What's New | Probe 2023.20.13 

1. Caseware Working Papers 2023

The following describes the features and fixes included in Working Papers 2023 and related products

1.1 Features

1.1.1 History and milestones 

1.1.2 IDEA integration 

1.1.3 Imports and exports 

• Working Papers now supports imports from the following software packages: 
  • Sage 50 Accounts 2023 (UK)
• Working Papers now supports exports to the following software packages: 
  • ProFile 2022 (Canada) 

1.1.4 Interface 

• The Caseware Cloud search menu in the Consolidation | Properties, Consolidation | New | Existing File, Connect to SmartSync Copy... and Locate Parent of... dialogs has been modernized to improve performance and functionality. 
• The SmartSync Server menu on the Working Papers File | Open page can now be automatically hidden when you connect to a Caseware Cloud site. 
• Improved the wording in the Rename File confirmation dialog to clarify that Cloud-integrated files can be renamed, but Cloud-published files cannot.

1.1.5 Print and save 

1.2 Fixes

1.2.1 CaseView 

• Fixed an issue where text copied from external PDFs in CaseView would appear distorted when pasted into other text editors. 
• Fixed an issue where document sections with a sort group name that exceeds 256-characters would cause the document to stop responding. 

1.2.2 Compression 

1.2.3 Hybrid Cloud 

• Fixed an issue where Cloud-integrated files with accented characters in the file name would fail to open when a sync copy was downloaded from the File | Open | Caseware Cloud menu. 
• Fixed an issue (Error code: 0x8007001d) that prevented Cloud-integrated engagement files from being converted from the Working Papers interface. 
• Fixed an issue where the Year-End Close Performed column in the Working Papers app on Cloud would not update with the correct year-end close status for each file. 

1.2.4 Imports and exports 

• Fixed an issue where imports from Fortune Acomba would exclude some transactions if Use the posting date if it is different than the effective date was selected. 
• Fixed an issue that prevented the completion of E-conomic Online Accounting imports. 

1.2.5 Interface 

• Fixed an issue where upon opening an engagement file, the messages “Updating balance sheet account balances” and “Processing registration” would display, but not progress, preventing access to the file’s contents. 
• Updated Chromium Embedded Framework to version 109. 

1.2.6 Copy Components 

1.2.7 SmartSync 

• Fixed an issue where after uncompressing a compressed sync copy, it would attempt to synchronize with the original parent file even if it was abandoned. This was potentially causing the sync copy to synchronize with two different parent files. 
• Fixed an issue where temporarily losing an internet connection would cause a connection error in active sync copies, rather than switching to the Offline status. The sync copies would only reconnect to Cloud after restarting Working Papers. 
• Fixed an issue that prevented users from opening sync copies after the parent entity was moved to another business unit. 

1.2.8 XBRL 

• Fixed an issue that prevented the XBRL taxonomy from loading and reporting error HTTP 300. 

2. Lockdown, clean up and year end close process 

2.1 Lockdown process

2.1.1 Considerations before the lockdown and archiving of client files

• a Year end close has been performed and/or;  
• whether a Clean up has been performed on the client file selected to be locked down.  

3. Universal

3.1 Engagement History

• Adjusting journal entry 
• File access 
• Document creation 
• Document deletion 
• All history events 
• Post lockdown events 

3.2 Features

3.2.1 CaseView security levels

 3.2.2 Sign-off functionality

3.2.3 Use of another practitioner (Template document 12.26) 

3.2.4 Firm Policies 

• 12.40 - Engagement Quality Review – Planning 
• 12.30 - Planning memorandum 
• 02.80 - Engagement Quality Review - Execution and finalisation 
• 02.00 - Partner sign-off 

3.2.5 Partner & EQ Reviewer Sign off automation 

• 10.80 - Engagement Quality Review – Planning (Review) 
• 12.40 - Engagement Quality Review – Planning (Audit) 
• 12.30 - Planning memorandum 
• 02.80 - Engagement Quality Review - Execution and finalisation 
• 02.00 - Partner sign-off 

3.2.6 Rebuttal of presumed fraud risks related to revenue recognition 

3.3 Previously reported items fixed with Hotfixes  

3.3.1 Groupings 

• The leadsheets for the section Deferred tax liability does not show any balances. 
• The leadsheets for the section Loans to/from group companies have variances in comparison with the annual financial statements. 

