ASA 450 - Evaluation of Misstatements Identified during the Audit - October 2009
In ForceCTH
Jurisdiction
Commonwealth
Collection
legislative instrument
Plain English Summary
5/10 complexity
Mechanically, this Auditing Standard requires auditors to accumulate identified misstatements (except those clearly trivial), reassess materiality before concluding, communicate and request correction from management and governance, obtain written representations about uncorrected items, and document conclusions (see paras 5, 10–15). It affects auditors (procedures, planning and documentation), and audited entities’ management and those charged with governance (requests to correct, explain or provide representations), imposing additional compliance and record‑keeping tasks on both parties.
This document is the Auditing and Assurance Standards Board’s Auditing Standard ASA 450, titled Evaluation of Misstatements Identified during the Audit, as compiled to 30 May 2017. It prescribes the auditor’s responsibilities for identifying, accumulating, communicating, evaluating and documenting misstatements discovered in the course of an audit of a financial report or other historical financial information (Aus 0.1; Scope, para. 1). The compilation notes that ASA 450 was made by the AUASB pursuant to section 227B of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission Act 2001 and section 336 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Authority Statement). The Standard is operative for financial reporting periods commencing on or after 1 January 2010 (Aus 0.3) and is to be read in conjunction with ASA 101 (Preamble) and ASA 200 (Overall Objectives) (Authority Statement).
Mechanically, ASA 450 requires the auditor to:
accumulate misstatements identified during the audit, other than those that are clearly trivial (Requirement, para. 5; A2‑A6);
reassess the audit strategy and plan where the nature or aggregate of misstatements indicates other misstatements may exist or the aggregate approaches materiality (Requirements, paras. 6‑7; A7‑A9);
communicate identified misstatements on a timely basis to the appropriate level of management and request correction, and if necessary obtain reasons when management refuses to correct (Requirements, paras. 8‑9; A10‑A13);
reassess materiality before evaluating uncorrected misstatements and determine whether uncorrected misstatements are material individually or in aggregate, taking size and nature into account and considering prior‑period misstatements (Requirements, paras. 10‑11; A14‑A25);
communicate material uncorrected misstatements to those charged with governance and request correction (Requirements, para. 12; A26‑A28);
Current sections
Direct links to the current provisions in ASA 450 - Evaluation of Misstatements Identified during the Audit - October 2009.
33
Obtaining a Copy of this Auditing Standa
Obtaining a Copy of this Auditing Standard
Obtaining a Copy of this Auditing Standard
The most recently compiled versions of Auditing Standards, original Standards and amending Standards (see Compilation Details) are available on the AUASB website: www.auasb.gov.au
Contact Details
Contact Details
Contact Details
Auditing and Assurance Standards BoardPodium LevelLevel 14, 530 Collins StreetMelbourne Victoria 3000AUSTRALIA
Phone: (03) 8080 7400E‑mail: enquiries@auasb.gov.auPostal Address:PO Box 204Collins Street WestMelbourne Victoria 8007AUSTRALIA
Requests and enquiries concerning reproduction and rights for commercial purposes within Australia should be addressed to the Executive Technical 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.
This Auditing Standard reproduces substantial parts of the corresponding International Standard on Auditing issued by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB) and published by the International Federation of Accountants (IFAC), in the manner described in the statement on Conformity with International Standards on Auditing. The AUASB acknowledges that IFAC is the owner of copyright in the International Standard on Auditing incorporated in this Auditing Standard throughout the world.
All existing rights in this material are reserved outside Australia. Reproduction outside Australia in unaltered form (retaining this notice) is permitted for personal and non‑commercial use only.
Further information and requests for authorisation to reproduce this Auditing Standard for commercial purposes outside Australia should be addressed to the Executive Technical Director, Auditing and Assurance Standards Board, PO Box 204, Collins Street West, Melbourne, Victoria 8007 or sent to enquiries@auasb.gov.au. Any decision to approve a request may also require the agreement of IFAC.
ISSN 1833‑4393
CONTENTS
CONTENTS
CONTENTS
COMPILATION DETAILS
AUTHORITY STATEMENT
CONFORMITY WITH INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS ON AUDITING
The most recently compiled versions of Auditing Standards, original Standards and amending Standards (see Compilation Details) are available on the AUASB website: www.auasb.gov.au
Contact Details
Auditing and Assurance Standards BoardPodium LevelLevel 14, 530 Collins StreetMelbourne Victoria 3000AUSTRALIA
Phone: (03) 8080 7400E‑mail: enquiries@auasb.gov.auPostal Address:PO Box 204Collins Street WestMelbourne Victoria 8007AUSTRALIA
Requests and enquiries concerning reproduction and rights for commercial purposes within Australia should be addressed to the Executive Technical 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.
This Auditing Standard reproduces substantial parts of the corresponding International Standard on Auditing issued by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB) and published by the International Federation of Accountants (IFAC), in the manner described in the statement on Conformity with International Standards on Auditing. The AUASB acknowledges that IFAC is the owner of copyright in the International Standard on Auditing incorporated in this Auditing Standard throughout the world.
All existing rights in this material are reserved outside Australia. Reproduction outside Australia in unaltered form (retaining this notice) is permitted for personal and non‑commercial use only.
Further information and requests for authorisation to reproduce this Auditing Standard for commercial purposes outside Australia should be addressed to the Executive Technical Director, Auditing and Assurance Standards Board, PO Box 204, Collins Street West, Melbourne, Victoria 8007 or sent to enquiries@auasb.gov.au. Any decision to approve a request may also require the agreement of IFAC.
ISSN 1833‑4393
CONTENTS
COMPILATION DETAILS
AUTHORITY STATEMENT
CONFORMITY WITH INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS ON AUDITING
Auditing Standard ASA 450 Evaluation of Misstatements Identified during the Audit (as Amended)
This compilation takes into account amendments made up to and including 30 May 2017 and was prepared on 30 May 2017 by the Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (AUASB).
This compilation is not a separate Auditing Standard made by the AUASB. Instead, it is a representation of ASA 450 (October 2009) as amended by another Auditing Standard which is listed in the Table below.
Table of Standards
Standard
Date made
Operative Date
ASA 450 [A]
27 October 2009
financial reporting periods commencing on or after 1 January 2010
ASA 2015‑1 [B]
1 December 2015
financial reporting periods ending on or after 15 December 2016
ASA 2017‑2 [C]
30 May 2017
financial reporting periods commencing on or after 1 January 2018
[A] Federal Register of Legislative Instruments – registration number F2009L04083, 11 November 2009
[B] Federal Register of Legislative Instruments – registration number F2015L02032, 16 December 2015
[C] Federal Register of Legislative Instruments – registration number F2017L01179TBD, TBD13 September 2017
Table of Amendments
Paragraph affected
How affected
By … [paragraph]
Aus A1.1
Deleted
ASA 2015‑1 [143]
Footnote * attached to paragraph Aus A1.1
Deleted
ASA 2015‑1 [144]
Paragraph A21
Amended
ASA 2015‑1 [145]
Footnote 16
Amended
ASA 2015‑1 [146]
Paragraph 4
Amended
ASA 2015-1 [120]
Paragraph A1
Amended
ASA 2015-1 [121]
Footnotes 6 and 7
Addition
ASA 2015-1 [122]
Paragraph A2
Amended
ASA 2015-1 [123]
Heading above paragraph A3
Addition
ASA 2015-1 [124]
A3
Addition
ASA 2015-1 [125-126]
Heading above paragraph A4
Addition
ASA 2015-1 [127]
A4
Addition
ASA 2015-1 [128-129]
Heading above paragraph A5
Addition
ASA 2015-1 [130]
A5
Addition
ASA 2015-1 [131-132]
A6
Amendment
ASA 2015-1 [133]
A10
Amendment
ASA 2015-1 [134]
A16
Amendment
ASA 2015-1 [135]
A17
Addition
ASA 2015-1 [136-137]
A18
Addition
ASA 2015-1 [138 and 140]
Footnote 13
Addition
ASA 2015-1 [139]
A20
Amendment
ASA 2015-1 [141]
Footnote 15
Addition
ASA 2015-1 [142]
8
Amendment
ASA 2017-2 [44]
9
Amendment
ASA 2017-2 [45]
10
Amendment
ASA 2017-2 [46]
11
Amendment
ASA 2017-2 [47]
12
Amendment
ASA 2017-2 [48]
14
Amendment
ASA 2017-2 [49]
15
Amendment
ASA 2017-2 [50]
A11
Amendment
ASA 2017-2 [51]
A20
Amendment
ASA 2017-2 [52]
A22
Amendment
ASA 2017-2 [53]
AUTHORITY STATEMENT
Auditing Standard ASA 450 Evaluation of Misstatements Identified during the Audit (as amended to 30 May 2017) is set out in paragraphs Aus 0.1 to A30.
This Auditing Standard is to be read in conjunction with ASA 101 Preamble to Australian Auditing Standards, which sets out the intentions of the AUASB on how the Australian Auditing Standards, operative for financial reporting periods commencing on or after 1 January 2010, are to be understood, interpreted and applied. This Auditing Standard is to be read also in conjunction with ASA 200 Overall Objectives of the Independent Auditor and the Conduct of an Audit in Accordance with Australian Auditing Standards.
Dated: 30 May 2017
Conformity with International Standards on Auditing
This Auditing Standard conforms with International Standard on Auditing ISA 450 Evaluation of Misstatements Identified during the Audit issued by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB), an independent standard‑setting board of the International Federation of Accountants (IFAC).
Paragraphs that have been added to this Auditing Standard (and do not appear in the text of the equivalent ISA) are identified with the prefix “Aus”.
The equivalent requirements and related application and other explanatory material included in ISA 450 in respect of “relevant ethical requirements”, have been included in Auditing Standard, ASA 102 Compliance with Ethical Requirements when Performing Audits, Reviews and Other Assurance Engagements. There is no international equivalent to ASA 102.
Compliance with this Auditing Standard enables compliance with ISA 450.
Auditing Standard ASA 450 Evaluation of
Auditing Standard ASA 450 Evaluation of Misstatements Identified during the Audit (as Amended)
Auditing Standard ASA 450 Evaluation of Misstatements Identified during the Audit (as Amended)
This compilation takes into account amendments made up to and including 30 May 2017 and was prepared on 30 May 2017 by the Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (AUASB).
This compilation is not a separate Auditing Standard made by the AUASB. Instead, it is a representation of ASA 450 (October 2009) as amended by another Auditing Standard which is listed in the Table below.
Table of Standards
Table of Standards
Table of Standards
Standard
Date made
Operative Date
ASA 450 [A]
27 October 2009
financial reporting periods commencing on or after 1 January 2010
ASA 2015‑1 [B]
1 December 2015
financial reporting periods ending on or after 15 December 2016
ASA 2017‑2 [C]
30 May 2017
financial reporting periods commencing on or after 1 January 2018
[A] Federal Register of Legislative Instruments – registration number F2009L04083, 11 November 2009
[B] Federal Register of Legislative Instruments – registration number F2015L02032, 16 December 2015
[C] Federal Register of Legislative Instruments – registration number F2017L01179TBD, TBD13 September 2017
Table of Amendments
Table of Amendments
Table of Amendments
Paragraph affected
How affected
By … [paragraph]
Aus A1.1
Deleted
ASA 2015‑1 [143]
Footnote * attached to paragraph Aus A1.1
Deleted
ASA 2015‑1 [144]
Paragraph A21
Amended
ASA 2015‑1 [145]
Footnote 16
Amended
ASA 2015‑1 [146]
Paragraph 4
Amended
ASA 2015-1 [120]
Paragraph A1
Amended
ASA 2015-1 [121]
Footnotes 6 and 7
Addition
ASA 2015-1 [122]
Paragraph A2
Amended
ASA 2015-1 [123]
Heading above paragraph A3
Addition
ASA 2015-1 [124]
A3
Addition
ASA 2015-1 [125-126]
Heading above paragraph A4
Addition
ASA 2015-1 [127]
A4
Addition
ASA 2015-1 [128-129]
Heading above paragraph A5
Addition
ASA 2015-1 [130]
A5
Addition
ASA 2015-1 [131-132]
A6
Amendment
ASA 2015-1 [133]
A10
Amendment
ASA 2015-1 [134]
A16
Amendment
ASA 2015-1 [135]
A17
Addition
ASA 2015-1 [136-137]
A18
Addition
ASA 2015-1 [138 and 140]
Footnote 13
Addition
ASA 2015-1 [139]
A20
Amendment
ASA 2015-1 [141]
Footnote 15
Addition
ASA 2015-1 [142]
8
Amendment
ASA 2017-2 [44]
9
Amendment
ASA 2017-2 [45]
10
Amendment
ASA 2017-2 [46]
11
Amendment
ASA 2017-2 [47]
12
Amendment
ASA 2017-2 [48]
14
Amendment
ASA 2017-2 [49]
15
Amendment
ASA 2017-2 [50]
A11
Amendment
ASA 2017-2 [51]
A20
Amendment
ASA 2017-2 [52]
A22
Amendment
ASA 2017-2 [53]
AUTHORITY STATEMENT
Auditing Standard ASA 450 Evaluation of Misstatements Identified during the Audit (as amended to 30 May 2017) is set out in paragraphs Aus 0.1 to A30.
