ASA 2018‑1 |
Auditing Standard ASA 2018-1
Amendments to Australian Auditing Standards
Issued by the Auditing and Assurance Standards Board

This Auditing Standard is available on the Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (AUASB) website: www.auasb.gov.au
Auditing and Assurance Standards Board Podium Level 14, 530 Collins Street Melbourne Victoria 3000 AUSTRALIA | Phone: (03) 8080 7400 E‑mail: enquiries@auasb.gov.au Postal Address: PO Box 204, Collins Street West Melbourne Victoria 8007 AUSTRALIA |
© 2018 Commonwealth of Australia. The text, graphics and layout of this Auditing Standard are protected by Australian copyright law and the comparable law of other countries. Reproduction within Australia in unaltered form (retaining this notice) is permitted for personal and non‑commercial use subject to the inclusion of an acknowledgment of the source as being the Australian Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (AUASB).
Requests and enquiries concerning reproduction and rights for commercial purposes should be addressed to the Executive Director, Auditing and Assurance Standards Board, PO Box 204, Collins Street West, Melbourne, Victoria 8007 or sent to enquiries@auasb.gov.au. Otherwise, no part of this Auditing Standard may be reproduced, stored or transmitted in any form or by any means without the prior written permission of the AUASB except as permitted by law.
ISSN 1833‑4393
PREFACE
AUTHORITY STATEMENT
CONFORMITY WITH INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS ON AUDITING
Paragraphs
Application........................................................1‑2
Operative Date..............................................................3
Introduction
Scope of this Auditing Standard..................................................4
Objective..................................................................5
Definition..................................................................6
Amendments to Auditing Standards
Amendments to ASA 200..............................................7‑10
Amendments to ASA 230.............................................11‑13
Amendments to ASA 240.............................................14‑17
Amendments to ASA 260.............................................18‑24
Amendments to ASA 500.............................................25‑49
Amendments to ASA 505.............................................50‑52
Amendments to ASA 520......................................................53
Amendments to ASA 580.............................................54‑55
Amendments to ASA 700.............................................56‑59
Amendments to ASA 701.............................................60‑63
The AUASB issues Auditing Standard ASA 2018‑1 Amendments to Australian Auditing Standards pursuant to the requirements of the legislative provisions and the Strategic Direction explained below.
The AUASB is a Non‑corporate Commonwealth entity of the Australian Government established under section 227A of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission Act 2001, as amended (ASIC Act). Under section 336 of the Corporations Act 2001, the AUASB may make Auditing Standards for the purposes of the corporations legislation. These Auditing Standards are legislative instruments under the Legislation Act 2003.
Under the Strategic Direction given to the AUASB by the Financial Reporting Council (FRC), the AUASB is required, inter alia, to develop auditing standards that have a clear public interest focus and are of the highest quality. Under the Strategic Direction, the AUASB is required to have regard to any programme initiated by the IAASB for the revision and enhancement of the International Standards on Auditing (ISAs) and to make appropriate consequential amendments to the Australian Auditing Standards.
This Auditing Standard makes amendments to the requirements and/or application and other explanatory material and/or appendices of the following Auditing Standards:
ASA 230 Audit Documentation (Issued October 2009 and amended to December 2015)
ASA 240 The Auditor's Responsibilities Relating to Fraud in an Audit of a Financial Report (Issued October 2009 and amended to May 2017)
ASA 260 Communication With Those Charged with Governance (Issued December 2015 and amended to May 2017)
ASA 500 Audit Evidence (Issued October 2009 and amended to May 2017)
ASA 505 External Confirmations (Issued October 2009)
ASA 520 Analytical Procedures (Issued October 2009)
ASA 580 Written Representations (Issued October 2009 and amended to December 2015)
ASA 700 Forming an Opinion and Reporting on a Financial Report (Issued December 2015 and amended to May 2017)
ASA 701 Communicating Key Audit Matters in the Independent Auditor’s Report (Issued December 2015 and amended to May 2017)).
The amendments arise mainly from changes made by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB) to ISA 540 (Revised) Auditing Accounting Estimates and Related Disclosures.
The Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (AUASB) makes this Auditing Standard ASA 2018‑1 Amendments to Australian Auditing Standards pursuant to section 227B of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission Act 2001 and section 336 of the Corporations Act 2001.
