[Analysis] Strengthening Compliance with SQC 1 – Key Observations and Recommendations by AASB of ICAI
- Blog|Advisory|Account & Audit|
- 6 Min Read
- By Taxmann
- |
- Last Updated on 25 August, 2024
Latest from Taxmann
Standard on Quality Control 1 (SQC 1), issued by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI), provides comprehensive guidelines for audit firms to establish and maintain an effective quality control system. It ensures compliance with professional standards, ethical principles, and regulatory requirements in all audit engagements. SQC 1 covers leadership responsibilities, ethical requirements, client acceptance, human resources, and monitoring. It mandates firms to implement structured policies and procedures to uphold audit quality, safeguard documentation, and ensure consistent and professional auditing practices across all engagements.
Table of Contents
- Introduction
- Non-compliance in Retaining Audit Documentation Post-Audit Completion
- Failure to Assemble the Final Audit File Within the Stipulated Time
- Failure to Record the Resolution of Differences of Opinion During the Audit
- Violation of the Principle of Confidentiality When Raising a Whistleblowing Complaint
- Addition of New Documents to the Audit File After Final Assembly
1. Introduction
Standard on Quality Control 1 (SQC 1) provides essential guidelines that audit firms must adhere to to establish and maintain a rigorous quality control system. These guidelines ensure that audits are conducted with the utmost professionalism and due diligence in accordance with established standards. Failure to comply with SQC 1 can compromise audit quality, increase legal and reputational risks, and negatively impact stakeholders who rely on accurate and fair financial statements. The Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (AASB) of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) has expressed concerns regarding the declining audit quality due to audit firms’ non-compliance with SQC 1.
Below are examples of such non-compliance, along with the AASB’s recommended guidelines for addressing these issues:
2. Non-compliance in Retaining Audit Documentation Post-Audit Completion
Paragraph 82 of Standard on Quality Control 1 (SQC 1) requires audit firms to establish policies and procedures for retaining engagement documentation for a period that meets the firm’s needs or complies with legal or regulatory requirements. Paragraph 83 further emphasizes that the retention period for engagement documentation may vary depending on the nature of the engagement and the specific circumstances of the firm.
|
AASB—Key Observations and Recommendations |
| The Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (AASB) has noted that many audit firms lack structured policies and procedures for retaining audit documentation. It is often observed that firms fail to retain these documents for an adequate period after completing an audit engagement, which violates Paragraphs 82 and 83 of SQC 1.
To address this issue, the AASB recommends that audit firms develop robust policies and procedures to support the organization and archiving of audit files. This includes the use of secure electronic archiving tools and implementing appropriate measures to safeguard manual working papers. Firms should ensure that manual documentation is compiled in binders or scanned for inclusion in the electronic audit file, thereby ensuring comprehensive and secure record-keeping. Additionally, as stipulated by Standard on Quality Control 1 (SQC 1), audit firms should establish retention policies that satisfy the firm’s needs or comply with legal or regulatory requirements. Specifically, Standard on Quality Control 1 (SQC 1) indicates that for audit engagements, the retention period should generally be no less than seven years from the date of the audit report or, if later, the date of the group audit report. |
3. Failure to Assemble the Final Audit File Within the Stipulated Time
Paragraph 74 of SQC 1 requires firms to establish policies and procedures that ensure engagement teams promptly complete the assembly of final engagement files after the engagement reports are finalized. Paragraph 75 further notes that specific laws or regulations may dictate time limits for finalizing the assembly of engagement files for certain types of engagements.
|
AASB—Key Observations and Recommendations |
| An audit file consists of one or more folders or storage media, whether physical or electronic, that contain the audit documentation for a specific engagement. According to SQC 1 and SA 230, “Audit Documentation,” the auditor must assemble the final audit file upon completing the engagement. The AASB has observed that many firms do not have established policies and procedures to ensure the timely assembly of the final audit file after the audit report is finalized, resulting in non-compliance with SQC 1 and SA 230.