This Auditing Standard is to be read in conjunction with ASA 101 Preamble to Australian Auditing Standards, which sets out the intentions of the AUASB on how the Australian Auditing Standards, operative for financial reporting periods commencing on or after 1 January 2010, are to be understood, interpreted and applied. This Auditing Standard is to be read also in conjunction with ASA 200 Overall Objectives of the Independent Auditor and the Conduct of an Audit in Accordance with Australian Auditing Standards.
Dated: 30 May 2017
Conformity with International Standards on Auditing
This Auditing Standard conforms with International Standard on Auditing ISA 450 Evaluation of Misstatements Identified during the Audit issued by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB), an independent standard‑setting board of the International Federation of Accountants (IFAC).
Paragraphs that have been added to this Auditing Standard (and do not appear in the text of the equivalent ISA) are identified with the prefix “Aus”.
The equivalent requirements and related application and other explanatory material included in ISA 450 in respect of “relevant ethical requirements”, have been included in Auditing Standard, ASA 102 Compliance with Ethical Requirements when Performing Audits, Reviews and Other Assurance Engagements. There is no international equivalent to ASA 102.
Compliance with this Auditing Standard enables compliance with ISA 450.
AUTHORITY STATEMENT
AUTHORITY STATEMENT
AUTHORITY STATEMENT
Auditing Standard ASA 450 Evaluation of Misstatements Identified during the Audit (as amended to 30 May 2017) is set out in paragraphs Aus 0.1 to A30.
This Auditing Standard is to be read in conjunction with ASA 101 Preamble to Australian Auditing Standards, which sets out the intentions of the AUASB on how the Australian Auditing Standards, operative for financial reporting periods commencing on or after 1 January 2010, are to be understood, interpreted and applied. This Auditing Standard is to be read also in conjunction with ASA 200 Overall Objectives of the Independent Auditor and the Conduct of an Audit in Accordance with Australian Auditing Standards.
Conformity with International Standards
Conformity with International Standards on Auditing
Conformity with International Standards on Auditing
This Auditing Standard conforms with International Standard on Auditing ISA 450 Evaluation of Misstatements Identified during the Audit issued by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB), an independent standard‑setting board of the International Federation of Accountants (IFAC).
Paragraphs that have been added to this Auditing Standard (and do not appear in the text of the equivalent ISA) are identified with the prefix “Aus”.
The equivalent requirements and related application and other explanatory material included in ISA 450 in respect of “relevant ethical requirements”, have been included in Auditing Standard, ASA 102 Compliance with Ethical Requirements when Performing Audits, Reviews and Other Assurance Engagements. There is no international equivalent to ASA 102.
Compliance with this Auditing Standard enables compliance with ISA 450.
Auditing Standard ASA 450
Auditing Standard ASA 450
Auditing Standard ASA 450
The Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (AUASB) made Auditing Standard ASA 450 Evaluation of Misstatements Identified during the Audit pursuant to section 227B of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission Act 2001 and section 336 of the Corporations Act 2001, on 27 October 2009.
This compiled version of ASA 450 incorporates subsequent amendments contained in another Auditing Standard made by the AUASB up to and including 30 May 2017 (see Compilation Details).
Auditing Standard ASA 450
Evaluation of Misstatements Identified during the Audit
Application
Aus 0.1 This Auditing Standard applies to:
(a) an audit of a financial report for a financial year, or an audit of a financial report for a half‑year, in accordance with the Corporations Act 2001; and
(b) an audit of a financial report, or a complete set of financial statements, for any other purpose.
Aus 0.2 This Auditing Standard also applies, as appropriate, to an audit of other historical financial information.
Operative Date
Aus 0.3 This Auditing Standard is operative for financial reporting periods commencing on or after 1 January 2010. [Note: For operative dates of paragraphs changed or added by an Amending Standard, see Compilation Details.]
Introduction
Scope of this Auditing Standard
This Auditing Standard deals with the auditor’s responsibility to evaluate the effect of identified misstatements on the audit and of uncorrected misstatements, if any, on the financial report. ASA 700 deals with the auditor’s responsibility, in forming an opinion on the financial report, to conclude whether reasonable assurance has been obtained about whether the financial report as a whole is free from material misstatement. The auditor’s conclusion required by ASA 700 takes into account the auditor’s evaluation of uncorrected misstatements, if any, on the financial report, in accordance with this Auditing Standard.[1] ASA 320[2] deals with the auditor’s responsibility to apply the concept of materiality appropriately in planning and performing an audit of a financial report.
Effective Date
[Deleted by the AUASB. Refer Aus 0.3]
Evaluation of Misstatements Identified d
Evaluation of Misstatements Identified during the Audit
Auditing Standard ASA 450
The Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (AUASB) made Auditing Standard ASA 450 Evaluation of Misstatements Identified during the Audit pursuant to section 227B of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission Act 2001 and section 336 of the Corporations Act 2001, on 27 October 2009.
This compiled version of ASA 450 incorporates subsequent amendments contained in another Auditing Standard made by the AUASB up to and including 30 May 2017 (see Compilation Details).
Auditing Standard ASA 450
Evaluation of Misstatements Identified during the Audit
Application
Aus 0.1 This Auditing Standard applies to:
(a) an audit of a financial report for a financial year, or an audit of a financial report for a half‑year, in accordance with the Corporations Act 2001; and
(b) an audit of a financial report, or a complete set of financial statements, for any other purpose.
Aus 0.2 This Auditing Standard also applies, as appropriate, to an audit of other historical financial information.
Operative Date
Aus 0.3 This Auditing Standard is operative for financial reporting periods commencing on or after 1 January 2010. [Note: For operative dates of paragraphs changed or added by an Amending Standard, see Compilation Details.]
Introduction
Scope of this Auditing Standard
This Auditing Standard deals with the auditor’s responsibility to evaluate the effect of identified misstatements on the audit and of uncorrected misstatements, if any, on the financial report. ASA 700 deals with the auditor’s responsibility, in forming an opinion on the financial report, to conclude whether reasonable assurance has been obtained about whether the financial report as a whole is free from material misstatement. The auditor’s conclusion required by ASA 700 takes into account the auditor’s evaluation of uncorrected misstatements, if any, on the financial report, in accordance with this Auditing Standard.[1] ASA 320[2] deals with the auditor’s responsibility to apply the concept of materiality appropriately in planning and performing an audit of a financial report.
Effective Date
[Deleted by the AUASB. Refer Aus 0.3]
Application
Application
Application
Aus 0.1 This Auditing Standard applies to:
(a) an audit of a financial report for a financial year, or an audit of a financial report for a half‑year, in accordance with the Corporations Act 2001; and
(b) an audit of a financial report, or a complete set of financial statements, for any other purpose.
Aus 0.2 This Auditing Standard also applies, as appropriate, to an audit of other historical financial information.
Operative Date
Operative Date
Operative Date
Aus 0.3 This Auditing Standard is operative for financial reporting periods commencing on or after 1 January 2010. [Note: For operative dates of paragraphs changed or added by an Amending Standard, see Compilation Details.]
Introduction
Introduction
Auditing Standard ASA 450
The Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (AUASB) made Auditing Standard ASA 450 Evaluation of Misstatements Identified during the Audit pursuant to section 227B of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission Act 2001 and section 336 of the Corporations Act 2001, on 27 October 2009.
This compiled version of ASA 450 incorporates subsequent amendments contained in another Auditing Standard made by the AUASB up to and including 30 May 2017 (see Compilation Details).
Auditing Standard ASA 450
Evaluation of Misstatements Identified during the Audit
Application
Aus 0.1 This Auditing Standard applies to:
(a) an audit of a financial report for a financial year, or an audit of a financial report for a half‑year, in accordance with the Corporations Act 2001; and
(b) an audit of a financial report, or a complete set of financial statements, for any other purpose.
Aus 0.2 This Auditing Standard also applies, as appropriate, to an audit of other historical financial information.
Operative Date
Aus 0.3 This Auditing Standard is operative for financial reporting periods commencing on or after 1 January 2010. [Note: For operative dates of paragraphs changed or added by an Amending Standard, see Compilation Details.]
Introduction
Scope of this Auditing Standard
This Auditing Standard deals with the auditor’s responsibility to evaluate the effect of identified misstatements on the audit and of uncorrected misstatements, if any, on the financial report. ASA 700 deals with the auditor’s responsibility, in forming an opinion on the financial report, to conclude whether reasonable assurance has been obtained about whether the financial report as a whole is free from material misstatement. The auditor’s conclusion required by ASA 700 takes into account the auditor’s evaluation of uncorrected misstatements, if any, on the financial report, in accordance with this Auditing Standard.[1] ASA 320[2] deals with the auditor’s responsibility to apply the concept of materiality appropriately in planning and performing an audit of a financial report.
Effective Date
[Deleted by the AUASB. Refer Aus 0.3]
Scope of this Auditing Standard
Scope of this Auditing Standard
Scope of this Auditing Standard
This Auditing Standard deals with the auditor’s responsibility to evaluate the effect of identified misstatements on the audit and of uncorrected misstatements, if any, on the financial report. ASA 700 deals with the auditor’s responsibility, in forming an opinion on the financial report, to conclude whether reasonable assurance has been obtained about whether the financial report as a whole is free from material misstatement. The auditor’s conclusion required by ASA 700 takes into account the auditor’s evaluation of uncorrected misstatements, if any, on the financial report, in accordance with this Auditing Standard.[1] ASA 320[2] deals with the auditor’s responsibility to apply the concept of materiality appropriately in planning and performing an audit of a financial report.
Effective Date
Effective Date
Effective Date
[Deleted by the AUASB. Refer Aus 0.3]
Objective
Objective
Objective
The objective of the auditor is to evaluate:
The effect of identified misstatements on the audit; and
The effect of uncorrected misstatements, if any, on the financial report.
Definitions
Definitions
Definitions
For the purposes of this Auditing Standard, the following terms have the meanings attributed below:
Misstatement means a difference between the reported amount, classification, presentation, or disclosure of a financial report item and the amount, classification, presentation, or disclosure that is required for the item to be in accordance with the applicable financial reporting framework. Misstatements can arise from error or fraud. (Ref: Para. A1)
When the auditor expresses an opinion on whether the financial report is presented fairly, in all material respects, or gives a true and fair view, misstatements also include those adjustments of amounts, classifications, presentation, or disclosures that, in the auditor’s judgement, are necessary for the financial report to be presented fairly, in all material respects, or to give a true and fair view.
Uncorrected misstatements means misstatements that the auditor has accumulated during the audit and that have not been corrected.
Requirements
Requirements
Objective
The objective of the auditor is to evaluate:
The effect of identified misstatements on the audit; and
The effect of uncorrected misstatements, if any, on the financial report.
Definitions
For the purposes of this Auditing Standard, the following terms have the meanings attributed below:
Misstatement means a difference between the reported amount, classification, presentation, or disclosure of a financial report item and the amount, classification, presentation, or disclosure that is required for the item to be in accordance with the applicable financial reporting framework. Misstatements can arise from error or fraud. (Ref: Para. A1)
When the auditor expresses an opinion on whether the financial report is presented fairly, in all material respects, or gives a true and fair view, misstatements also include those adjustments of amounts, classifications, presentation, or disclosures that, in the auditor’s judgement, are necessary for the financial report to be presented fairly, in all material respects, or to give a true and fair view.
Uncorrected misstatements means misstatements that the auditor has accumulated during the audit and that have not been corrected.
Requirements
Accumulation of Identified Misstatements
The auditor shall accumulate misstatements identified during the audit, other than those that are clearly trivial. (Ref: Para. A2‑A6)
Consideration of Identified Misstatements as the Audit Progresses
The auditor shall determine whether the overall audit strategy and audit plan need to be revised if:
The nature of identified misstatements and the circumstances of their occurrence indicate that other misstatements may exist that, when aggregated with misstatements accumulated during the audit, could be material; or (Ref: Para. A7)
The aggregate of misstatements accumulated during the audit approaches materiality determined in accordance with ASA 320. (Ref: Para. A8)
If, at the auditor’s request, management has examined a class of transactions, account balances or disclosures and corrected misstatements that were detected, the auditor shall perform additional audit procedures to determine whether misstatements remain. (Ref: Para. A9)
Communication and Correction of Misstatements
The auditor shall communicate, unless prohibited by law or regulation, on a timely basis all misstatements accumulated during the audit with the appropriate level of management.[3] The auditor shall request management to correct those misstatements. (Ref: Para. A10‑A12)
If management refuses to correct some or all of the misstatements communicated by the auditor, the auditor shall obtain an understanding of management’s reasons for not making the corrections and shall take that understanding into account when evaluating whether the financial report as a whole is free from material misstatement. (Ref: Para. A13)
Evaluating the Effect of Uncorrected Misstatements
Prior to evaluating the effect of uncorrected misstatements, the auditor shall reassess materiality determined in accordance with ASA 320 to confirm whether it remains appropriate in the context of the entity’s actual financial results. (Ref: Para. A14‑A15)
The auditor shall determine whether uncorrected misstatements are material, individually or in aggregate. In making this determination, the auditor shall consider:
The size and nature of the misstatements, both in relation to particular classes of transactions, account balances or disclosures and the financial report as a whole, and the particular circumstances of their occurrence; and (Ref: Para. A16‑A22, A24‑A25)
The effect of uncorrected misstatements related to prior periods on the relevant classes of transactions, account balances or disclosures, and the financial report as a whole. (Ref: Para. A23)
Communication with Those Charged with Governance
The auditor shall communicate with those charged with governance uncorrected misstatements and the effect that they, individually or in aggregate, may have on the opinion in the auditor’s report, unless prohibited by law or regulation.[4] The auditor’s communication shall identify material uncorrected misstatements individually. The auditor shall request that uncorrected misstatements be corrected. (Ref: Para. A26‑A28)
The auditor shall also communicate with those charged with governance the effect of uncorrected misstatements related to prior periods on the relevant classes of transactions, account balances or disclosures, and the financial report as a whole.