Dated: 5 December 2018 Roger Simnett
Chair - AUASB
This Auditing Standard has been made for Australian legislative purposes. It contains a series of proposed miscellaneous amendments to various Australian Auditing Standards (as shown) arising from the proposed revision of an existing Auditing Standard. The amendments, in the main, reflect similar amendments made to the equivalent International Standard on Auditing (ISA) issued by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB), an independent standard‑setting board of the International Federation of Accountants (IFAC).
The assessment of the risks of material misstatement may be expressed in quantitative terms, such as in percentages, or in non‑quantitative terms. In any case, the need for the auditor to make appropriate risk assessments is more important than the different approaches by which they may be made. The Australian Auditing Standards do not ordinarily refer to inherent risk and control risk separately, but rather to a combined assessment of the “risks of material misstatement.” However, ASA 54019 requires a separate assessment of inherent risk and control risk to provide a basis for designing and performing further audit procedures to respond to the assessed risks of material misstatement, including significant risks, for accounting estimates at the assertion level in accordance with ASA 330.20 In identifying and assessing risks of material misstatement for significant classes of transactions, account balances or disclosures other than accounting estimates, the auditor may make separate or combined assessments of inherent and control risk depending on preferred audit techniques or methodologies and practical considerations. The assessment of the risks of material misstatement may be expressed in quantitative terms, such as in percentages, or in non‑quantitative terms. In any case, the need for the auditor to make appropriate risk assessments is more important than the different approaches by which they may be made.
19 See ASA 540 Auditing Accounting Estimates and Disclosures, paragraph 16.
20 See ASA 330, paragraph 7(b).
Issued by the Australian Accounting Standards Board, (July 2004) (June 2014).
Issued by the Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (October 2009) (September 2018).
Audit documentation provides evidence that the audit complies with the Australian Auditing Standards. However, it is neither necessary nor practicable for the auditor to document every matter considered, or professional judgement made, in an audit. Further, it is unnecessary for the auditor to document separately (as in a checklist, for example) compliance with matters for which compliance is demonstrated by documents included within the audit file. For example:
Some examples of circumstances in which, in accordance with paragraph 8, it is appropriate to prepare audit documentation relating to the use of professional judgement include, where the matters and judgements are significant:
A retrospective review is also required by ASA 540.20 That review is conducted as a risk assessment procedure to obtain information regarding the effectiveness of management’s previous prior period estimation process accounting estimates, audit evidence about the outcome, or where applicable, their subsequent re‑estimation of prior period accounting estimates that is pertinent to making to assist in identifying and assessing the risks of material misstatement in the current period accounting estimates, and audit evidence of matters, such as estimation uncertainty, that may be required to be disclosed in the financial report. As a practical matter, the auditor’s review of management judgements and assumptions for biases that could represent a risk of material misstatement due to fraud in accordance with this Auditing Standard may be carried out in conjunction with the review required by ASA 540.
See ASA 200, paragraph 15.
See ASA 540 Auditing Accounting Estimates, Including Fair Value Accounting Estimates, and Related Disclosures, paragraph 14 9.
See ASIC Regulatory Guide 34 Auditor’s obligations: reporting to ASIC (December 2007 May 2013), that which provides guidance to help auditors comply with their obligations, under sections 311, 601HG and 990K of the Corporations Act 2001, to report contraventions and suspected contraventions of the Act to ASIC.
Financial reporting frameworks ordinarily allow for the entity to make accounting estimates, and judgements about accounting policies and financial report disclosures, for example, in relation to the use of key assumptions in the development of accounting estimates for which there is significant measurement uncertainty. In addition, law, regulation or financial reporting frameworks may require disclosure of a summary of significant accounting policies or make reference to “critical accounting estimates” or “critical accounting policies and practices” to identify and provide additional information to users about the most difficult, subjective or complex judgements made by management in preparing the financial report.
As a result, the auditor’s views on the subjective aspects of the financial report may be particularly relevant to those charged with governance in discharging their responsibilities for oversight of the financial reporting process. For example, in relation to the matters described in paragraph A19, those charged with governance may be interested in the auditor’s evaluation of the adequacy of disclosures of the estimation uncertainty relating to accounting estimates that give rise to significant risks. views on the degree to which complexity, subjectivity or other inherent risk factors affect the selection or application of the methods, assumptions and data used in making a significant accounting estimate, as well as the auditor’s evaluation of whether management’s point estimate and related disclosures in the financial report are reasonable in the context of the applicable financial reporting framework. Open and constructive communication about significant qualitative aspects of the entity’s accounting practices also may include comment on the acceptability of significant accounting practices and on the quality of the disclosures. When applicable, this may include whether a significant accounting practice of the entity relating to accounting estimates is considered by the auditor not to be most appropriate to the particular circumstances of the entity, for example, when an alternative acceptable method for making an accounting estimate would, in the auditor’s judgement, be more appropriate. Appendix 2 identifies matters that may be included in this communication.