3.3.2 Caseware Q 

3.3.3 07.500 Non-current liabilities compilation program

3.3.4 10.50 Gathering information 

3.3.5 10.51 Types and volumes of transactions 

• The selected source documents in the Revenue section for the question "Where does a sales transaction originate for different categories of revenue" are not consistent with the source documents being displayed in the work program. 
• The reference cells in each section are not populating correctly when linking documents on that cell. 
• The operating expenses section leadsheet's total does not add up correctly with its respective sub-categories. 
• The responses in the 'Types of procedures' table are linked. 

3.3.6 10.53 Understanding of accounting estimates. 

3.3.7 11.20 Inherent risk assessment 

• The conclusion section does not populate automatically, causing further issues in 11.10 Risk analysis summary where the risk assessment remains as not yet assessed. 
• Overall responses selected when recording a risk are not pulling through to the overall risk responses table. 

3.3.8 11.25 Fraud risk assessment 

• Inserting a new row for additional considerations and procedures does not work. 
• The conclusion section does not populate automatically, causing further issues in 11.10 Risk analysis summary where the risk assessment remains as not yet assessed. 
• The tickboxes for significant risks do not get ticked automatically. After applying this hotfix, you will need to re-assess all your risks (in documents 11.20, 11.25 and 11.30) by editing the risks, marking them as significant, if required, and then submitting. 
• Overall responses selected when recording a risk are not pulling through to the overall risk responses table. 

3.3.9 11.30 Evaluation of system of internal control 

• Overall responses selected when recording a risk are not pulling through to the overall risk responses table. 
• Inserting a new row for additional considerations and procedures does not work. 
• The conclusion section does not populate automatically, causing further issues in 11.10 Risk analysis summary where the risk assessment remains as not yet assessed. 

3.3.10 11.50 Information system and control activities 

• Linking of a control to a risk will now be possible for all sections after a control was removed by erasing the Control ID instead of removing it by selecting a blank control. 
• A new line cannot be added under the General IT controls section once all risks are deleted. 
• Adding a new control creates two controls instead of one (the desired control and a blank control).  
• Performing walkthrough procedures is always a requirement even when having selected that walkthroughs are not a requirement in either the Firm Settings or in 10.50 Gathering Information. 
• The overall conclusion consideration shows all the time instead of only showing when the user has determined the overall conclusion to be 'Inappropriate'. 
• The inherent risk column of the controls to address risks, does not populate automatically. 

3.3.11 11.60 Risk assessment at assertion level 

3.3.12 12.20 Audit plan and strategy 

3.3.13 Work programs 

• Rectifies an issue where, after running the hotfix, the user is unable to insert hidden procedures that they have chosen to show in the work programs. 
• Work programs for review engagement where sections are not material and have no items likely to be misstated during the planning phase but where the user reassesses that there are items likely to be misstated during the execution phase do not populate for that work program. 
• Work programs for review engagement where sections are not material and have items likely to be misstated during the planning phase where the user determines in the work program that the financial statements are still likely to be materially misstated does not bring in the required procedures. 
• Work programs for audit engagements where the procedure 'Have you, during the audit, identified adjustments which result in this section being material?' appears even when the assessment and the procedures have been completed correctly. 
• The assertions for significant risks in 11.60 and the assertions for those same significant risks in the work programs are not aligned. 

3.3.14 700.10 Revenue work program 

3.3.15 Other work programs 

• 405.11 Attendance at physical inventory count work program 
• 420.11 Cash count work program 
• 430.11 Receivables direct confirmation 
• 430.61 Receivables confirmation summary 
• 750.11 Wage payout work program 
• 750.60 Director's remuneration certificate 

3.3.16 02.00 Partner sign-off 

3.4 Known matters 

3.4.1 Cosmetic items

3.4.1.1 Work programs

• When revising your audit plan in the work program, the overridden dot appears 
• Within the following sections, the last procedure in the section is not an input cell: 
  • Extended test of detail 
  • Substantive sampling 

3.4.1.2 Printing

• 02.20 - The document number appears misaligned on the bottom left of the page. 

3.4.1.3 10.70 - Identify material items and areas likely to be misstated 

• When raising a new LTBM, the details of the LTBM recorded correctly appears, but each time a Blank LTBM also appears. Simply deleting it will solve the issue.

