Joint audit

Last updated

A joint audit is an audit on a legal entity (the auditee) by two or more auditors to produce a single audit report, thereby sharing responsibility for the audit. A typical joint audit has audit planning performed jointly and fieldwork allocated to the auditors. The auditors are typically not individuals, but auditing firms. This work allocation may be rotated after a set number of years to mitigate the risk of over-familiarity. Work performed by each auditor is reviewed by the other, in most cases by exchanging audit summary reports. The critical issues at group level, including group consolidation, are reviewed jointly and there is joint reporting to the legal entity's management, its audit committee, a government entity, or the general public.

Contents

A joint audit is different from a dual audit, where a dual audit is performed by two independent auditors issuing their own separate reports, which are then used by another auditor that ultimately reports on the entity as a whole. Since the audit reform in 2014 in Europe, joint auditing is encouraged but not obligated by the law. In combination with mandatory rotation it's effective to diversify the audit market. In France the joint audit system is obligated by law for PIE's. [1]

Uses

Joint audits are used internationally, including in India, Denmark, Germany, Switzerland and the UK. In France, joint audit became a legal requirement in 1966, while in South Africa, a joint audit is mandatory for firms operating in the financial services sector. In the United States, a joint audits are performed by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) by using various specialists and agents simultaneously in a single tax audit. [2] The state of Maryland has a joint audit committee, composed of members of the State House of Representatives and State Senate, responsible for reviewing the legislative audit. [3]

Auditor competence and independence

Joint audit addresses two underlying principles of audit quality: auditors’ competence and independence. It enables a benchmarking of audit approaches and affords audit committees the opportunity to pick and choose the best local firms from within two global audit networks. Audit committees and investors have additional assurance that the audit opinion with which they are presented is complete. A joint audit allows rotation of audit firms, and retains knowledge and understanding of group operations in a way that minimizes the disruption caused when a single audit firm is changed. The rotation of audit firms is equally likely to mitigate the risk of over familiarity. Two firms can also stand stronger together against aggressive accounting treatments. In this way, joint audit effectively becomes a guardian for audit quality. The benchmarking that takes place between the two firms raises the level of service quality. In India, members of the company has the liberty to choose joint auditors. [4]

Market competition

A joint audit has a further benefit in that it can encourage more competition between audit firms. Despite the fact that two Big Four firms can still be used on a joint audit, there is an opportunity for companies to be more willing to engage other firms in the process. The Big Four then becomes the best seven or eight, as more firms are given the opportunity to demonstrate their capabilities, while clients can retain a Big Four signature where they feel it is needed. A recent report produced by consultants London Economics for the European Commission highlighted that France and Denmark (two countries with joint audits) are the two least concentrated audit markets in Europe.

Some critics believe that it is difficult for two firms, who outside of the joint audit are competitors, to easily co-operate with each other during the audit. The degree of co-operation, and its effectiveness, is essentially down to the spirit in which the two audit firms approach the joint audit. If they approach the audit with a willingness to work together to provide a company's shareholders with what they truly value – namely confidence in the financial position of the company in which they are investing – communication will not be a problem. If they favour competition over collaboration, the outcome is poor.

Costs

Increased costs is the most commonly cited objection to joint audits. Joint audit adds approximately 10% to audit time, mostly at the highest levels of the audit team (managers and partners). In the longer term, it could bring about a reduction in audit costs as a result of (1) increased market competition, and (2) benchmarking of prices and efficiencies between the two joint auditors by the Audit Committee of the audited organization.

Joint audit delivers increased reporting on audit time and rates applied across the group. A recent comparative analysis of audit fees between Germany and France shows that companies with joint audit pay significantly less for their audit than companies without joint audit.[ citation needed ]

Joint audit increases time spent by the senior staff on the audit team, and the senior management of the group or organization.

Joint Audit (Tax)

A joint tax audit is the examination of a business or individual tax return by a common audit team with members of two or more States examining cross-border tax situations as one tax audit to gain a uniform actual and legal assessment concerning this situation. [5]

Related Research Articles

The Big Four are the four largest professional services networks in the world: Deloitte, Ernst & Young (EY), KPMG, and PwC. They are the four largest global accounting networks as measured by revenue. The four are often grouped because they are comparable in size relative to the rest of the market, both in terms of revenue and workforce; they are considered equal in their ability to provide a wide scope of professional services to their clients; and, among those looking to start a career in professional services, particularly accounting, they are considered equally attractive networks to work in, because of the frequency with which these firms engage with Fortune 500 companies.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">KPMG</span> Multinational professional services and accounting company firm

KPMG International Limited is a multinational professional services network, and one of the Big Four accounting organizations, along with Ernst & Young (EY), Deloitte, and PwC. The name "KPMG" stands for "Klynveld Peat Marwick Goerdeler". The initialism was chosen when KMG merged with Peat Marwick in 1987.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">PwC</span> Multinational professional services brand

PricewaterhouseCoopers International Limited is a British multinational professional services brand of firms, operating as partnerships under the PwC brand. It is the second-largest professional services network in the world and is considered one of the Big Four accounting firms, along with Deloitte, EY and KPMG.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Audit</span> Systematic and independent examination of books, accounts, documents and vouchers of an organization

An audit is an "independent examination of financial information of any entity, whether profit oriented or not, irrespective of its size or legal form when such an examination is conducted with a view to express an opinion thereon." Auditing also attempts to ensure that the books of accounts are properly maintained by the concern as required by law. Auditors consider the propositions before them, obtain evidence, and evaluate the propositions in their auditing report.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Financial audit</span> Type of audit

A financial audit is conducted to provide an opinion whether "financial statements" are stated in accordance with specified criteria. Normally, the criteria are international accounting standards, although auditors may conduct audits of financial statements prepared using the cash basis or some other basis of accounting appropriate for the organization. In providing an opinion whether financial statements are fairly stated in accordance with accounting standards, the auditor gathers evidence to determine whether the statements contain material errors or other misstatements.

Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited, commonly referred to as Deloitte, is a British multinational professional services network headquartered in London, England. Deloitte is the largest professional services network by revenue and number of professionals in the world and is considered one of the Big Four accounting firms along with EY, KPMG and PwC.

An audit committee is a committee of an organisation's board of directors which is responsible for oversight of the financial reporting process, selection of the independent auditor, and receipt of audit results both internal and external.

An information technology audit, or information systems audit, is an examination of the management controls within an Information technology (IT) infrastructure and business applications. The evaluation of evidence obtained determines if the information systems are safeguarding assets, maintaining data integrity, and operating effectively to achieve the organization's goals or objectives. These reviews may be performed in conjunction with a financial statement audit, internal audit, or other form of attestation engagement.

Enterprise risk management (ERM) in business includes the methods and processes used by organizations to manage risks and seize opportunities related to the achievement of their objectives. ERM provides a framework for risk management, which typically involves identifying particular events or circumstances relevant to the organization's objectives, assessing them in terms of likelihood and magnitude of impact, determining a response strategy, and monitoring process. By identifying and proactively addressing risks and opportunities, business enterprises protect and create value for their stakeholders, including owners, employees, customers, regulators, and society overall.

<i>Kabushiki gaisha</i> Company with limited liability established under Japanese law

A kabushiki gaisha or kabushiki kaisha, commonly abbreviated K.K. or KK, is a type of company defined under the Companies Act of Japan. The term is often translated as "stock company", "joint-stock company" or "stock corporation". The term kabushiki gaisha in Japan refers to any joint-stock company regardless of country of origin or incorporation; however, outside Japan the term refers specifically to joint-stock companies incorporated in Japan.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Internal audit</span> Independent, objective assurance and consulting activity

Internal auditing is an independent, objective assurance and consulting activity designed to add value and improve an organization's operations. It helps an organization accomplish its objectives by bringing a systematic, disciplined approach to evaluate and improve the effectiveness of risk management, control and governance processes. Internal auditing might achieve this goal by providing insight and recommendations based on analyses and assessments of data and business processes. With commitment to integrity and accountability, internal auditing provides value to governing bodies and senior management as an objective source of independent advice. Professionals called internal auditors are employed by organizations to perform the internal auditing activity.

Mazars is an internationally integrated partnership, specialising in audit, accounting and consulting group employing more than 47,000 professionals in more than 95 countries through member firms. With head offices in Paris, capital of France, Mazars has a network of correspondent partners and joint ventures in a further 21 countries and is a founding member of the Praxity alliance, a network of independent firms.

Internal control, as defined by accounting and auditing, is a process for assuring of an organization's objectives in operational effectiveness and efficiency, reliable financial reporting, and compliance with laws, regulations and policies. A broad concept, internal control involves everything that controls risks to an organization.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">SOX 404 top–down risk assessment</span>

In financial auditing of public companies in the United States, SOX 404 top–down risk assessment (TDRA) is a financial risk assessment performed to comply with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. Under SOX 404, management must test its internal controls; a TDRA is used to determine the scope of such testing. It is also used by the external auditor to issue a formal opinion on the company's internal controls. However, as a result of the passage of Auditing Standard No. 5, which the SEC has since approved, external auditors are no longer required to provide an opinion on management's assessment of its own internal controls.

Grant Thornton is the world's seventh-largest by revenue and sixth-largest by number of employees professional services network of independent accounting and consulting member firms which provide assurance, tax and advisory services to privately held businesses, public interest entities, and public sector entities. Grant Thornton International Ltd. is a not-for-profit, non-practising, international umbrella membership entity organised as a private company limited by guarantee. Grant Thornton International Ltd. is incorporated in London, England, and has no share capital.

Fraud deterrence has gained public recognition and spotlight since the 2002 inception of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Of the many reforms enacted through Sarbanes-Oxley, one major goal was to regain public confidence in the reliability of financial markets in the wake of corporate scandals such as Enron, WorldCom and Waste Management. Section 404 of Sarbanes Oxley mandated that public companies have an independent Audit of internal controls over financial reporting. In essence, the intent of the U.S. Congress in passing the Sarbanes Oxley Act was attempting to proactively deter financial misrepresentation (Fraud) in order to ensure more accurate financial reporting to increase investor confidence. This same concept is applied in the discussion of fraud deterrence.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Entity-level controls</span>

Entity-level controls are controls that help to ensure that management directives pertaining to the entire entity are carried out. They are the second level of a to understanding the risks of an organization. Generally, entity refers to the entire company.

The chief audit executive (CAE), director of audit, director of internal audit, auditor general, or controller general is a high-level independent corporate executive with overall responsibility for internal audit.

An accounting network or accounting association is a professional services network whose principal purpose is to provide members resources to assist the clients around the world and hence reduce the uncertainty by bringing together a greater number of resources to work on a problem. The networks and associations operate independently of the independent members. The largest accounting networks are known as the Big Four.

References

  1. ↑ Mazars. "What you need to know about joint audit - Mazars - Belgium". www.mazars.be. Retrieved 2019-12-09.
  2. ↑ Internal Revenue Service Joint Audit Planning, 17 September 2003. Accessed 4 April 2007.
  3. ↑ Maryland General Assembly Joint Audit Committee Accessed 7 April 2007.
  4. ↑ Companies Act 2013
  5. ↑ Till Meickmann, Taxing German-Dutch Cross-Border Business Activities, p. 397.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.