See paragraphs 19–22 and A24–A33 of ASA 220, Quality Control for an Audit of a Financial Report, paragraphs 19–22 and A24–A33.
Accounting Estimates and Related Disclosures
External information source means an external individual or organisation that provides information that has been used by the entity in preparing the financial report, or that has been obtained by the auditor as audit evidence, when such information is suitable for use by a broad range of users. When information has been provided by an individual or organisation acting in the capacity of a management’s expert, service organisation6, or auditor’s expert7 the individual or organisation is not considered an external information source with respect to that particular information. (Ref: Para. A1‑A4)
6 See ASA 402 Audit Considerations Relating to an Entity Using a Service Organisation, paragraph 8.
7 See ASA 620 Using the Work of an Auditor’s Expert, paragraph 6.
When designing and performing audit procedures, the auditor shall consider the relevance and reliability of the information to be used as audit evidence., including information obtained from an external information source. (Ref: Para. A26‑A44)
External Information Source (Ref: Para. 5(d))
External information sources may include pricing services, governmental organisations, central banks or recognised stock exchanges. Examples of information that may be obtained from external information sources include:
A particular set of information is more likely to be suitable for use by a broad range of users and less likely to be subject to influence by any particular user if the external individual or organisation provides it to the public for free, or makes it available to a wide range of users in return for payment of a fee. Judgement may be required in determining whether the information is suitable for use by a broad range of users, taking into account the ability of the entity to influence the external information source.
An external individual or organisation cannot, in respect of any particular set of information, be both an external information source and a management’s expert, or service organisation or auditor’s expert.
However, an external individual or organisation may, for example, be acting as a management’s expert when providing a particular set of information, but may be acting as an external information source when providing a different set of information. In some circumstances, professional judgement may be needed to determine whether an external individual or organisation is acting as an external information source or as a management’s expert with respect to a particular set of information. In other circumstances, the distinction may be clear. For example:
Audit evidence is necessary to support the auditor’s opinion and report. It is cumulative in nature and is primarily obtained from audit procedures performed during the course of the audit. It may, however, also include information obtained from other sources such as previous audits (provided the auditor has determined whether changes have occurred since the previous audit that may affect its relevance to the current audit)6 or a firm’s quality control procedures for client acceptance and continuance. In addition to other sources inside and outside the entity, the entity’s accounting records and other sources internal to the entity are important sources of audit evidence. Also, iInformation that may be used as audit evidence may have been prepared using the work of a management’s expert. or be obtained from an external information source. Audit evidence comprises both information that supports and corroborates management’s assertions, and any information that contradicts such assertions. In addition, in some cases the absence of information (for example, management’s refusal to provide a requested representation) is used by the auditor, and therefore, also constitutes audit evidence.
Information from sources independent of the entity that the auditor may use as audit evidence may include confirmations from third parties, and information from an external information source, including analysts’ reports, and comparable data about competitors (benchmarking data).
The reliability of information to be used as audit evidence, and therefore of the audit evidence itself, is influenced by its source and its nature, and the circumstances under which it is obtained, including the controls over its preparation and maintenance where relevant. Therefore, generalisations about the reliability of various kinds of audit evidence are subject to important exceptions. Even when information to be used as audit evidence is obtained from sources external to the entity, circumstances may exist that could affect its reliability. For example, information obtained from an source independent external source of the entity may not be reliable if the source is not knowledgeable, or a management’s expert may lack objectivity. While recognising that exceptions may exist, the following generalisations about the reliability of audit evidence may be useful:
External Information Sources
The auditor is required by paragraph 7 to consider the relevance and reliability of information obtained from an external information source that is to be used as audit evidence, regardless of whether that information has been used by the entity in preparing the financial report or obtained by the auditor. For information obtained from an external information source, that consideration may, in certain cases, include audit evidence about the external information source or the preparation of the information by the external information source, obtained through designing and performing further audit procedures in accordance with ASA 330 or, where applicable, ASA 540.19
19 See ASA 540 Auditing Accounting Estimates and Related Disclosures
Obtaining an understanding of why management or, when applicable, a management’s expert uses an external information source, and how the relevance and reliability of the information was considered (including its accuracy and completeness), may help to inform the auditor's consideration of the relevance and reliability of that information.
