Αποτελέσματα Αναζήτησης
The reviewer needs to consider whether the audit team has applied appropriate professional scepticism. A two-year cooling off period is required before an audit engagement partner can act as a reviewer for their former client.
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.
1 Οκτ 2021 · 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...
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.
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.
cooling-off periods for EQ reviews provided that they are inspected at least once every three years (PCAOB Release 2009-004, AS 7 -Engagement Quality Review ). At its October ASB meeting, the ASB considered the following three options:
11 Νοε 2014 · In many respects, the length of the cooling-off period is more important than the period for which a KAP is permitted to act. A short cooling-off period may simply be regarded as a brief hiatus in the audit appointment – a costly breach of continuity only.