3.4.1.4 Update

• In the Protection setup, EQR will refer to the old term of EQCR as we are unable to access our users’ data stores to amend this. 
• In the document manager, not all folders are collapsed. 

3.4.2 Functionality

4. Audit

4.1 ISA 220 (Revised) 

• Clarification of the required involvement of the engagement partner throughout the audit and for managing and achieving quality on the audit, which include the standback-requirement at the end of an audit. 
• Changes to the definition of “Engagement team” that recognise that: 
  • Engagement team could include individuals from another firm, for example to perform inspection of physical fixed assets or performing inventory count. 
  • Regardless of the location of employment status, the individuals need to be independent, and their work needs to be appropriately directed, supervised, and reviewed. 
• Clarification that in certain circumstances the engagement partner may depend on the firm’s policies or procedures in complying with ISA 220 (Revised) and should not ‘blindly’ rely on the firm’s System of Quality Management (SoQM) without taking into account whether the firm’s SoQM policies or procedures are fit-for-purpose in the specific circumstances of the engagement. 
• Emphasizing that each engagement team member must exercise professional scepticism and recognise that conditions in some audits can create impediments to appropriate exercise of professional scepticism.  
• Requirements to address the full suite of resources needed at engagement level, being human, technological, and intellectual resources. The engagement partner needs to take action if the resources made available is not sufficient or appropriate in the circumstances of the engagement. 
• Determination whether the engagement team, including any auditor’s external expert and internal auditors who provide direct assistance, collectively have the appropriate competence and capabilities, including sufficient time, to perform the engagement. 

• Amendments 
  • 12.30 – Planning memorandum 
  • 02.00 – Partner sign-off 
• Additions 
  • 12.22 – Use of resources 
  • 12.26 – Use of another practitioner 
  • 02.05 – Engagement team declaration 

4.1.1. Responsibilities of the auditor 

4.1.2. Identifying and assessing risks of material misstatement

4.1.2.1 Engagement partner declarations 

4.1.2.2 Assist with documentation of rationale of conclusions 

• The actions that are expected to be performed to meet the ISA 220 (Revised) requirements, when the Probe template is used, are included as options in the “Detail” column of the declaration. The inclusion of the actions will be depended on the selections made earlier in the engagement file, for example actions related to use of individuals from another practitioner will only be added when it was selected in 12.20 that another practitioner’s staff will be used. 
• When an action is selected, the reference of the relevant Probe document will be added in the “Reference” column.  
• The engagement partner can use the hyperlink to jump to the relevant question or section within the document or the whole document, depending on where it is expected that the relevant audit evidence is recorded. 
• If electronic sign-off was chosen (refer par 3.2.2 Partner & EQ Reviewer Sign off automation), and the relevant document has been signed off by the engagement partner, the electronic signature and date will pull through to the reference column. Engagement partners can use this information to quickly determine whether they have reviewed the audit evidence to answer the relevant question. 

Furthermore, ISA220.30 requires engagement partners to review audit documentation related to significant matters, significant judgements, and other matters, based on the engagement partners’ professional judgement, that are relevant to the execution of their responsibilities as engagement partner. ISA 220.30 does not specify which significant matters or significant judgements should be reviewed. The application material does however provide examples. To assist engagement partners with documentation, these examples were added to the “Detail” column to select from, based on the engagement partners professional judgement and their firm’s SoQM policies and procedures: 

• For significant judgements or significant matters whose audit evidence should always be reviewed, firm authors can add questions to the declaration. As with other questions in the product, the user will not be able to delete questions added by the firm author. 
• For significant judgements or significant matters whose audit evidence should be reviewed if certain events or conditions are present on the engagement, for example significant uncertainty related to going concern, the firm author can add questions to sub-section “Firm mandatory – based on events and conditions present”. This sub-section will only be included in the declarations when the firm author has added questions.  

See par 3.2.1 Firm Policies on details of how this feature works. 

4.2 ISQM2  

• Extend the scope of engagements subject to an EQ Review (“EQR”). 
  • Audits of financial statements of listed entities. 
  • Audit or other engagements for which and EQR is required by law or regulation. 
  • Audits of other engagements required by the firm’s SoQM policies and procedures, 
  •  Appropriate response to address one or more quality risk(s). 
• Strengthen the eligibility criteria for an individual to be appointed as an Engagement Quality Reviewer (“EQ Reviewer”); and 
• Enhance the EQ reviewer’s responsibility relating the performance and documentation of an EQR. 

