[toc-this] Show
PrincipleThe audit team aims to obtain sufficient, relevant and reliable audit evidence to ensure that the contents of the audit report stand up to critical review. When providing an audit opinion as in Statement of Assurance, the evidence should allow reaching a conclusion with reasonable assurance. DefinitionsAudit evidence is all of the information used by the auditor to support the audit findings and conclusions and, where required, arrive at an audit opinion. Information is data collected from documents, databases or other sources and analysed by the auditors. SufficiencySufficiency relates to the quantity of audit evidence - auditors should collect enough evidence to enable them to substantiate their conclusions in relation to the audit objective. Audit evidence is sufficient if there is enough of it to persuade a reasonable person that the audit findings and conclusions are valid, and that the recommendations are appropriate. Auditors typically do not examine all data available. This would be impractical, prohibitively costly and unnecessary, as conclusions and opinions can generally be reached by using sampling and other means of selecting items for testing. There is no formula to express in absolute terms how much evidence there must be for it to be considered sufficient. However, the quantity needed is affected by the degree of risk and the quality of such audit evidence - the higher the quality, the less evidence may be required. ReliabilityAudit evidence is reliable if it fulfils the necessary requirements for credibility, if the same findings arise when tests are carried out repeatedly or when information is obtained from different sources. The reliability of audit evidence is affected by its source and type and is dependent on the circumstances under which it is obtained. While recognising that exceptions may exist, audit evidence is considered more reliable when it is:
Sources of evidenceAudit evidence may emanate from the following sources:
Types of evidenceAudit evidence may be physical, documentary, oral or analytical.
CorroborationDifferent sources should be employed when collecting evidence to make it more persuasive. Audit evidence provides a higher degree of confidence when items of evidence from different sources or of a different nature are consistent with one another. This is known as corroboration or triangulation. In addition, obtaining audit evidence from different sources or of a different nature may indicate that an individual item of audit evidence is not reliable. Conversely, when audit evidence obtained from one source is inconsistent with that obtained from another, the audit team shoulddetermine what additional audit procedures are necessary to resolve the inconsistency and thus allow the information to be used as audit evidence. RelevancyFor evidence to be relevant, it should help to answer the audit [multi-link title="objective%20or%20assertion" link_1="%2Faware%2FPA%2FPages%2FPlanning%2FDeveloping-audit-questions.aspx" title_1="Performance" link_2="%2Faware%2FCA%2FPages%2FConcepts%2FObjectives-of-compliance-audit.aspx" title_2="Compliance" link_3="%2Faware%2FFA%2FPages%2FConcepts%2FObjectives-of-reliability-audits.aspx" title_3="Financial" /] . Relevance also bears upon the audit criteria, audit finding and the purpose of the audit procedure. The more an audit objective is judgement-based (like in performance audits), the more likely the audit evidence available is to be persuasive ("points towards the conclusion that...") than conclusive ("right/wrong") in nature. Relevance also requires the evidence to apply to the period under review. If the audit objective so requires, the total evidence must be representative of the entire period being audited.InstructionsAudit considerationsThere are no precise guidelines to measure the degree of proof required. When evaluating audit evidence for sufficiency, reliability and relevancy, the auditor uses professional judgement and exercises professional scepticism. These qualities are interrelated and must be considered together with the objective and context of the audit and nature of the audit finding:
Detailed assessments of information needs should be carried out at both the audit planning and examination phases so that the auditors are not swamped by excessive data. Evidence is obtained at the audit examination phase by carrying out a mixture of [multi-link title="audit%20procedures" link_1="%2Faware%2FGAP%2FPages%2FCA-FA%2FPlanning%2FDesigning-audit-procedures.aspx" title_1="Compliance%20and%20financial" link_2="%2Faware%2FPA%2FPages%2FPlanning%2FAudit-procedures.aspx" title_2="Performance" /] to collect and analyse data. The audit team needs to make a judgement as to which method of obtaining persuasive evidence will be suitable for the particular audit objective. They need to consider also the extent of their skills in designing and applying the methods, as their skills will determine the quality of the evidence.Access and proceduresThe ECA has right of access to "any document or information necessary to carry out its task" ( [link new-window title="Art%20287(3)%20TFEU" link="https%3A%2F%2Feur-lex.europa.eu%2Flegal-content%2FEN%2FTXT%2FPDF%2F%3Furi%3DCELEX%3A12012E%2FTXT%26from%3DEN%23page%3D124" icon="external-link" /] ). It is a matter for the ECA to determine what documents or information it deems necessary in this regard within the boundaries set by the TFEU. The ECA is also fully committed to ensuring that[link title="confidential%20documents" link="%2Faware%2FGAP%2FPages%2FDocumenting-an-audit.aspx%23Confidentiality" /] received from auditees are processed appropriately and are not disclosed to any unauthorised parties. If an audit involves processing of classified or sensitive documents or other data, the team should contact the information security officer. If personal data will be processed, the team should contact the data protection officer. Information and documentation relating to cases of discovered or suspected fraud should be handled with particular care. The audit evidence should be adequately documented. [/toc-this]What makes an audit evidence persuasive?Sufficiency and appropriateness are integral factors in evaluating the persuasiveness of the audit evidence.” “Appropriate audit evidence is sufficient (that is, persuasive) when an experienced auditor would be persuaded to draw conclusions based on consideration of the audit evidence.”
What does persuasive mean in auditing?Persuasive means any evidence that may cause a person to believe a fact. Conclusive means decisive and convincing. In many cases the auditor has to rely on evidence which is only persuasive rather than conclusive. This is because generally it is difficult to obtain conclusive evidence.
Which type of evidence would be most persuasive when testing the existence objective for long term assets?Physical inspection would be most persuasive when testing the existence of long-term assets.
What is persuasiveness of evidence?Two determinants of persuasiveness of evidence are: Competence – the degree to which evidence can be considered trustworthy. Sufficiency – amount of evidence is enough to form a reasonable opinion.
|