Written Representation
The auditor shall request a written representation from management and, where appropriate, those charged with governance whether they believe the effects of uncorrected misstatements are immaterial, individually and in aggregate, to the financial report as a whole. A summary of such items shall be included in or attached to the written representation. (Ref: Para. A29)
Documentation
The auditor shall include in the audit documentation:[5] (Ref: Para. A30)
The amount below which misstatements would be regarded as clearly trivial (see paragraph 5 of this Auditing Standard);
All misstatements accumulated during the audit and whether they have been corrected (see paragraphs 5, 8 and 12 of this Auditing Standard); and
The auditor’s conclusion as to whether uncorrected misstatements are material, individually or in aggregate, and the basis for that conclusion (see paragraph 11 of this Auditing Standard).
* * *
Application and Other Explanatory Material
Definition of Misstatement (Ref: Para. 4(a))
Misstatements may result from:
An inaccuracy in gathering or processing data from which the financial report is prepared;
An omission of an amount or disclosure, including inadequate or incomplete disclosures, and those disclosures required to meet disclosure objectives of certain financial reporting frameworks as applicable[6];
An incorrect accounting estimate arising from overlooking, or clear misinterpretation of, facts;
Judgements of management concerning accounting estimates that the auditor considers unreasonable or the selection and application of accounting policies that the auditor considers inappropriate.
An inappropriate classification, aggregation or disaggregation, of information; and
For a financial report prepared in accordance with a fair presentation framework, the omission of a disclosure necessary for the financial report to achieve fair presentation beyond disclosures specifically required by the framework.[7]
Examples of misstatements arising from fraud are provided in ASA 240.[8]
Accumulation of Identified Misstatements (Ref: Para. 5)
Paragraph 5 of this Auditing Standard requires the auditor to accumulate misstatements identified during the audit other than those that are clearly trivial. “Clearly trivial” is not another expression for “not material.” Misstatements that are clearly trivial will be of a wholly different (smaller) order of magnitude, or of a wholly different nature than those that would be determined to be material, and will be matters that are clearly inconsequential, whether taken individually or in aggregate and whether judged by any criteria of size, nature or circumstances. When there is any uncertainty about whether one or more items are clearly trivial, the misstatement is considered not to be clearly trivial.
Misstatements in Individual Statements
The auditor may designate an amount below which misstatements of amounts in the individual statements would be clearly trivial, and would not need to be accumulated because the auditor expects that the accumulation of such amounts clearly would not have a material effect on the financial report. However, misstatements of amounts that are above the designated amount are accumulated as required by paragraph 5 of this Auditing Standard. In addition, misstatements relating to amounts may not be clearly trivial when judged on criteria of nature or circumstances, and, if not, are accumulated as required by paragraph 5 of this Auditing Standard.
Misstatements in Disclosures
Misstatements in disclosures may also be clearly trivial whether taken individually or in aggregate, and whether judged by any criteria of size, nature or circumstances. Misstatements in disclosures that are not clearly trivial are also accumulated to assist the auditor in evaluating the effect of such misstatements on the relevant disclosures and the financial report as a whole. Paragraph A14 of this Auditing Standard provides examples of where misstatements in qualitative disclosures may be material.
Accumulation of Misstatements
Misstatements by nature or circumstances, accumulated as described in paragraphs A3‑A4, cannot be added together as is possible in the case of misstatements of amounts. Nevertheless, the auditor is required by paragraph 11 of this Auditing Standard to evaluate those misstatements individually and in aggregate (i.e., collectively with other misstatements) to determine whether they are material.
To assist the auditor in evaluating the effect of misstatements accumulated during the audit and in communicating misstatements to management and those charged with governance, it may be useful to distinguish between factual misstatements, judgemental misstatements and projected misstatements.
Misstatements in Disclosures
Factual misstatements are misstatements about which there is no doubt.
Judgemental misstatements are differences arising from the judgements of management including those concerning recognition, measurement, presentation and disclosure in the financial report (including the selection or application of accounting policies) that the auditor considers unreasonable or inappropriate.
Projected misstatements are the auditor’s best estimate of misstatements in populations, involving the projection of misstatements identified in audit samples to the entire populations from which the samples were drawn. Guidance on the determination of projected misstatements and evaluation of the results is set out in ASA 530.[9]
Consideration of Identified Misstatements as the Audit Progresses (Ref: Para. 6‑7)
A misstatement may not be an isolated occurrence. Evidence that other misstatements may exist include, for example, where the auditor identifies that a misstatement arose from a breakdown in internal control or from inappropriate assumptions or valuation methods that have been widely applied by the entity.
If the aggregate of misstatements accumulated during the audit approaches materiality determined in accordance with ASA 320, there may be a greater than acceptably low level of risk that possible undetected misstatements, when taken with the aggregate of misstatements accumulated during the audit, could exceed materiality. Undetected misstatements could exist because of the presence of sampling risk and non‑sampling risk.[10]
The auditor may request management to examine a class of transactions, account balances or disclosures in order for management to understand the cause of a misstatement identified by the auditor, perform procedures to determine the amount of the actual misstatement in the class of transactions, account balance or disclosure, and to make appropriate adjustments to the financial report. Such a request may be made, for example, based on the auditor’s projection of misstatements identified in an audit sample to the entire population from which it was drawn.
Communication and Correction of Misstatements (Ref: Para. 8‑9)
Timely communication of misstatements to the appropriate level of management is important as it enables management to evaluate whether the classes of transactions, account balances and disclosures are misstated, inform the auditor if it disagrees, and take action as necessary. Ordinarily, the appropriate level of management is the one that has responsibility and authority to evaluate the misstatements and to take the necessary action.
In some jurisdictions, law or regulation may restrict the auditor’s communication of certain misstatements to management, or others, within the entity. Law or regulation may specifically prohibit a communication, or other action, that might prejudice an investigation by an appropriate authority into an actual, or suspected, illegal act, including alerting the entity, for example, when the auditor is required to report identified or suspected non-compliance with law or regulation to an appropriate authority pursuant to anti-money laundering legislation. In these circumstances, the issues considered by the auditor may be complex[*] and the auditor may consider it appropriate to obtain legal advice.
The correction by management of all misstatements, including those communicated by the auditor, enables management to maintain accurate accounting books and records and reduces the risks of material misstatement of future financial reports because of the cumulative effect of immaterial uncorrected misstatements related to prior periods.
ASA 700 requires the auditor to evaluate whether the financial report is prepared and presented, in all material respects, in accordance with the requirements of the applicable financial reporting framework. This evaluation includes consideration of the qualitative aspects of the entity’s accounting practices, including indicators of possible bias in management’s judgements,[11] which may be affected by the auditor’s understanding of management’s reasons for not making the corrections.
Evaluating the Effect of Uncorrected Misstatements (Ref: Para. 10‑11)
The auditor’s determination of materiality in accordance with ASA 320 is often based on estimates of the entity’s financial results, because the actual financial results may not yet be known. Therefore, prior to the auditor’s evaluation of the effect of uncorrected misstatements, it may be necessary to revise materiality determined in accordance with ASA 320 based on the actual financial results.
ASA 320 explains that, as the audit progresses, materiality for the financial report as a whole (and, if applicable, the materiality level or levels for particular classes of transactions, account balances or disclosures) is revised in the event of the auditor becoming aware of information during the audit that would have caused the auditor to have determined a different amount (or amounts) initially.[12] Thus, any significant revision is likely to have been made before the auditor evaluates the effect of uncorrected misstatements. However, if the auditor’s reassessment of materiality determined in accordance with ASA 320 (see paragraph 10) gives rise to a lower amount (or amounts), then performance materiality and the appropriateness of the nature, timing and extent of the further audit procedures are reconsidered so as to obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence on which to base the audit opinion.
Each individual misstatement of an amount is considered to evaluate its effect on the relevant classes of transactions, account balances or disclosures, including whether the materiality level for that particular class of transactions, account balance or disclosure, if any, has been exceeded.
In addition, each individual misstatement of a qualitative disclosure is considered to evaluate its effect on the relevant disclosure(s), as well as its overall effect on the financial report as a whole. The determination of whether a misstatement(s) in a qualitative disclosure is material, in the context of the applicable financial reporting framework and the specific circumstances of the entity, is a matter that involves the exercise of professional judgement. Examples where such misstatements may be material include:
Inaccurate or incomplete descriptions of information about the objectives, policies and processes for managing capital for entities with insurance and banking activities.
The omission of information about the events or circumstances that have led to an impairment loss (e.g., a significant long‑term decline in the demand for a metal or commodity) in an entity with mining operations.
The incorrect description of an accounting policy relating to a significant item in the statement of financial position, the statement of comprehensive income, the statement of changes in equity or the statement of cash flows.
The inadequate description of the sensitivity of an exchange rate in an entity that undertakes International trading activities.
In determining whether uncorrected misstatements by nature are material as required by paragraph 11 of this Auditing Standard, the auditor considers uncorrected misstatements in amounts and disclosures. Such misstatements may be considered material either individually, or when taken in combination with other misstatements. For example, depending on the misstatements identified in disclosures, the auditor may consider whether:
Identified errors are persistent or pervasive; or
A number of identified misstatements are relevant to the same matter, and considered collectively may affect the users’ understanding of that matter.
This consideration of accumulated misstatements is also helpful when evaluating the financial report in accordance with paragraph 13(d) of ASA 700, which requires the auditor to consider whether the overall presentation of the financial report has been undermined by including information that is not relevant or that obscures a proper understanding of the matters disclosed.[13]
If an individual misstatement is judged to be material, it is unlikely that it can be offset by other misstatements. For example, if revenue has been materially overstated, the financial report as a whole will be materially misstated, even if the effect of the misstatement on earnings is completely offset by an equivalent overstatement of expenses. It may be appropriate to offset misstatements within the same account balance or class of transactions; however, the risk that further undetected misstatements may exist is considered before concluding that offsetting even immaterial misstatements is appropriate.[14]
Determining whether a classification misstatement is material involves the evaluation of qualitative considerations, such as the effect of the classification misstatement on debt or other contractual covenants, the effect on individual line items or sub‑totals, or the effect on key ratios. There may be circumstances where the auditor concludes that a classification misstatement is not material in the context of the financial report as a whole, even though it may exceed the materiality level or levels applied in evaluating other misstatements. For example, a misclassification between balance sheet line items may not be considered material in the context of the financial report as a whole when the amount of the misclassification is small in relation to the size of the related balance sheet line items and the misclassification does not affect the income statement or any key ratios.
The circumstances related to some misstatements may cause the auditor to evaluate them as material, individually or when considered together with other misstatements accumulated during the audit, even if they are lower than materiality for the financial report as a whole. Circumstances that may affect the evaluation include the extent to which the misstatement:
Affects compliance with regulatory requirements;
Affects compliance with debt covenants or other contractual requirements;
Relates to the incorrect selection or application of an accounting policy that has an immaterial effect on the current period’s financial report but is likely to have a material effect on future periods’ financial reports;
Masks a change in earnings or other trends, especially in the context of general economic and industry conditions;
Affects ratios used to evaluate the entity’s financial position, results of operations or cash flows;
Affects segment information presented in the financial report (for example, the significance of the matter to a segment or other portion of the entity’s business that has been identified as playing a significant role in the entity’s operations or profitability);
Has the effect of increasing management compensation, for example, by ensuring that the requirements for the award of bonuses or other incentives are satisfied;
Is significant having regard to the auditor’s understanding of known previous communications to users, for example, in relation to forecast earnings;
Relates to items involving particular parties (for example, whether external parties to the transaction are related to members of the entity’s management);
Is an omission of information not specifically required by the applicable financial reporting framework but which, in the judgement of the auditor, is important to the users’ understanding of the financial position, financial performance or cash flows of the entity; or
Affects other information to be included in the entity’s annual report (for example, information to be included in a “Management Discussion and Analysis” or an “Operating and Financial Review”) that may reasonably be expected to influence the economic decisions of the users of the financial report. ASA 720[15] deals with the auditor’s responsibilities relating to other information.
These circumstances are only examples; not all are likely to be present in all audits nor is the list necessarily complete. The existence of any circumstances such as these does not necessarily lead to a conclusion that the misstatement is material.