The following factors may be important when considering the relevance and reliability of information obtained from an external information source, including its accuracy and completeness, taking into account that some of these factors may only be relevant when the information has been used by management in preparing the financial report or has been obtained by the auditor:
The nature and extent of the auditor’s consideration takes into account the assessed risks of material misstatement at the assertion level to which the use of the external information is relevant, the degree to which the use of that information is relevant to the reasons for the assessed risks of material misstatement and the possibility that the information from the external information source may not be reliable (for example, whether it is from a credible source). Based on the auditor’s consideration of the matters described in paragraph A39, the auditor may determine that further understanding of the entity and its environment, including its internal control, is needed, in accordance with ASA 315, or that further audit procedures, in accordance with ASA 33020, and ASA 54021 when applicable, are appropriate in the circumstances, to respond to the assessed risks of material misstatement related to the use of information from an external information source. Such procedures may include:
20 See ASA 330, paragraph 6.
21 See ASA 540, paragraph 30.
In some situations, there may be only one provider of certain information, for example, information from a central bank or government, such as an inflation rate, or a single recognised industry body. In such cases, the auditor’s determination of the nature and extent of audit procedures that may be appropriate in the circumstances is influenced by the nature and credibility of the source of the information, the assessed risks of material misstatement to which that external information is relevant, and the degree to which the use of that information is relevant to the reasons for the assessed risk of material misstatement. For example, when the information is from a credible authoritative source, the extent of the auditor’s further audit procedures may be less extensive, such as corroborating the information to the source’s website or published information. In other cases, if a source is not assessed as credible, the auditor may determine that more extensive procedures are appropriate and, in the absence of any alternative independent information source against which to compare, may consider whether performing procedures to obtain information from the external information source, when practical, is appropriate in order to obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence.
When the auditor does not have a sufficient basis with which to consider the relevance and reliability of information from an external information source, the auditor may have a limitation on scope if sufficient appropriate audit evidence cannot be obtained through alternative procedures. Any imposed limitation on scope is evaluated in accordance with the requirements of ASA 705.22
22 See ASA 705 Modifications to the Opinion in the Independent Auditor’s Report, paragraph 13.
When information to be used as audit evidence has been prepared using the work of a management’s expert, the requirement in paragraph 8 applies. For example, an individual or organisation may possess expertise in the application of models to estimate the fair value of securities for which there is no observable market. If the individual or organisation applies that expertise in making an estimate which the entity uses in preparing its financial report, the individual or organisation is a management’s expert and paragraph 8 applies. If, on the other hand, that individual or organisation merely provides price data regarding private transactions not otherwise available to the entity which the entity uses in its own estimation methods, such information, if used as audit evidence, is subject to paragraph 7 of this Auditing Standard, but is being information from an external information source and not the use of a management’s expert by the entity.
See ASA 620 Using the Work of an Auditor’s Expert, paragraph 7.
Considerations when evaluating the appropriateness of the management’s expert’s work as audit evidence for the relevant assertion may include:
See ASA 500, paragraph A5 A9.
See ASA 500, paragraph A31 A35.
See ASA 500, paragraphs A8‑A9 A12‑A13.
See ASA 500 Audit Evidence, paragraph A31A35.
In particular, the auditor shall evaluate whether, in view of the requirements of the applicable financial reporting framework:
[Deleted by the AUASB. Refer Aus 8.1]
See revised ASA 720 The Auditor’s Responsibilities Relating to Other Information.
The auditor shall determine, from the matters communicated with those charged with governance, those matters that required significant auditor attention in performing the audit. In making this determination, the auditor shall take into account the following: (Ref: Para. A9- A18)
Significant Auditor Judgements Relating to Areas in the Financial Report that Involved Significant Management Judgement, Including Accounting Estimates that Have Been Identified as Having Are Subject to a High Degree of Estimation Uncertainty (Ref: Para. 9(b))
However, users of the financial report have highlighted their interest in accounting estimates that have been identified as having are subject to a high degree of estimation uncertainty in accordance with (see ASA 54028) that may have not been determined to be significant risks. Among other things, such estimates are highly dependent on management judgement and are often the most complex areas of the financial report, and may require the involvement of both a management’s expert and an auditor’s expert. Users have also highlighted that accounting policies that have a significant effect on the financial report (and significant changes to those policies) are relevant to their understanding of the financial report, especially in circumstances where an entity’s practices are not consistent with others in its industry.
See ASA 540 Auditing Accounting Estimates, Including Fair Value Accounting Estimates, and Related Disclosures, paragraphs 16‑1710‑11.