1. The objective is to identify the threats posed to auditor independence in each of the following situations in line with the relevant ethical code given by APES.
Situation 1: The relevant facts indicate that CEO (Chris) of the client Luxury Travel Holidays LTD (LTH) expressed that the board of client intends to continue the audit relationship with the company but insists that it would be contingent on whether Geoff (Audit Partner) goes out of the way to make a speech at a seminar promoting the business interests of LTH. Such an action on the part of Geoff would not be permissible as advocacy threat (Section 200-6) would be present which forbids such promotional speeches as the same may bring perceived independence under threat and hint to a quid pro quo relationship. Hence, the given threat is significant and cannot be ignored (APES, 2010).
Situation 2 – In appreciation of the work done by Geoff and the team, the client wishes to extend a 14 ay holiday voucher which would provide a fully paid to Greek Isles along with respective families. This has been extended in order to maintain a smooth relationship. It is apparent that such a gift of material monetary value must not be accepted as it would create familiarity threat (Section 200-7) which clearly lists down that no gifts having material monetary value should be accepted by the members as this presents significant risk not only to perceived but in addition actual independence also (APES, 2010).
Situation 3- Michael on being informed that he would be a part of the audit team of LTH is elated expresses his utility as a valuable asset for the team considering the position of his father as the financial controller for LTH. In the given scenario if Michael continues to be part of the team, then would create familiarity threat (Section 200-7) as there must not be any relationship between the members of audit team and the client firm to be audited (APES, 2010). The nature of the threat seems to be highly significant as the underlying audit quality can be materially impacted due to impairment of auditor independence due to presence of Michael who most likely would not be critical of the firm even if desired (CPA, 2013).
Situation 4: The facts indicate that Annette which expressing her joy on being part of the audit team for LTH expresses that the audit process would be quite efficient and not much time taking as only till a month ago she was involved with the company on a temporary basis while providing them requisite book keeping & taxation services. Thus, inclusion of Annette in the LTH’s audit team would result in self–review threat (Section 200-5) as she was till recently employed with the client and hence may not be critical of the financial records prepared by her own self (APES, 2010). Indications of this happening is apparent from her statement that audit should less time which reflects that she is being judgmental and hence poses a significant threat of the independence of the audit team (CPA, 2013).
Situation 1 – The firm level safeguard would be quite effective in this case. The firm must have a strict internal policy which must necessarily bar any employee (including Audit Partner) to deliver any speech which may be promotional in nature as the perceived independence of the auditing team will be hit. Besides, the client level safeguard could be achieved by ensuring that selection of auditor is carried out in a transparent manner by the board of directors in line with the sound corporate governance practices (Arens et. al., 2012).
Situation 2– The relevant safeguard to the threat posed would be in the form of both firm level and client level. At the level of the firm, a strict internal policy which must necessarily bar any employee (including Audit Partner) from accepting any gifts (beyond a particular value like $ 100) from the audit client under any circumstances with indifference to the underlying intention of the client. Also, any such gift received with seemingly insignificant value must also be disclosed to the firm and record must be maintained of the same. Besides, at the client level through internal policy such actions that extend any favors or gifts to auditors must not be permissible as it enhances the risk of fraud for the company (Gay and Simnett, 2012).
Situation 3: The appropriate safeguard to be applied would be firm specific only. This can be implemented by ensuring that employees are required to furnish information about the employment status of immediate family members along with their past and present association with various employers including their duration of employment and position occupied. Also, when a particular member is allotted to a given client, then a compulsory undertaking should also be asked highlighting the family members who have been associated in the past or the present with the client firm (Caanz, 2016).
Situation 4: The appropriate safeguard to be applied would be firm specific only. This can be implemented by ensuring that employees are required to furnish information about their employment association in the past with various employers including their duration of employment and position occupied. Also, when a particular member is allotted to a given client, then a compulsory undertaking should also be asked highlighting that the member concerned has not no association in the past or present with the client firm in any capacity (Leung, Coram and Cooper, 2012).
2.
APES (2010), APES 110 Code of Ethics for Professional Accountants, APESB Website, Retrieved on April 20, 2017 from https://www.apesb.org.au/uploads/standards/apesb_standards/standard1.pdf
Arens, A., Best, P., Shailer, G. & Fiedler,I. (2013). Auditing, Assurance Services and Ethics in Australia( 2nd ed.), Sydney: Pearson Australia
Caanz, S. (2016), Auditing And Assurance Handbook 2016 Australia (3rd ed.), Sydney: John Wiley &Sons
CPA (2013), Independence Guide, CPA Website, Retrieved on April 20, 2017 from https://www.cpaaustralia.com.au/~/media/corporate/allfiles/document/professional-resources/auditing-assurance/independence-guide.pdf?la=en
Gay, G. & Simnett, R. (2012), Auditing and Assurance Services in Australia (5th ed.), Sydney: McGraw-Hill Education
Leung, P., Coram, P. & Cooper, B.J. (2012), Modern Auditing and Assurance Services (4th ed.), New York: John Wiley and Sons
Essay Writing Service Features
Our Experience
No matter how complex your assignment is, we can find the right professional for your specific task. Contact Essay is an essay writing company that hires only the smartest minds to help you with your projects. Our expertise allows us to provide students with high-quality academic writing, editing & proofreading services.
Free Features
Free revision policy
$10Free bibliography & reference
$8Free title page
$8Free formatting
$8How Our Essay Writing Service Works
First, you will need to complete an order form. It's not difficult but, in case there is anything you find not to be clear, you may always call us so that we can guide you through it. On the order form, you will need to include some basic information concerning your order: subject, topic, number of pages, etc. We also encourage our clients to upload any relevant information or sources that will help.
Complete the order form
Once we have all the information and instructions that we need, we select the most suitable writer for your assignment. While everything seems to be clear, the writer, who has complete knowledge of the subject, may need clarification from you. It is at that point that you would receive a call or email from us.
Writer’s assignment
As soon as the writer has finished, it will be delivered both to the website and to your email address so that you will not miss it. If your deadline is close at hand, we will place a call to you to make sure that you receive the paper on time.
Completing the order and download