ASA 240[16] explains how the implications of a misstatement that is, or may be, the result of fraud ought to be considered in relation to other aspects of the audit, even if the size of the misstatement is not material in relation to the financial report. Depending on the circumstances, misstatements in disclosures could also be indicative of fraud, and, for example, may arise from:
Misleading disclosures that have resulted from bias in management’s judgements; or
Extensive duplicative or uninformative disclosures that are intended to obscure a proper understanding of matters in the financial report.
When considering the implications of misstatements in classes of transactions, account balances and disclosures, the auditor exercises professional scepticism in accordance with ASA 200.[17]
The cumulative effect of immaterial uncorrected misstatements related to prior periods may have a material effect on the current period’s financial report. There are different acceptable approaches to the auditor’s evaluation of such uncorrected misstatements on the current period’s financial report. Using the same evaluation approach provides consistency from period to period.
Considerations Specific to Public Sector Entities (Ref: Para 11(a))
In the case of an audit of a public sector entity, the evaluation whether a misstatement is material may also be affected by the auditor’s responsibilities established by law, regulation or other authority to report specific matters, including, for example, fraud.
Furthermore, issues such as public interest, accountability, probity and ensuring effective legislative oversight, in particular, may affect the assessment whether an item is material by virtue of its nature. This is particularly so for items that relate to compliance with law, regulation, or other authority.
Communication with Those Charged with Governance (Ref: Para. 12)
If uncorrected misstatements have been communicated with person(s) with management responsibilities, and those person(s) also have governance responsibilities, they need not be communicated again with those same person(s) in their governance role. The auditor nonetheless has to be satisfied that communication with person(s) with management responsibilities adequately informs all of those with whom the auditor would otherwise communicate in their governance capacity.[18]
Where there is a large number of individual immaterial uncorrected misstatements, the auditor may communicate the number and overall monetary effect of the uncorrected misstatements, rather than the details of each individual uncorrected misstatement.
ASA 260 requires the auditor to communicate with those charged with governance the written representations the auditor is requesting (see paragraph 14).[19] The auditor may discuss with those charged with governance the reasons for, and the implications of, a failure to correct misstatements, having regard to the size and nature of the misstatement judged in the surrounding circumstances, and possible implications in relation to a future financial report.
Written Representation (Ref: Para. 14)
Because the preparation of the financial report requires management and, where appropriate, those charged with governance to adjust the financial report to correct material misstatements, the auditor is required to request them to provide a written representation about uncorrected misstatements.[*] In some circumstances, management and, where appropriate, those charged with governance may not believe that certain uncorrected misstatements are misstatements. For that reason, they may want to add to their written representation words such as: “We do not agree that items … and … constitute misstatements because [description of reasons].” Obtaining this representation does not, however, relieve the auditor of the need to form a conclusion on the effect of uncorrected misstatements.
Documentation (Ref: Para. 15)
The auditor’s documentation of uncorrected misstatements may take into account:
The consideration of the aggregate effect of uncorrected misstatements;
The evaluation of whether the materiality level or levels for particular classes of transactions, account balances or disclosures, if any, have been exceeded; and
The evaluation of the effect of uncorrected misstatements on key ratios or trends, and compliance with legal, regulatory and contractual requirements (for example, debt covenants).
Accumulation of Identified Misstatements
Accumulation of Identified Misstatements
Accumulation of Identified Misstatements
The auditor shall accumulate misstatements identified during the audit, other than those that are clearly trivial. (Ref: Para. A2‑A6)
Consideration of Identified Misstatement
Consideration of Identified Misstatements as the Audit Progresses
Consideration of Identified Misstatements as the Audit Progresses
The auditor shall determine whether the overall audit strategy and audit plan need to be revised if:
The nature of identified misstatements and the circumstances of their occurrence indicate that other misstatements may exist that, when aggregated with misstatements accumulated during the audit, could be material; or (Ref: Para. A7)
The aggregate of misstatements accumulated during the audit approaches materiality determined in accordance with ASA 320. (Ref: Para. A8)
If, at the auditor’s request, management has examined a class of transactions, account balances or disclosures and corrected misstatements that were detected, the auditor shall perform additional audit procedures to determine whether misstatements remain. (Ref: Para. A9)
Communication and Correction of Misstate
Communication and Correction of Misstatements
Communication and Correction of Misstatements
The auditor shall communicate, unless prohibited by law or regulation, on a timely basis all misstatements accumulated during the audit with the appropriate level of management.[3] The auditor shall request management to correct those misstatements. (Ref: Para. A10‑A12)
If management refuses to correct some or all of the misstatements communicated by the auditor, the auditor shall obtain an understanding of management’s reasons for not making the corrections and shall take that understanding into account when evaluating whether the financial report as a whole is free from material misstatement. (Ref: Para. A13)
Evaluating the Effect of Uncorrected Mis
Evaluating the Effect of Uncorrected Misstatements
Evaluating the Effect of Uncorrected Misstatements
Prior to evaluating the effect of uncorrected misstatements, the auditor shall reassess materiality determined in accordance with ASA 320 to confirm whether it remains appropriate in the context of the entity’s actual financial results. (Ref: Para. A14‑A15)
The auditor shall determine whether uncorrected misstatements are material, individually or in aggregate. In making this determination, the auditor shall consider:
The size and nature of the misstatements, both in relation to particular classes of transactions, account balances or disclosures and the financial report as a whole, and the particular circumstances of their occurrence; and (Ref: Para. A16‑A22, A24‑A25)
The effect of uncorrected misstatements related to prior periods on the relevant classes of transactions, account balances or disclosures, and the financial report as a whole. (Ref: Para. A23)
Communication with Those Charged with Governance
The auditor shall communicate with those charged with governance uncorrected misstatements and the effect that they, individually or in aggregate, may have on the opinion in the auditor’s report, unless prohibited by law or regulation.[4] The auditor’s communication shall identify material uncorrected misstatements individually. The auditor shall request that uncorrected misstatements be corrected. (Ref: Para. A26‑A28)
The auditor shall also communicate with those charged with governance the effect of uncorrected misstatements related to prior periods on the relevant classes of transactions, account balances or disclosures, and the financial report as a whole.
Written Representation
Written Representation
Written Representation
The auditor shall request a written representation from management and, where appropriate, those charged with governance whether they believe the effects of uncorrected misstatements are immaterial, individually and in aggregate, to the financial report as a whole. A summary of such items shall be included in or attached to the written representation. (Ref: Para. A29)
Documentation
Documentation
Documentation
The auditor shall include in the audit documentation:[5] (Ref: Para. A30)
The amount below which misstatements would be regarded as clearly trivial (see paragraph 5 of this Auditing Standard);
All misstatements accumulated during the audit and whether they have been corrected (see paragraphs 5, 8 and 12 of this Auditing Standard); and
The auditor’s conclusion as to whether uncorrected misstatements are material, individually or in aggregate, and the basis for that conclusion (see paragraph 11 of this Auditing Standard).
* * *
Application and Other Explanatory Materi
Application and Other Explanatory Material
Objective
The objective of the auditor is to evaluate:
The effect of identified misstatements on the audit; and
The effect of uncorrected misstatements, if any, on the financial report.
Definitions
For the purposes of this Auditing Standard, the following terms have the meanings attributed below:
Misstatement means a difference between the reported amount, classification, presentation, or disclosure of a financial report item and the amount, classification, presentation, or disclosure that is required for the item to be in accordance with the applicable financial reporting framework. Misstatements can arise from error or fraud. (Ref: Para. A1)
When the auditor expresses an opinion on whether the financial report is presented fairly, in all material respects, or gives a true and fair view, misstatements also include those adjustments of amounts, classifications, presentation, or disclosures that, in the auditor’s judgement, are necessary for the financial report to be presented fairly, in all material respects, or to give a true and fair view.
Uncorrected misstatements means misstatements that the auditor has accumulated during the audit and that have not been corrected.
Requirements
Accumulation of Identified Misstatements
The auditor shall accumulate misstatements identified during the audit, other than those that are clearly trivial. (Ref: Para. A2‑A6)
Consideration of Identified Misstatements as the Audit Progresses
The auditor shall determine whether the overall audit strategy and audit plan need to be revised if:
The nature of identified misstatements and the circumstances of their occurrence indicate that other misstatements may exist that, when aggregated with misstatements accumulated during the audit, could be material; or (Ref: Para. A7)
The aggregate of misstatements accumulated during the audit approaches materiality determined in accordance with ASA 320. (Ref: Para. A8)
If, at the auditor’s request, management has examined a class of transactions, account balances or disclosures and corrected misstatements that were detected, the auditor shall perform additional audit procedures to determine whether misstatements remain. (Ref: Para. A9)
Communication and Correction of Misstatements
The auditor shall communicate, unless prohibited by law or regulation, on a timely basis all misstatements accumulated during the audit with the appropriate level of management.[3] The auditor shall request management to correct those misstatements. (Ref: Para. A10‑A12)
If management refuses to correct some or all of the misstatements communicated by the auditor, the auditor shall obtain an understanding of management’s reasons for not making the corrections and shall take that understanding into account when evaluating whether the financial report as a whole is free from material misstatement. (Ref: Para. A13)
Evaluating the Effect of Uncorrected Misstatements
Prior to evaluating the effect of uncorrected misstatements, the auditor shall reassess materiality determined in accordance with ASA 320 to confirm whether it remains appropriate in the context of the entity’s actual financial results. (Ref: Para. A14‑A15)
The auditor shall determine whether uncorrected misstatements are material, individually or in aggregate. In making this determination, the auditor shall consider:
The size and nature of the misstatements, both in relation to particular classes of transactions, account balances or disclosures and the financial report as a whole, and the particular circumstances of their occurrence; and (Ref: Para. A16‑A22, A24‑A25)
The effect of uncorrected misstatements related to prior periods on the relevant classes of transactions, account balances or disclosures, and the financial report as a whole. (Ref: Para. A23)
Communication with Those Charged with Governance
The auditor shall communicate with those charged with governance uncorrected misstatements and the effect that they, individually or in aggregate, may have on the opinion in the auditor’s report, unless prohibited by law or regulation.[4] The auditor’s communication shall identify material uncorrected misstatements individually. The auditor shall request that uncorrected misstatements be corrected. (Ref: Para. A26‑A28)
The auditor shall also communicate with those charged with governance the effect of uncorrected misstatements related to prior periods on the relevant classes of transactions, account balances or disclosures, and the financial report as a whole.
Written Representation
The auditor shall request a written representation from management and, where appropriate, those charged with governance whether they believe the effects of uncorrected misstatements are immaterial, individually and in aggregate, to the financial report as a whole. A summary of such items shall be included in or attached to the written representation. (Ref: Para. A29)
Documentation
The auditor shall include in the audit documentation:[5] (Ref: Para. A30)
The amount below which misstatements would be regarded as clearly trivial (see paragraph 5 of this Auditing Standard);
All misstatements accumulated during the audit and whether they have been corrected (see paragraphs 5, 8 and 12 of this Auditing Standard); and
The auditor’s conclusion as to whether uncorrected misstatements are material, individually or in aggregate, and the basis for that conclusion (see paragraph 11 of this Auditing Standard).
* * *
Application and Other Explanatory Material
Definition of Misstatement (Ref: Para. 4(a))
Misstatements may result from:
An inaccuracy in gathering or processing data from which the financial report is prepared;
An omission of an amount or disclosure, including inadequate or incomplete disclosures, and those disclosures required to meet disclosure objectives of certain financial reporting frameworks as applicable[6];
An incorrect accounting estimate arising from overlooking, or clear misinterpretation of, facts;
Judgements of management concerning accounting estimates that the auditor considers unreasonable or the selection and application of accounting policies that the auditor considers inappropriate.
An inappropriate classification, aggregation or disaggregation, of information; and
For a financial report prepared in accordance with a fair presentation framework, the omission of a disclosure necessary for the financial report to achieve fair presentation beyond disclosures specifically required by the framework.[7]
Examples of misstatements arising from fraud are provided in ASA 240.[8]
Accumulation of Identified Misstatements (Ref: Para. 5)
Paragraph 5 of this Auditing Standard requires the auditor to accumulate misstatements identified during the audit other than those that are clearly trivial. “Clearly trivial” is not another expression for “not material.” Misstatements that are clearly trivial will be of a wholly different (smaller) order of magnitude, or of a wholly different nature than those that would be determined to be material, and will be matters that are clearly inconsequential, whether taken individually or in aggregate and whether judged by any criteria of size, nature or circumstances. When there is any uncertainty about whether one or more items are clearly trivial, the misstatement is considered not to be clearly trivial.
Misstatements in Individual Statements
The auditor may designate an amount below which misstatements of amounts in the individual statements would be clearly trivial, and would not need to be accumulated because the auditor expects that the accumulation of such amounts clearly would not have a material effect on the financial report. However, misstatements of amounts that are above the designated amount are accumulated as required by paragraph 5 of this Auditing Standard. In addition, misstatements relating to amounts may not be clearly trivial when judged on criteria of nature or circumstances, and, if not, are accumulated as required by paragraph 5 of this Auditing Standard.
