The firms can teach particular procedures and techniques. Hal Zeidman suggested focusing on the underlying conceptual basis for auditing, especially risk assessment and response. The discussion of the effects on audit education was initiated by a member of the audience who asked, “As an auditing teacher and a writer of textbooks, how am I supposed to deal with all of this?” Educators were advised by the audit practitioners on the panel to emphasize good judgment skills in preparing students for a career in accounting. Implications of Multiple Standards for Students and Educators 7 ( PCAOB 2009) for engagement quality review partners on non-issuer audits, because it believed that the rationale for these incremental procedures on these audits was not sufficiently compelling for the firm to exceed the AICPA procedures in this area. In a different context the firm chose not to require the incremental procedures required by PCAOB AS No. In the past, the firm has chosen to implement the more stringent PCAOB standard on some non-issuer audits. Under PCAOB standards, the same sample size must be used for both purposes, even if that means that a larger sample size than otherwise necessary is used for one of the two purposes. 111, AICPA 2006) allows the use of different sample sizes for control evaluation and substantive testing purposes when performing dual-purpose tests. Zeidman's firm also considers whether the rationale for incremental PCAOB standards may be sufficiently compelling to warrant incorporation of these PCAOB standards into audits of non-issuers. The panelists also discussed challenges posed by the existence of multiple standards for CPA firms, students, and instructors, and how these challenges may be addressed by both educators and accounting firms. We then present panelists' responses to questions raised during the session, which reflect differing perspectives concerning why multiple standards may be necessary, barriers to a more unified structure for auditing standards, and differences in enforcement and quality assessment. In this paper, we discuss the roles of the various auditing standards setters (e.g., Auditing Standards Board, Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board ) and how the standards have diverged over time. The session took place at the American Accounting Association (AAA) Auditing Section Meeting in Savannah, Georgia in January 2012. We organized a panel discussion on the roles of the multiple auditing standard setters and the implications of these multiple sets of standards for practice and education. Journal of Forensic Accounting Research Teaching Notes.Journal of Forensic Accounting Research.The Journal of the American Taxation Association.Journal of Management Accounting Research.Journal of International Accounting Research.Journal of Information Systems Teaching Notes.Journal of Governmental & Nonprofit Accounting Teaching Notes.Journal of Governmental & Nonprofit Accounting.
Journal of Emerging Technologies in Accounting Teaching Notes.Journal of Emerging Technologies in Accounting.Current Issues in Auditing Teaching Notes.AUDITING: A Journal of Practice and Theory.Issues in Accounting Education Teaching Notes.
0 kommentar(er)