The AASB recommends that firms adhere to any time limits specified by law or regulation when assembling the final audit file for specific types of engagements. In the absence of such prescribed time limits, firms should set reasonable internal deadlines, taking into account the nature of the engagement and the prevailing circumstances. Generally, if a firm sets its own policies, the time limit for assembling the audit file should not exceed 60 days from the date of the auditor’s report. |
4. Failure to Record the Resolution of Differences of Opinion During the Audit
Paragraph 57 of SQC 1 requires firms to establish clear policies and procedures for managing and resolving differences of opinion within the engagement team, among consulted parties, and, where applicable, between the engagement partner and the engagement quality control reviewer. The conclusions from these discussions must be documented and implemented accordingly.
|
AASB—Key Observations and Recommendations |
| The AASB has noted that when differences of opinion arise within the engagement team or between the engagement partner and the engagement quality control reviewer, firms often fail to seek external expertise. Even when an external expert is consulted and resolves the issue, there is frequently inadequate documentation of the conclusions and the rationale behind them.
The AASB recommends that auditors document potential disagreements in accordance with SA 230. This documentation, which may be termed a Memorandum of Dispute Resolution (MDR) or a similar name chosen by the firm, should detail the key facts, differing opinions, and technical perspectives on the matter. Additionally, if an internal resolution cannot be achieved, the firm must refer the issue to an external expert. The expert’s opinion, along with the rationale for their conclusions, should be documented and retained. The MDR must include the signatures and dates from the engagement partner, review partner, or external expert confirming the resolution of the disagreement and the basis for the conclusions reached. |
5. Violation of the Principle of Confidentiality When Raising a Whistleblowing Complaint
Paragraph 86 of SQC 1 requires that firms and their personnel adhere to relevant ethical requirements, including the obligation to maintain the confidentiality of information contained in engagement documentation. Disclosure of such information is permitted only with specific client authorization or when there is a legal or professional duty to do so.
|
AASB—Key Observations and Recommendations |
| When non-compliance or suspected non-compliance is identified, firm personnel often raise whistleblowing complaints. However, the AASB has observed that these complaints frequently fail to uphold the principles of confidentiality. Additionally, many audit firms lack sufficient controls to protect the confidentiality of client information.
SQC 1 mandates that firms establish comprehensive policies and procedures to ensure the confidentiality, secure custody, integrity, accessibility, and retrievability of engagement documentation. It is crucial that audit firm personnel maintain confidentiality at all stages of the engagement, including when raising whistleblowing complaints. The AASB recommends that audit firms emphasize to their personnel the importance of maintaining confidentiality while ensuring that sufficient information is provided when submitting whistleblowing complaints. To strengthen controls over client information confidentiality, the AASB advises implementing the following measures: a) Using passwords among engagement team members to restrict electronic document access to authorized users. |
6. Addition of New Documents to the Audit File After Final Assembly
Paragraph 16 of SA 230 stipulates that if the auditor finds it necessary to modify existing audit documentation or add new documentation after the final audit file has been assembled, the auditor must document the following, regardless of the nature of the modifications or additions:
a) The specific reasons for making the changes.
b) When and by whom were the changes made and reviewed?
|
AASB—Key Observations and Recommendations |
| The AASB has noted that audit firms often face uncertainty about whether they can add new documents to audit documentation after the final audit file has been assembled. Additionally, when new documents are added, firms frequently fail to document these changes as required by SQC 1.
The AASB advises that while SQC 1 permits audit firms to make changes to audit documentation even after the final audit file has been completed, it is essential that the following details are documented: a) The date when the new information was added and reviewed. |
Disclaimer: The content/information published on the website is only for general information of the user and shall not be construed as legal advice. While the Taxmann has exercised reasonable efforts to ensure the veracity of information/content published, Taxmann shall be under no liability in any manner whatsoever for incorrect information, if any.
Taxmann Publications has a dedicated in-house Research & Editorial Team. This team consists of a team of Chartered Accountants, Company Secretaries, and Lawyers. This team works under the guidance and supervision of editor-in-chief Mr Rakesh Bhargava.
The Research and Editorial Team is responsible for developing reliable and accurate content for the readers. The team follows the six-sigma approach to achieve the benchmark of zero error in its publications and research platforms. The team ensures that the following publication guidelines are thoroughly followed while developing the content:
- The statutory material is obtained only from the authorized and reliable sources
- All the latest developments in the judicial and legislative fields are covered
- Prepare the analytical write-ups on current, controversial, and important issues to help the readers to understand the concept and its implications
- Every content published by Taxmann is complete, accurate and lucid
- All evidence-based statements are supported with proper reference to Section, Circular No., Notification No. or citations
- The golden rules of grammar, style and consistency are thoroughly followed
- Font and size that’s easy to read and remain consistent across all imprint and digital publications are applied
Everything on Tax and Corporate Laws of India
To subscribe to our weekly newsletter please log in/register on Taxmann.com
CA | CS | CMA