Misstatements in Disclosures
Misstatements in disclosures may also be clearly trivial whether taken individually or in aggregate, and whether judged by any criteria of size, nature or circumstances. Misstatements in disclosures that are not clearly trivial are also accumulated to assist the auditor in evaluating the effect of such misstatements on the relevant disclosures and the financial report as a whole. Paragraph A14 of this Auditing Standard provides examples of where misstatements in qualitative disclosures may be material.
Accumulation of Misstatements
Misstatements by nature or circumstances, accumulated as described in paragraphs A3‑A4, cannot be added together as is possible in the case of misstatements of amounts. Nevertheless, the auditor is required by paragraph 11 of this Auditing Standard to evaluate those misstatements individually and in aggregate (i.e., collectively with other misstatements) to determine whether they are material.
To assist the auditor in evaluating the effect of misstatements accumulated during the audit and in communicating misstatements to management and those charged with governance, it may be useful to distinguish between factual misstatements, judgemental misstatements and projected misstatements.
Misstatements in Disclosures
Factual misstatements are misstatements about which there is no doubt.
Judgemental misstatements are differences arising from the judgements of management including those concerning recognition, measurement, presentation and disclosure in the financial report (including the selection or application of accounting policies) that the auditor considers unreasonable or inappropriate.
Projected misstatements are the auditor’s best estimate of misstatements in populations, involving the projection of misstatements identified in audit samples to the entire populations from which the samples were drawn. Guidance on the determination of projected misstatements and evaluation of the results is set out in ASA 530.[9]
Consideration of Identified Misstatements as the Audit Progresses (Ref: Para. 6‑7)
A misstatement may not be an isolated occurrence. Evidence that other misstatements may exist include, for example, where the auditor identifies that a misstatement arose from a breakdown in internal control or from inappropriate assumptions or valuation methods that have been widely applied by the entity.
If the aggregate of misstatements accumulated during the audit approaches materiality determined in accordance with ASA 320, there may be a greater than acceptably low level of risk that possible undetected misstatements, when taken with the aggregate of misstatements accumulated during the audit, could exceed materiality. Undetected misstatements could exist because of the presence of sampling risk and non‑sampling risk.[10]
The auditor may request management to examine a class of transactions, account balances or disclosures in order for management to understand the cause of a misstatement identified by the auditor, perform procedures to determine the amount of the actual misstatement in the class of transactions, account balance or disclosure, and to make appropriate adjustments to the financial report. Such a request may be made, for example, based on the auditor’s projection of misstatements identified in an audit sample to the entire population from which it was drawn.
Communication and Correction of Misstatements (Ref: Para. 8‑9)
Timely communication of misstatements to the appropriate level of management is important as it enables management to evaluate whether the classes of transactions, account balances and disclosures are misstated, inform the auditor if it disagrees, and take action as necessary. Ordinarily, the appropriate level of management is the one that has responsibility and authority to evaluate the misstatements and to take the necessary action.
In some jurisdictions, law or regulation may restrict the auditor’s communication of certain misstatements to management, or others, within the entity. Law or regulation may specifically prohibit a communication, or other action, that might prejudice an investigation by an appropriate authority into an actual, or suspected, illegal act, including alerting the entity, for example, when the auditor is required to report identified or suspected non-compliance with law or regulation to an appropriate authority pursuant to anti-money laundering legislation. In these circumstances, the issues considered by the auditor may be complex[*] and the auditor may consider it appropriate to obtain legal advice.
The correction by management of all misstatements, including those communicated by the auditor, enables management to maintain accurate accounting books and records and reduces the risks of material misstatement of future financial reports because of the cumulative effect of immaterial uncorrected misstatements related to prior periods.
ASA 700 requires the auditor to evaluate whether the financial report is prepared and presented, in all material respects, in accordance with the requirements of the applicable financial reporting framework. This evaluation includes consideration of the qualitative aspects of the entity’s accounting practices, including indicators of possible bias in management’s judgements,[11] which may be affected by the auditor’s understanding of management’s reasons for not making the corrections.
Evaluating the Effect of Uncorrected Misstatements (Ref: Para. 10‑11)
The auditor’s determination of materiality in accordance with ASA 320 is often based on estimates of the entity’s financial results, because the actual financial results may not yet be known. Therefore, prior to the auditor’s evaluation of the effect of uncorrected misstatements, it may be necessary to revise materiality determined in accordance with ASA 320 based on the actual financial results.
ASA 320 explains that, as the audit progresses, materiality for the financial report as a whole (and, if applicable, the materiality level or levels for particular classes of transactions, account balances or disclosures) is revised in the event of the auditor becoming aware of information during the audit that would have caused the auditor to have determined a different amount (or amounts) initially.[12] Thus, any significant revision is likely to have been made before the auditor evaluates the effect of uncorrected misstatements. However, if the auditor’s reassessment of materiality determined in accordance with ASA 320 (see paragraph 10) gives rise to a lower amount (or amounts), then performance materiality and the appropriateness of the nature, timing and extent of the further audit procedures are reconsidered so as to obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence on which to base the audit opinion.
Each individual misstatement of an amount is considered to evaluate its effect on the relevant classes of transactions, account balances or disclosures, including whether the materiality level for that particular class of transactions, account balance or disclosure, if any, has been exceeded.
In addition, each individual misstatement of a qualitative disclosure is considered to evaluate its effect on the relevant disclosure(s), as well as its overall effect on the financial report as a whole. The determination of whether a misstatement(s) in a qualitative disclosure is material, in the context of the applicable financial reporting framework and the specific circumstances of the entity, is a matter that involves the exercise of professional judgement. Examples where such misstatements may be material include:
Inaccurate or incomplete descriptions of information about the objectives, policies and processes for managing capital for entities with insurance and banking activities.
The omission of information about the events or circumstances that have led to an impairment loss (e.g., a significant long‑term decline in the demand for a metal or commodity) in an entity with mining operations.
The incorrect description of an accounting policy relating to a significant item in the statement of financial position, the statement of comprehensive income, the statement of changes in equity or the statement of cash flows.
The inadequate description of the sensitivity of an exchange rate in an entity that undertakes International trading activities.
In determining whether uncorrected misstatements by nature are material as required by paragraph 11 of this Auditing Standard, the auditor considers uncorrected misstatements in amounts and disclosures. Such misstatements may be considered material either individually, or when taken in combination with other misstatements. For example, depending on the misstatements identified in disclosures, the auditor may consider whether:
Identified errors are persistent or pervasive; or
A number of identified misstatements are relevant to the same matter, and considered collectively may affect the users’ understanding of that matter.
This consideration of accumulated misstatements is also helpful when evaluating the financial report in accordance with paragraph 13(d) of ASA 700, which requires the auditor to consider whether the overall presentation of the financial report has been undermined by including information that is not relevant or that obscures a proper understanding of the matters disclosed.[13]
If an individual misstatement is judged to be material, it is unlikely that it can be offset by other misstatements. For example, if revenue has been materially overstated, the financial report as a whole will be materially misstated, even if the effect of the misstatement on earnings is completely offset by an equivalent overstatement of expenses. It may be appropriate to offset misstatements within the same account balance or class of transactions; however, the risk that further undetected misstatements may exist is considered before concluding that offsetting even immaterial misstatements is appropriate.[14]
Determining whether a classification misstatement is material involves the evaluation of qualitative considerations, such as the effect of the classification misstatement on debt or other contractual covenants, the effect on individual line items or sub‑totals, or the effect on key ratios. There may be circumstances where the auditor concludes that a classification misstatement is not material in the context of the financial report as a whole, even though it may exceed the materiality level or levels applied in evaluating other misstatements. For example, a misclassification between balance sheet line items may not be considered material in the context of the financial report as a whole when the amount of the misclassification is small in relation to the size of the related balance sheet line items and the misclassification does not affect the income statement or any key ratios.
The circumstances related to some misstatements may cause the auditor to evaluate them as material, individually or when considered together with other misstatements accumulated during the audit, even if they are lower than materiality for the financial report as a whole. Circumstances that may affect the evaluation include the extent to which the misstatement:
Affects compliance with regulatory requirements;
Affects compliance with debt covenants or other contractual requirements;
Relates to the incorrect selection or application of an accounting policy that has an immaterial effect on the current period’s financial report but is likely to have a material effect on future periods’ financial reports;
Masks a change in earnings or other trends, especially in the context of general economic and industry conditions;
Affects ratios used to evaluate the entity’s financial position, results of operations or cash flows;
Affects segment information presented in the financial report (for example, the significance of the matter to a segment or other portion of the entity’s business that has been identified as playing a significant role in the entity’s operations or profitability);
Has the effect of increasing management compensation, for example, by ensuring that the requirements for the award of bonuses or other incentives are satisfied;
Is significant having regard to the auditor’s understanding of known previous communications to users, for example, in relation to forecast earnings;
Relates to items involving particular parties (for example, whether external parties to the transaction are related to members of the entity’s management);
Is an omission of information not specifically required by the applicable financial reporting framework but which, in the judgement of the auditor, is important to the users’ understanding of the financial position, financial performance or cash flows of the entity; or
Affects other information to be included in the entity’s annual report (for example, information to be included in a “Management Discussion and Analysis” or an “Operating and Financial Review”) that may reasonably be expected to influence the economic decisions of the users of the financial report. ASA 720[15] deals with the auditor’s responsibilities relating to other information.
These circumstances are only examples; not all are likely to be present in all audits nor is the list necessarily complete. The existence of any circumstances such as these does not necessarily lead to a conclusion that the misstatement is material.
ASA 240[16] explains how the implications of a misstatement that is, or may be, the result of fraud ought to be considered in relation to other aspects of the audit, even if the size of the misstatement is not material in relation to the financial report. Depending on the circumstances, misstatements in disclosures could also be indicative of fraud, and, for example, may arise from:
Misleading disclosures that have resulted from bias in management’s judgements; or
Extensive duplicative or uninformative disclosures that are intended to obscure a proper understanding of matters in the financial report.
When considering the implications of misstatements in classes of transactions, account balances and disclosures, the auditor exercises professional scepticism in accordance with ASA 200.[17]
The cumulative effect of immaterial uncorrected misstatements related to prior periods may have a material effect on the current period’s financial report. There are different acceptable approaches to the auditor’s evaluation of such uncorrected misstatements on the current period’s financial report. Using the same evaluation approach provides consistency from period to period.
Considerations Specific to Public Sector Entities (Ref: Para 11(a))
In the case of an audit of a public sector entity, the evaluation whether a misstatement is material may also be affected by the auditor’s responsibilities established by law, regulation or other authority to report specific matters, including, for example, fraud.
Furthermore, issues such as public interest, accountability, probity and ensuring effective legislative oversight, in particular, may affect the assessment whether an item is material by virtue of its nature. This is particularly so for items that relate to compliance with law, regulation, or other authority.
Communication with Those Charged with Governance (Ref: Para. 12)
If uncorrected misstatements have been communicated with person(s) with management responsibilities, and those person(s) also have governance responsibilities, they need not be communicated again with those same person(s) in their governance role. The auditor nonetheless has to be satisfied that communication with person(s) with management responsibilities adequately informs all of those with whom the auditor would otherwise communicate in their governance capacity.[18]
Where there is a large number of individual immaterial uncorrected misstatements, the auditor may communicate the number and overall monetary effect of the uncorrected misstatements, rather than the details of each individual uncorrected misstatement.
ASA 260 requires the auditor to communicate with those charged with governance the written representations the auditor is requesting (see paragraph 14).[19] The auditor may discuss with those charged with governance the reasons for, and the implications of, a failure to correct misstatements, having regard to the size and nature of the misstatement judged in the surrounding circumstances, and possible implications in relation to a future financial report.
Written Representation (Ref: Para. 14)
Because the preparation of the financial report requires management and, where appropriate, those charged with governance to adjust the financial report to correct material misstatements, the auditor is required to request them to provide a written representation about uncorrected misstatements.[*] In some circumstances, management and, where appropriate, those charged with governance may not believe that certain uncorrected misstatements are misstatements. For that reason, they may want to add to their written representation words such as: “We do not agree that items … and … constitute misstatements because [description of reasons].” Obtaining this representation does not, however, relieve the auditor of the need to form a conclusion on the effect of uncorrected misstatements.
Documentation (Ref: Para. 15)
The auditor’s documentation of uncorrected misstatements may take into account:
The consideration of the aggregate effect of uncorrected misstatements;
The evaluation of whether the materiality level or levels for particular classes of transactions, account balances or disclosures, if any, have been exceeded; and
The evaluation of the effect of uncorrected misstatements on key ratios or trends, and compliance with legal, regulatory and contractual requirements (for example, debt covenants).
Definition of Misstatement (Ref: Para. 4
Definition of Misstatement (Ref: Para. 4(a))
Definition of Misstatement (Ref: Para. 4(a))
Misstatements may result from:
An inaccuracy in gathering or processing data from which the financial report is prepared;
An omission of an amount or disclosure, including inadequate or incomplete disclosures, and those disclosures required to meet disclosure objectives of certain financial reporting frameworks as applicable[6];
An incorrect accounting estimate arising from overlooking, or clear misinterpretation of, facts;
Judgements of management concerning accounting estimates that the auditor considers unreasonable or the selection and application of accounting policies that the auditor considers inappropriate.
