have a strategic significance. This will include an explanation of the adoption of the “going concern” basis where otherwise this might be called into doubt (FReM 5.2.8(i) refers)