(c) Explain the extent to which you should plan to place reliance on analytical procedures

Question

(c) Explain the extent to which you should plan to place reliance on analytical procedures as audit evidence.

(6 marks)

Answer 1

正确答案：
(c) Extent of reliance on analytical procedures as audit evidence
Tutorial note: In the requirement ‘… reliance … as audit evidence’ is a direction to consider only substantive analytical
procedures. Answer points concerning planning and review stages were not asked for and earn no marks.
■ Although there is likely to be less reliance on analytical procedures than if this had been an existing audit client, the fact
that this is a new assignment does not preclude placing some reliance on such procedures.
■ Analytical procedures will not be relied on in respect of material items that require 100% testing. For example, additions
to property is likely to represent a very small number of transactions.
■ Analytical procedures alone may provide sufficient audit evidence on line items that are not individually material. For
example, inventory (less than 1/2% revenue and less than 1% total assets) may be shown to be materially correctly
stated through analytical procedures on consumable stores (i.e. fuel, lubricants, materials for servicing vehicles etc).
■ Substantive analytical procedures are best suited to large volume transactions (e.g. revenue, materials expense, staff
costs). If controls over the completeness, accuracy and validity of recording transactions in these areas are effective then
substantive analytical procedures showing that there are no unexpected fluctuations should reduce the need for
substantive detailed tests.
■ The extent of planned use will be dependent on the relationships expected between variables. (e.g. between items of
financial information and between items of financial and non-financial information). For example, if material costs rise
due to an increase in the level of business then a commensurate increase in revenue and staff costs might be expected
also.
■ ‘Proofs in total’ (or reasonableness tests) provide substantive evidence that income statement items are not materially
misstated. In the case of Yates these might be applied to staff costs (number of employees in each category ×
wage/salary rates, grossed up for social security, etc) and finance expense (interest rate × average monthly overdraft
balance).
■ However, such tests may have limited application, if any, if the population is not homogenous and cannot be subdivided.
For example, all the categories of non-current asset have a wide range of useful life. Therefore it would be
difficult/meaningless to apply an ‘average’ depreciation rate to all assets in the class to substantiate the total depreciation
expense for the year. (Although it might highlight a risk of potential over or understatement requiring further
investigation.)
■ Substantive analytical procedures are more likely to be used if there is relevant information available that is being used
by Yates. For example, as fuel costs will be significant, Yates may monitor consumption (e.g. miles per gallon (MPG)).
■ Analytical procedures may supplement alternative procedures that provide evidence regarding the same assertion. For
example, the review of after-date payments to confirm the completeness of trade payables may be supplemented by
calculations of average payment period on a monthly basis.
Tutorial note: Credit will be given for other relevant points drawn from the scenario. For example, the restructuring during
the previous year is likely to have caused fluctuations that may result in less reliance being placed on analytical procedures.