An inappropriate classification, aggregation or disaggregation, of information; and
For a financial report prepared in accordance with a fair presentation framework, the omission of a disclosure necessary for the financial report to achieve fair presentation beyond disclosures specifically required by the framework.[7]
Examples of misstatements arising from fraud are provided in ASA 240.[8]
Misstatements in Individual Statements
Misstatements in Individual Statements
Misstatements in Individual Statements
The auditor may designate an amount below which misstatements of amounts in the individual statements would be clearly trivial, and would not need to be accumulated because the auditor expects that the accumulation of such amounts clearly would not have a material effect on the financial report. However, misstatements of amounts that are above the designated amount are accumulated as required by paragraph 5 of this Auditing Standard. In addition, misstatements relating to amounts may not be clearly trivial when judged on criteria of nature or circumstances, and, if not, are accumulated as required by paragraph 5 of this Auditing Standard.
Misstatements in Disclosures
Misstatements in Disclosures
Misstatements in Disclosures
Misstatements in disclosures may also be clearly trivial whether taken individually or in aggregate, and whether judged by any criteria of size, nature or circumstances. Misstatements in disclosures that are not clearly trivial are also accumulated to assist the auditor in evaluating the effect of such misstatements on the relevant disclosures and the financial report as a whole. Paragraph A14 of this Auditing Standard provides examples of where misstatements in qualitative disclosures may be material.
Accumulation of Misstatements
Accumulation of Misstatements
Accumulation of Misstatements
Misstatements by nature or circumstances, accumulated as described in paragraphs A3‑A4, cannot be added together as is possible in the case of misstatements of amounts. Nevertheless, the auditor is required by paragraph 11 of this Auditing Standard to evaluate those misstatements individually and in aggregate (i.e., collectively with other misstatements) to determine whether they are material.
To assist the auditor in evaluating the effect of misstatements accumulated during the audit and in communicating misstatements to management and those charged with governance, it may be useful to distinguish between factual misstatements, judgemental misstatements and projected misstatements.
Misstatements in Disclosures
Factual misstatements are misstatements about which there is no doubt.
Judgemental misstatements are differences arising from the judgements of management including those concerning recognition, measurement, presentation and disclosure in the financial report (including the selection or application of accounting policies) that the auditor considers unreasonable or inappropriate.
Projected misstatements are the auditor’s best estimate of misstatements in populations, involving the projection of misstatements identified in audit samples to the entire populations from which the samples were drawn. Guidance on the determination of projected misstatements and evaluation of the results is set out in ASA 530.[9]
Written Representation (Ref: Para. 14)
Written Representation (Ref: Para. 14)
Written Representation (Ref: Para. 14)
Because the preparation of the financial report requires management and, where appropriate, those charged with governance to adjust the financial report to correct material misstatements, the auditor is required to request them to provide a written representation about uncorrected misstatements.[*] In some circumstances, management and, where appropriate, those charged with governance may not believe that certain uncorrected misstatements are misstatements. For that reason, they may want to add to their written representation words such as: “We do not agree that items … and … constitute misstatements because [description of reasons].” Obtaining this representation does not, however, relieve the auditor of the need to form a conclusion on the effect of uncorrected misstatements.
Documentation (Ref: Para. 15)
Documentation (Ref: Para. 15)
Documentation (Ref: Para. 15)
The auditor’s documentation of uncorrected misstatements may take into account:
The consideration of the aggregate effect of uncorrected misstatements;
The evaluation of whether the materiality level or levels for particular classes of transactions, account balances or disclosures, if any, have been exceeded; and
The evaluation of the effect of uncorrected misstatements on key ratios or trends, and compliance with legal, regulatory and contractual requirements (for example, debt covenants).
Source text: opening excerpt
Sourced from the Federal Register of Legislation (legislation.gov.au), CC BY 4.0.
Obtaining a Copy of this Auditing Standa Obtaining a Copy of this Auditing Standard
Obtaining a Copy of this Auditing Standard
The most recently compiled versions of Auditing Standards, original Standards and amending Standards (see Compilation Details) are available on the AUASB website: www.auasb.gov.au
Contact Details Contact Details
Contact Details
Auditing and Assurance Standards BoardPodium LevelLevel 14, 530 Collins StreetMelbourne Victoria 3000AUSTRALIA
Phone: (03) 8080 7400E‑mail: enquiries@auasb.gov.auPostal Address:PO Box 204Collins Street WestMelbourne Victoria 8007AUSTRALIA
Requests and enquiries concerning reproduction and rights for commercial purposes within Australia should be addressed to the Executive Technical 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.
This Auditing Standard reproduces substantial parts of the corresponding International Standard on Auditing issued by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB) and published by the International Federation of Accountants (IFAC), in the manner described in the statement on Conformity with International Standards on Auditing. The AUASB acknowledges that IFAC is the owner of copyright in the International Standard on Auditing incorporated in this Auditing Standard throughout the world.
All existing rights in this material are reserved outside Australia. Reproduction outside Australia in unaltered form (retaining this notice) is permitted for personal and non‑commercial use only.
Further information and requests for authorisation to reproduce this Auditing Standard for commercial purposes outside Australia should be addressed to the Executive Technical Director, Auditing and Assurance Standards Board, PO Box 204, Collins Street West, Melbourne, Victoria 8007 or sent to . Any decision to approve a request may also require the agreement of IFAC.
request written representations from management and where appropriate those charged with governance about whether uncorrected misstatements are immaterial, and include a summary of such items in the representation (Requirements, para. 14; A29); and
include specific items in audit documentation, notably the threshold for “clearly trivial,” all accumulated misstatements and the auditor’s conclusion about uncorrected misstatements (Requirements, para. 15; A30).
The Standard expressly conforms with International Standard on Auditing ISA 450 (Conformity with International Standards on Auditing) and notes that paragraphs added for Australia are identified by the prefix “Aus” (Conformity). It cross‑references other Australian Standards that govern materiality (ASA 320), auditor’s overall responsibilities and professional scepticism (ASA 200), reporting on the financial report (ASA 700), fraud (ASA 240), sample projection (ASA 530), communications with governance (ASA 260) and other information (ASA 720). The compilation includes two amending standards listed in the Table of Standards (ASA 2015‑1 and ASA 2017‑2) and records paragraph‑level amendments in the Table of Amendments (Compilation Details).
The Standard does not itself specify statutory penalties or enforcement mechanisms; it is an AUASB auditing standard describing auditor duties and documentation obligations to be applied in audits required by or performed under the Corporations Act and other purposes identified in Aus 0.1. The text must be read with ASA 101 and ASA 200 to understand the AUASB’s intended application and interpretation (Authority Statement).
Main concepts
ASA 450 rests on a small set of interlocking concepts that determine auditor behaviour: misstatement, uncorrected misstatement, clearly trivial, materiality (and reassessment), accumulation, categorisation of misstatements, communication and documentation. The Standard defines misstatement broadly to include differences in amount, classification, presentation or disclosure required by the applicable financial reporting framework, and notes misstatements can arise from error or fraud (Definitions, para. 4(a); A1). When an auditor opines on fair presentation or true and fair view, misstatements include adjustments the auditor judges necessary for that outcome (Definitions, para. 4).
Uncorrected misstatements are those the auditor has accumulated during the audit and that have not been corrected (Definitions, para. 4(b)). The Standard requires accumulation of identified misstatements other than those that are “clearly trivial” (Requirement, para. 5; A2‑A6). The concept “clearly trivial” is defined by contrast: it is not a synonym for “not material” but denotes items of a wholly different, smaller order of magnitude or nature that are clearly inconsequential whether taken individually or aggregated (A2). When doubt exists, the item is not treated as clearly trivial (A2).
Materiality is a cross‑cutting concept drawn from ASA 320. Before evaluating uncorrected misstatements the auditor must reassess materiality in light of the entity’s actual financial results (Requirements, para. 10; A14‑A15). The auditor then determines whether uncorrected misstatements are material, individually or in aggregate, by considering both size and nature in relation to classes of transactions, account balances, disclosures and the financial report as a whole (Requirements, para. 11; A16‑A25). The Standard lists qualitative circumstances that can render a misstatement material even when numerically smaller than a general materiality threshold (A21‑A22 and A24‑A25).
ASA 450 distinguishes types of misstatements to aid evaluation and communication (A5‑A6). Factual misstatements are definitive errors about which there is no doubt. Judgemental misstatements arise from management judgements the auditor considers unreasonable. Projected misstatements are auditor estimates projecting sample misstatements to population totals and are governed by ASA 530 (A5‑A6).
Communication is a procedural concept. The auditor must communicate accumulated misstatements to the appropriate level of management unless prohibited by law or regulation and request correction (Requirements, para. 8; A10‑A12). If management refuses, the auditor must obtain and consider the reasons when evaluating whether the financial report as a whole is free from material misstatement (Requirements, para. 9; A13). The auditor must also communicate material uncorrected misstatements to those charged with governance and seek correction (Requirements, para. 12; A26‑A28).
Documentation is explicit and prescriptive. The auditor must record the amount below which misstatements are clearly trivial, all misstatements accumulated and whether corrected, and the auditor’s conclusion on uncorrected misstatements and its basis (Requirements, para. 15; A30). The Standard requires auditors to exercise professional scepticism in applying these concepts (A17; cross‑reference ASA 200).
The Standard contains Australian‑specific paragraphs (marked “Aus”) and amendments incorporated from ASA 2015‑1 and ASA 2017‑2. It conforms with ISA 450 but embeds Australia‑specific cross‑references (Conformity; Compilation Details).
Who it affects
ASA 450 primarily imposes duties on the auditor engaged to express an audit opinion on a financial report or a complete set of financial statements, and it applies where an audit is required under the Corporations Act and for other audit purposes specified in Aus 0.1. The auditor’s obligations to accumulate, communicate, evaluate and document misstatements are central requirements in the standard (Aus 0.1; Requirements paras. 5, 8‑15).
Management and those charged with governance are directly affected as addressees of the auditor’s communications and requests. The auditor must timely communicate accumulated misstatements to the appropriate level of management and request correction (Requirements, para. 8; A10‑A12). Where misstatements remain uncorrected, the auditor must communicate material uncorrected misstatements to those charged with governance and include a request that they be corrected (Requirements, para. 12; A26‑A28). Management is also required to provide a written representation about whether the effects of uncorrected misstatements are immaterial and to attach a summary of such items (Requirements, para. 14; A29).
Entities subject to audits are affected because the Standard sets out procedures that will typically lead to discussions with management and governance about correcting accounting entries, disclosures and policies. The Standard explicitly notes particular considerations for public sector entities , the auditor’s materiality assessment may be affected by statutory reporting responsibilities, public interest, accountability, probity and legislative oversight, including reporting obligations for fraud (A? Considerations Specific to Public Sector Entities, Ref: Para 11(a)). This means auditors of government entities should account for those obligations in applying ASA 450.
Professional bodies and regulators are affected indirectly. ASA 450 is an AUASB standard made pursuant to s227B ASIC Act and s336 Corporations Act (Authority Statement) and conforms with ISA 450 (Conformity). While ASA 450 itself does not prescribe statutory sanctions, it informs professional practice and the content of audit reports that regulators, enforcement agencies and courts may examine in the context of disputes or investigations. The Standard cross‑references other auditing standards (ASA 101, ASA 200, ASA 320, ASA 700, ASA 240, ASA 530, ASA 260, ASA 720), so practitioners must apply a bundle of Standards in audits required by legislation (Authority Statement; various cross‑references).
Finally, external users of financial reports are indirectly affected through the improved transparency and rigour in how auditors treat identified and uncorrected misstatements. The Standard requires auditors to evaluate qualitative and quantitative effects, to communicate material uncorrected items to governance, and to consider prior period misstatements, thereby shaping the information auditors deliver to report users (Requirements paras. 10‑12; A14‑A25).
Key duties and rights
The Standard sets out specific duties for the auditor and procedural expectations for management and governance. These duties are mandatory “shall” provisions in the Requirements section.
Auditor duties
Accumulate identified misstatements, except those that are clearly trivial (Requirement, para. 5; A2‑A6). The auditor must decide and record the threshold below which misstatements are “clearly trivial” (Documentation, para. 15; A30).
Reassess the audit strategy and plan if the nature or pattern of misstatements suggests other misstatements may exist or the aggregate approaches materiality determined under ASA 320 (Requirement, para. 6; A7‑A9).
If management has been asked to examine a class of transactions or balances and has corrected detected misstatements, perform additional procedures to determine whether misstatements remain (Requirement, para. 6.2; A9).
Communicate on a timely basis all accumulated misstatements with the appropriate level of management unless prohibited by law or regulation, and request correction (Requirement, para. 8; A10‑A12). The Standard identifies that “appropriate level” ordinarily means those with responsibility and authority to evaluate and act (A10).
Obtain an understanding of management’s reasons if management refuses to correct some or all misstatements, and take those reasons into account when evaluating whether the financial report is free from material misstatement (Requirement, para. 9; A13).
Reassess materiality prior to evaluating uncorrected misstatements and determine whether uncorrected misstatements are material individually or in aggregate, considering size, nature and particular circumstances (Requirement, paras. 10‑11; A14‑A25).
