Αποτελέσματα Αναζήτησης
1 Αυγ 2022 · This paper examines the association between the length of the cooling-off period and audit quality: (1) when partners rotate back and (2) during the cooling-off period, ahead of an extension to the minimum cooling-off period requirement in Australia.
A two-year cooling off period is required before an audit engagement partner can act as a reviewer for their former client. The reviewer must be competent and capable of performing the role including understanding the legal and professional framework, firm policies relevant to the engagement and have an appropriate knowledge of the client industry.
17 Δεκ 2018 · Integrated within MPR requirements, minimum cooling-off periods regulate audit quality at the time of a rotation-back. Within the context of a proposed extension to the minimum cooling-off period, we examine the association between the length of the cooling-off period and audit quality.
Both committees would support a cooling-off period before a former engagement partner can serve as an engagement quality reviewer. However, we realize that the IAASB requires a two-year cooling-off period, so we would support a similar requirement.
The requirement for ‘key audit partners’ to rotate after a maximum of seven years, followed by a three-year cooling-off period is retained under the new legislation; however, member states have an option to elect shorter partner rotation periods. Described in the Article 17 of the Regulation.
Cooling-off period A 4-year ‘cooling-off’ period starts after the maximum duration of the engagement expires. During this time, the statutory auditor, audit firm or any member of their network shall not undertake the statutory audit of the same company. In addition, the Regulation requires key audit
7 Φεβ 2024 · Relative to the year before rotation, audit quality after rotation-back is higher if the auditors use the ‘substantive’ cooling-off mode, whereas the audit quality decreases if the auditors use the ‘non-substantive’ cooling-off mode.