Communicate with those charged with governance uncorrected misstatements and their potential effect on the auditor’s report, identifying material uncorrected misstatements individually and requesting correction (Requirement, para. 12; A26‑A28).
Request written representations from management and, where appropriate, those charged with governance about whether they believe the effects of uncorrected misstatements are immaterial and include a summary of such items in or attached to the representation (Requirement, para. 14; A29).
Document the triviality threshold, accumulated misstatements and the auditor’s conclusion on uncorrected misstatements with the basis for the conclusion (Requirement, para. 15; A30).
Management duties and obligations (as affected by the Standard)
To respond to auditor communications and to correct misstatements where appropriate. The Standard does not create a statutory duty to correct, but requires auditors to request corrections and to obtain management’s reasons if they refuse (Requirements, paras. 8‑9; A10‑A13).
To provide written representations about uncorrected misstatements when requested (Requirement, para. 14; A29).
Auditor rights and procedural powers
The Standard authorises auditors to request management to examine classes of transactions or balances and to perform additional audit procedures when needed (A9).
The auditor may obtain legal advice where legal or regulatory restrictions affect communications (A11).
The auditor has the right, under the Standard’s procedural framework, to escalate communication to those charged with governance and to record and report uncorrected misstatements in the audit file (Requirements, paras. 12, 15; A26‑A30).
Scope limits and discretion
“Clearly trivial” is a matter of auditor judgement: the Standard allows the auditor to designate a clearly trivial amount for individual statements but cautions that items above the designated amount or those that are trivial by size but not by nature must still be accumulated and evaluated (A3‑A4).
For misstatements arising from legal or regulatory restrictions on communication, the Standard instructs auditors to consider complexity and to seek legal advice where appropriate (A11). The Standard therefore recognises external constraints on the auditor’s ability to communicate.
Intersections with other Standards
Duties under ASA 450 are to be discharged in the context of ASA 320 materiality determinations, ASA 700 reporting responsibilities and ASA 200 requirements for professional scepticism and audit planning (Authority Statement; Requirements paras. 10; cross‑references A14‑A15, A17).
The Standard is prescriptive about what auditors must do and record; it does not itself create sanctions but establishes the professional obligations auditors must follow when performing audits that fall within its application (Aus 0.1; Authority Statement).
Penalties and enforcement
ASA 450 is an AUASB Auditing Standard and does not itself prescribe statutory penalties, fines or criminal sanctions. The compilation and authority statement note the Standard was made by the AUASB pursuant to section 227B of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission Act 2001 and section 336 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Authority Statement). Those statutory references locate the AUASB’s power to make auditing standards but do not, within ASA 450’s text, create a schedule of penalties for non‑compliance by auditors or audit clients.
The Standard instead specifies professional duties and documentation obligations which, in practice, are enforced through the professional regulatory and oversight regime that applies to auditors. The document itself does not describe enforcement processes, disciplinary procedures or criminal sanctions. Where the Standard refers to law or regulation that may restrict auditor communications (A11), it calls for the auditor to consider the need for legal advice but does not set enforcement steps.
Users must therefore read ASA 450 together with the statutory and regulatory frameworks governing auditor registration, licensing, and conduct to determine the enforcement consequences of failing to follow the Standard. The compilation notes that ASA 450 is to be read with ASA 101 (Preamble) and ASA 200 (Overall Objectives) (Authority Statement), which together form the AUASB’s framework for audit practice. Any regulatory action for non‑compliance with auditing standards is taken by the relevant regulator or professional body under their statutory or regulatory powers, which are not detailed in ASA 450.
In summary, ASA 450 specifies mandatory professional requirements (use of “shall”) and documentation expectations (para. 15; A30) but does not itself set out penalties or enforcement mechanisms within its text. If readers require the loci of statutory enforcement or professional disciplinary measures, they must consult the Corporations Act, the Australian Securities and Investments Commission’s powers, and relevant professional body rules , documents and provisions that ASA 450 cross‑references but does not replicate.
How it interacts with other laws
ASA 450 is presented as an Australian Auditing Standard that aligns with international guidance and sits within a suite of Australian Auditing Standards. The Authority Statement directs readers to ASA 101 Preamble and ASA 200 for how the Standards are to be understood and applied (Authority Statement). The Standard explicitly conforms with ISA 450 (Conformity with International Standards on Auditing) and identifies Australia‑specific additions with the prefix “Aus” (Conformity).
Cross‑reference network within auditing standards
ASA 320 (Materiality in Planning and Performing an Audit) is central to ASA 450’s operation: ASA 450 requires the auditor to reassess materiality determined under ASA 320 prior to evaluating uncorrected misstatements (Requirement, para. 10; A14‑A15). ASA 320 also informs the concept of performance materiality and when the aggregate of misstatements approaches materiality (A14‑A15).
ASA 700 (Forming an Opinion and Reporting on Financial Reports) is the reporting standard that takes account of the auditor’s evaluation of uncorrected misstatements when forming an overall opinion (Introduction; para. 1).
ASA 200 sets out the auditor’s overall objectives and the requirement to exercise professional scepticism, a duty ASA 450 invokes in evaluating implications of misstatements (Authority Statement; A17).
ASA 240 deals with misstatements arising from fraud and is cross‑referenced where misstatements may indicate fraud or where fraud affects other aspects of the audit (A?; references to ASA 240 in A14‑A28).
ASA 530 is referenced for guidance on projected misstatements and projecting sample results to populations (A5‑A6; A?).
ASA 260 requires communications with those charged with governance and is referenced in relation to written representations (A26‑A28; A29).
ASA 720 addresses auditor responsibilities relating to other information that may be affected by misstatements (A?; cross‑reference in A24‑A25).
Interaction with statute and regulation
The Standard was made under specific statutory authorisations (s227B ASIC Act and s336 Corporations Act). While ASA 450 does not itself impose criminal or civil penalties, these statutory anchors indicate the Standards’ place within the regulatory architecture governing financial reporting and audit obligations (Authority Statement).
The Standard recognises that law or regulation in some jurisdictions may restrict the auditor’s communication of certain misstatements (A11). For example, where communication could prejudice an investigation by an appropriate authority (such as anti‑money laundering reporting obligations), auditors may be prohibited from notifying management and may need to seek legal advice (A11). ASA 450 therefore anticipates and defers to higher‑order legal duties that may limit auditor communications.
Public sector interaction
For audits of public sector entities the Standard advises that statutory reporting obligations, public interest and accountability may affect materiality assessments (Considerations Specific to Public Sector Entities, Ref: Para 11(a)). That means auditors conducting statutory audits of government bodies must account for parliamentary or other legal reporting obligations when evaluating the materiality of misstatements.
Intellectual property and reproduction
ASA 450 reproduces substantial parts of ISA 450 and acknowledges IFAC’s copyright; the Standard includes copyright and reproduction conditions (Copyright section). Reproduction for commercial purposes may require permission from the AUASB and possibly IFAC.
In practice, auditors must apply ASA 450 within the legal and regulatory context of each engagement. Where statutory obligations (for example, reporting to regulators or restrictions on disclosure) conflict with standard‑level communication duties, ASA 450 instructs auditors to recognise the legal restriction, consider obtaining legal advice and to document the decisions taken (A11). The Standard therefore occupies a professional rule‑making role that is designed to be applied alongside statutory duties, other AUASB Standards and international guidance.
Amendment history
ASA 450 as presented in this compilation incorporates amendments up to and including 30 May 2017. The Compilation Details set out the amending standards and operative dates that have affected the text (Compilation Details).
Table of Standards
Original ASA 450 was made on 27 October 2009, operative for financial reporting periods commencing on or after 1 January 2010 (Table of Standards, Standard [A]).
ASA 2015‑1 was made on 1 December 2015 and is operative for financial reporting periods ending on or after 15 December 2016 (Table of Standards, Standard [B]).
ASA 2017‑2 was made on 30 May 2017 and is operative for financial reporting periods commencing on or after 1 January 2018 (Table of Standards, Standard [C]).
Table of Amendments
The compilation records paragraph‑level amendments effected by the amending standards. Examples from the Table of Amendments include:
Deletion of paragraph Aus A1.1 and its attached footnote by ASA 2015‑1 (ASA 2015‑1 [143], [144]).
Amendments and additions across numerous application and explanatory paragraphs by ASA 2015‑1, including A21 (amended), A1 (amended), A2 (amended), and additions of A3, A4, A5 and A17-A18 (ASA 2015‑1 [120‑142]).
Amendments by ASA 2017‑2 to paragraphs 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15 and to several application paragraphs, including A11, A20 and A22 (ASA 2017‑2 [44‑53]).
Compilation annotations
The compilation draws attention to the fact that paragraphs added to the Australian Standard that do not appear in ISA 450 are identified with the prefix “Aus” (Conformity with International Standards on Auditing). The Compilation Details note that this is a compiled version incorporating subsequent amending Auditing Standards up to the stated date and is not itself a separate Auditing Standard made by the AUASB.
Practical implication of amendments
The Table of Amendments shows that both operative and application/explanatory material have been revised over time. Auditors must therefore ensure they are applying the version of ASA 450 that corresponds to the operative dates of their engagement (Aus 0.3; Compilation Details). The compilation provides operative dates for amending paragraphs where relevant.
Documentation of compilation
The compilation itself was prepared by the AUASB on 30 May 2017 and expressly takes into account amendments made up to that date (Compilation Details). Users should consult the AUASB website or the Federal Register of Legislative Instruments references supplied in the Compilation Details for the original and amending instrument texts and operative dates.
In short, ASA 450 has been subject to multiple amending Standards, with amendments recorded at paragraph level in the Compilation Details. The Standard as compiled to 30 May 2017 reflects those changes; practitioners must verify operative dates for specific paragraphs against the Compilation Details and the original amending Standards cited.
Litigation history
The compiled ASA 450 text provided contains no citations to judicial decisions, no case law analysis and no litigation history. The Standard itself is a technical and prescriptive document setting out auditor requirements, definitions and application guidance (Authority Statement; Requirements; Application and Other Explanatory Material). It does not include or summarise court decisions or administrative rulings.
Because ASA 450 is an authoritative auditing standard that auditors must apply when performing audits under the Corporations Act and for other purposes (Aus 0.1; Authority Statement), it will inevitably be relevant in litigation or regulatory proceedings that examine the conduct of an audit, the reasonableness of auditor judgements, or the adequacy of audit documentation. However, ASA 450’s text does not record any litigation outcomes, nor does it cite precedent. The Standard cross‑references other ASAs that themselves may have been considered in courtroom or regulatory contexts, but such usage is outside the Standard’s text.
If a user requires case law interpreting ASA 450, its requirements, or the interface between ASA 450 and statutory duties (for example, under the Corporations Act or ASIC enforcement), that material must be sourced externally from court decisions, tribunal decisions, regulatory determinations, or professional disciplinary rulings. The Standard functions as the normative professional rule book; it does not supply the litigated history of how courts interpret those rules.
In practice, parties involved in disputes about audit quality or opinion are likely to reference ASA 450 (and its sister Standards ASA 200, ASA 320, ASA 700, ASA 240, ASA 530, ASA 260 and ASA 720) in briefs and expert evidence. But such references and litigation outcomes are not included in the compiled Standard and must be researched in legal databases and regulator publications.
Gotchas
The Standard contains several practical traps and judgement points that can lead to misunderstandings or inconsistent application if not carefully attended to. The following “gotchas” are grounded in the Standard’s text and application material.
“Clearly trivial” is not equivalent to “not material”
The Standard emphasises that “clearly trivial” is not another expression for “not material.” Items considered “clearly trivial” are of a wholly different, smaller order of magnitude or nature and are clearly inconsequential whether individually or aggregated (A2). When in doubt, the auditor must treat the item as not clearly trivial and therefore accumulate it (A2). Failure to appreciate this distinction risks under‑accumulation of items that might collectively be material.
Designating a triviality threshold does not eliminate judgement
The auditor may designate an amount below which misstatements in individual statements would be clearly trivial (A3). However, the Standard warns that misstatements above the designated amount must be accumulated and that some misstatements may be trivial by amount but not by nature or circumstance and therefore must be accumulated (A3). Rigid numeric thresholds without qualitative analysis risk misclassification.
Aggregation rules differ by type of misstatement
Misstatements of amounts can be aggregated arithmetically, but misstatements by nature or circumstance (for example, disclosure deficiencies, classification issues, qualitative misstatements) cannot simply be added together; they must be evaluated individually and in aggregate conceptually (A5). Practitioners who mechanically sum unlike items risk producing unreliable conclusions.
Qualitative misstatements can be material even if small
The Standard gives examples where qualitative misstatements may be material (A14), such as incorrect description of accounting policies or omission of information that explains impairment causes. Auditors must evaluate nature and context; small numerical amounts can have material effects on compliance, covenants, compensation arrangements or user understanding (A21‑A22, A24‑A25).
Reassess materiality in light of actual results
Materiality often is set on estimates of financial results, but ASA 450 requires reassessment of materiality determined under ASA 320 based on actual financial results before evaluating uncorrected misstatements (Requirement, para. 10; A14‑A15). Failure to revise when necessary can lead to an inappropriate tolerance for uncorrected misstatements.
Management refusal to correct does not end auditor responsibility
If management refuses to correct misstatements, the auditor must obtain management’s reasons and take them into account in forming the conclusion on the financial report (Requirement, para. 9; A13). Auditors must document the reasons and their evaluation. Accepting unexplained refusals without further procedures is inconsistent with the Standard.
Communication constraints under law or regulation
In some situations law or regulation may prohibit communication of certain identified or suspected non‑compliance with management because it could prejudice law enforcement or regulatory investigations (A11). Auditors must recognise these constraints and consider legal advice. Misapplying the Standard by uncritically communicating matters where law prohibits it can have legal consequences.
Public sector nuance
For public sector audits, materiality may be affected not only by quantitative measures but by public interest, probity, and statutory accountability (Considerations Specific to Public Sector Entities, Ref: Para 11(a)). A commercial‑sector materiality mindset applied without adjustment can underplay matters of public significance.
Projected misstatements and sampling projection
Projected misstatements (estimates projecting sample findings to populations) require application of ASA 530 guidance (A5). Errors in extrapolation technique or ignoring sampling risk and non‑sampling risk when aggregating projected misstatements can misstate the auditor’s evaluation.
Documentation requirements are precise
The Standard requires specific documentation: the amount below which items are clearly trivial, all accumulated misstatements and the auditor’s conclusion on uncorrected misstatements with the basis for the conclusion (Requirement, para. 15; A30). Incomplete documentation can leave auditors exposed in subsequent reviews.
Offsetting and classification issues
ASA 450 cautions that if an individual misstatement is judged material it is unlikely to be offset by other misstatements even when netting would appear to reduce the financial effect; offsetting is limited and requires consideration of risk of undetected misstatements (A22). Classification misstatements require qualitative assessment, particularly where they affect covenants, ratios or key line items (A23).
These are not hypothetical caveats. Each is directly embedded in the Standard’s requirements and application material (paras. 5, 6, 8‑15; A2‑A30). Practitioners should build processes and checklists that specifically address each of these items to avoid misapplication.
How to comply
The following is a practical compliance checklist mapped to the Standard’s mandatory requirements and application material. Each step cites the relevant paragraphs in ASA 450 and cross‑references other Standards where ASA 450 requires it.
Confirm applicability and operative date
Verify that the engagement falls within ASA 450’s application: audits of financial reports under the Corporations Act or other audits of financial reports or historical financial information (Aus 0.1). Confirm the engagement’s reporting period is within the Standard’s operative date (Aus 0.3).
Establish materiality and triviality criteria
Determine initial materiality in accordance with ASA 320 and document it. ASA 450 requires reassessment of materiality prior to evaluating uncorrected misstatements (Requirement, para. 10; A14‑A15; cross‑ref ASA 320). Decide whether to designate an amount below which misstatements in individual statements will be regarded as clearly trivial, and record that threshold in audit documentation (A3; Documentation, para. 15; A30).
Accumulate misstatements during the audit
Accumulate all identified misstatements except those clearly trivial (Requirement, para. 5; A2‑A6). Use categories: factual, judgemental and projected misstatements (A5). For projected misstatements apply ASA 530 procedures (A5; cross‑ref ASA 530). Where uncertainty exists about triviality, treat the item as not clearly trivial and accumulate it (A2).
Monitor patterns and revise audit plan
As misstatements are accumulated, evaluate whether their nature suggests a wider occurrence (e.g. breakdown in internal control, pervasive policy error) and whether the aggregate approaches materiality, prompting revision of the overall audit strategy and plan (Requirement, para. 6; A7‑A9). If management corrects items following auditor requests, perform additional procedures to verify no remaining misstatements (Requirement, para. 6.2; A9).
Communicate with management timely
Communicate on a timely basis all accumulated misstatements with the level of management that has authority to act, unless law or regulation prohibits communication (Requirement, para. 8; A10‑A12). Document the communications and the requested corrections. If legal/regulatory restrictions exist, consider obtaining legal advice (A11).
If management refuses correction, obtain reasons and evaluate
Where management refuses to correct some or all misstatements, obtain a written or documented explanation of reasons and take those reasons into account when evaluating whether the financial report is free from material misstatement (Requirement, para. 9; A13). Consider whether the refusal indicates bias in management judgement (cross‑ref ASA 700 and ASA 200 statements on qualitative aspects and professional scepticism, A17).
Reassess materiality and evaluate uncorrected misstatements
Before completing the evaluation of uncorrected misstatements, reassess materiality in light of actual financial results (Requirement, para. 10; A14‑A15). Determine whether uncorrected misstatements are material individually or in aggregate, considering size and nature, prior‑period misstatements, and qualitative circumstances listed in A21‑A25 (Requirement, para. 11; A16‑A25). Pay particular attention to items that affect regulatory compliance, covenants, compensation, trends or user understanding.
Communicate with those charged with governance
Communicate material uncorrected misstatements and their effect on the auditor’s proposed opinion to those charged with governance, identifying material items individually and requesting correction (Requirement, para. 12; A26‑A28). If persons with management responsibilities also have governance roles, ensure communications satisfy the governance disclosure expectations (A26).
Obtain written representations
Request written representations from management and, where appropriate, those charged with governance stating whether they believe the effects of uncorrected misstatements are immaterial, individually and in aggregate, and include a summary of such items in or attached to the representation (Requirement, para. 14; A29). If management disputes that items are misstatements, allow them to include their reasons in the representation, but retain independent auditor judgement.
Complete documentation
Include in audit documentation: the triviality threshold; all misstatements accumulated and whether corrected; and the auditor’s conclusion on the materiality of uncorrected misstatements with the basis for that conclusion (Requirement, para. 15; A30). Where communication was restricted by law, document the legal basis and any legal advice obtained (A11). Ensure that documentation records how judgmental and qualitative factors were considered, especially for classification and disclosure items (A21‑A25).
Apply professional scepticism and cross‑reference other ASAs
Exercise professional scepticism in evaluating misstatements and evidence (A17; cross‑ref ASA 200). Use ASA 320 to set and, if required, revise materiality. For fraud‑related misstatements, apply ASA 240 guidance (A?; cross‑ref ASA 240). For projected misstatements rely on ASA 530 procedures (A5). Where other information in the annual report is affected, consider ASA 720 implications (A?).
Special considerations for public sector or regulated clients
For public sector entities, account for public interest, accountability and statutory reporting requirements when assessing materiality (Considerations Specific to Public Sector Entities, Ref: Para 11(a)). For regulated entities, consider how misstatements may affect regulatory compliance and any obligations to report to regulatory authorities.
Review and finalise audit opinion in light of uncorrected misstatements
Incorporate the evaluation of uncorrected misstatements into the auditor’s overall conclusion under ASA 700 about whether reasonable assurance has been obtained and whether the financial report is free from material misstatement (Introduction, para. 1; cross‑ref ASA 700). If uncorrected misstatements are material individually or in aggregate, consider the implications for the audit opinion and the need for modification.
By following the procedural steps mandated in ASA 450 and documenting the judgements and communications specified in paras. 5, 8‑15 and application material A2‑A30, auditors comply with the Standard’s requirements. Firms should embed these steps into audit methodology and working‑paper templates, and train engagement teams to apply the qualitative tests and cross‑referenced Standards (ASA 320, ASA 700, ASA 240, ASA 530, ASA 260, ASA 720) that ASA 450 cites.
The most recently compiled versions of Auditing Standards, original Standards and amending Standards (see Compilation Details) are available on the AUASB website: www.auasb.gov.au
Contact Details
Auditing and Assurance Standards BoardPodium LevelLevel 14, 530 Collins StreetMelbourne Victoria 3000AUSTRALIA
Phone: (03) 8080 7400E‑mail: enquiries@auasb.gov.auPostal Address:PO Box 204Collins Street WestMelbourne Victoria 8007AUSTRALIA
Requests and enquiries concerning reproduction and rights for commercial purposes within Australia should be addressed to the Executive Technical 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.
This Auditing Standard reproduces substantial parts of the corresponding International Standard on Auditing issued by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB) and published by the International Federation of Accountants (IFAC), in the manner described in the statement on Conformity with International Standards on Auditing. The AUASB acknowledges that IFAC is the owner of copyright in the International Standard on Auditing incorporated in this Auditing Standard throughout the world.
All existing rights in this material are reserved outside Australia. Reproduction outside Australia in unaltered form (retaining this notice) is permitted for personal and non‑commercial use only.
Further information and requests for authorisation to reproduce this Auditing Standard for commercial purposes outside Australia should be addressed to the Executive Technical Director, Auditing and Assurance Standards Board, PO Box 204, Collins Street West, Melbourne, Victoria 8007 or sent to enquiries@auasb.gov.au. Any decision to approve a request may also require the agreement of IFAC.
ISSN 1833‑4393
CONTENTS
COMPILATION DETAILS
AUTHORITY STATEMENT
CONFORMITY WITH INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS ON AUDITING
Auditing Standard ASA 450 Evaluation of Misstatements Identified during the Audit (as Amended)
This compilation takes into account amendments made up to and including 30 May 2017 and was prepared on 30 May 2017 by the Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (AUASB).
This compilation is not a separate Auditing Standard made by the AUASB. Instead, it is a representation of ASA 450 (October 2009) as amended by another Auditing Standard which is listed in the Table below.
Table of Standards
Standard
Date made
Operative Date
ASA 450 [A]
27 October 2009
financial reporting periods commencing on or after 1 January 2010
ASA 2015‑1 [B]
1 December 2015
financial reporting periods ending on or after 15 December 2016
ASA 2017‑2 [C]
30 May 2017
financial reporting periods commencing on or after 1 January 2018
[A] Federal Register of Legislative Instruments – registration number F2009L04083, 11 November 2009
[B] Federal Register of Legislative Instruments – registration number F2015L02032, 16 December 2015
[C] Federal Register of Legislative Instruments – registration number F2017L01179TBD, TBD13 September 2017
Table of Amendments
Paragraph affected
How affected
By … [paragraph]
Aus A1.1
Deleted
ASA 2015‑1 [143]
Footnote * attached to paragraph Aus A1.1
Deleted
ASA 2015‑1 [144]
Paragraph A21
Amended
ASA 2015‑1 [145]
Footnote 16
Amended
ASA 2015‑1 [146]
Paragraph 4
Amended
ASA 2015-1 [120]
Paragraph A1
Amended
ASA 2015-1 [121]
Footnotes 6 and 7
Addition
ASA 2015-1 [122]
Paragraph A2
Amended
ASA 2015-1 [123]
Heading above paragraph A3
Addition
ASA 2015-1 [124]
A3
Addition
ASA 2015-1 [125-126]
Heading above paragraph A4
Addition
ASA 2015-1 [127]
A4
Addition
ASA 2015-1 [128-129]
Heading above paragraph A5
Addition
ASA 2015-1 [130]
A5
Addition
ASA 2015-1 [131-132]
A6
Amendment
ASA 2015-1 [133]
A10
Amendment
ASA 2015-1 [134]
A16
Amendment
ASA 2015-1 [135]
A17
Addition
ASA 2015-1 [136-137]
A18
Addition
ASA 2015-1 [138 and 140]
Footnote 13
Addition
ASA 2015-1 [139]
A20
Amendment
ASA 2015-1 [141]
Footnote 15
Addition
ASA 2015-1 [142]
8
Amendment
ASA 2017-2 [44]
9
Amendment
ASA 2017-2 [45]
10
Amendment
ASA 2017-2 [46]
11
Amendment
ASA 2017-2 [47]
12
Amendment
ASA 2017-2 [48]
14
Amendment
ASA 2017-2 [49]
15
Amendment
ASA 2017-2 [50]
A11
Amendment
ASA 2017-2 [51]
A20
Amendment
ASA 2017-2 [52]
A22
Amendment
ASA 2017-2 [53]
AUTHORITY STATEMENT
Auditing Standard ASA 450 Evaluation of Misstatements Identified during the Audit (as amended to 30 May 2017) is set out in paragraphs Aus 0.1 to A30.
This Auditing Standard is to be read in conjunction with ASA 101 Preamble to Australian Auditing Standards, which sets out the intentions of the AUASB on how the Australian Auditing Standards, operative for financial reporting periods commencing on or after 1 January 2010, are to be understood, interpreted and applied. This Auditing Standard is to be read also in conjunction with ASA 200 Overall Objectives of the Independent Auditor and the Conduct of an Audit in Accordance with Australian Auditing Standards.
Dated: 30 May 2017
Conformity with International Standards on Auditing
This Auditing Standard conforms with International Standard on Auditing ISA 450 Evaluation of Misstatements Identified during the Audit issued by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB), an independent standard‑setting board of the International Federation of Accountants (IFAC).
Paragraphs that have been added to this Auditing Standard (and do not appear in the text of the equivalent ISA) are identified with the prefix “Aus”.
The equivalent requirements and related application and other explanatory material included in ISA 450 in respect of “relevant ethical requirements”, have been included in Auditing Standard, ASA 102 Compliance with Ethical Requirements when Performing Audits, Reviews and Other Assurance Engagements. There is no international equivalent to ASA 102.
Compliance wi
This is an opening excerpt, not the complete document.