• Amendments 
  • 02.80 – Engagement Quality Review – Execution and finalisation 
• Additions 
  • 12.40 – Engagement Quality Review - Planning 
  • 02.05 – Engagement team declaration 

4.2.1 12.40 Engagement Quality Review – Planning (NEW) 

• Reading the firm’s relevant SoQM policies and procedures (ISQM2.18(b) & 20(b) & 21 & 22 & 24). 
• Considering and concluding on eligibility to act as EQ Reviewer (ISQM2.23) 
• Obtaining understanding of engagement and entity (ISQM2.25) as well as results from the firm’s monitoring and remedial action process (ISQM2.25) 
• Having required discussions with engagement partners and where appropriate other engagement team members (ISQM2.25(b)). 
• Review of audit evidence relating to significant judgements made by the engagement team during planning (ISQM2.25(c)) 

4.2.2 02.80 Engagement Quality Review – Execution and finalisation 

4.2.3 Assist with documentation of audit evidence 

• Record the description of the significant judgement. 
• Link to the document or working paper reviewed. 

4.3 ISA 315 (2019 Revised) 

4.3.1 Type of risk assessment procedures 

4.3.2 Preliminary analytical review 

4.3.3 Procedures required by International Auditing Standards 

4.3.3.1 General 

Some procedures, for example those procedures that are required to be performed when substantive sampling is selected as audit response, does not provide audit evidence independently. It will be performed in conjunction with another test of detail. Furthermore, these procedures are required to be performed in accordance with an ISA, either: 

• Always, for example agree the amounts and disclosures presented in the current period financial statements to underlying accounting records, or 
• when decisions are taken by the engagement team, for example an auditor’s expert will be used or sampling will be part of the audit response. 

• All assertions have been removed from this category of procedures. 
• The relevant ISA reference has been added to inform users that it is a required procedure in accordance with which ISA (subject to selections made by the engagement team). 

• Agree the amounts and disclosures presented in the current period financial statements to the following and reconcile any differences (ISA330.20 and .30). 
• Substantive analytical procedures (ISA520.5 & 7) 
• Using the work of a management’s expert (ISA500.8 &9) 
• Using the work of an auditor’s expert (ISA620.10) 
• External confirmations (ISA505) 

4.3.3.2 Material inventory 

4.3.4 Core and Extended options

4.3.4.1 11.21 Laws and regulations. 

• Firstly, identify the COTABD whose determination of material amounts and disclosures may be affected by the provisions of the identified laws and regulations, and  
• Review the work program of those COTABD to obtain sufficient and appropriate evidence regarding the compliance. 

4.3.4.2 12.20 Audit plan and strategy 

• Answer “Yes” to “A need to revise audit plan?”. 
• Select “General including laws and regulations.” 
• Select “Required procedures – Laws and regulations” 

4.3.4.3 Manager checklist 

4.3.5 Testing compliance with Value Added Taxation Act (South Africa) 

• Moved the procedures from the existing main procedure to a new VAT main procedure.  
• Removed any assertions assigned to these compliance procedures. 
• Added an affix (ISA 240.14) after the procedures to ‘inform’ users that these procedures relate to testing compliance with laws and regulations of a material COTABD. 

4.3.6 Testing Compliances with Companies Act (South Africa) 

• Include the compliance procedures based on the following principles: 
  • When the requirements relate to a specific transaction, for example issue of shares or financial assistance to directors, related or interrelated entities or persons, include it in the work program the transaction relates to, for example 805 Capital or contributions or 347 Loans to Group Companies, respectively. Therefore, the compliance procedures will be included for a material COTABD and a COTABD with a relevant assertion.  
  • When the requirements relate to presentation or disclosure requirements of the Companies Act, for example directors’ remuneration, include it in 18.10 Financial Statement Preparation. These compliance procedures will always be completed. 
  • When the requirements do not relate to a specific transaction, for example the requirements related to the Audit or Social and Ethics Committee, include it in a new work program 20.10 Laws and regulations (NEW). 
• Removed any assertions assigned to these compliance procedures. 
• Include an affix (ISA 240.14) after the procedures to ‘inform’ users that these procedures relate to testing compliance with laws and regulations of a material COTABD. Except for the compliance procedures included in the new work program since the objective of the new work program is to test compliance with the provisions of laws and regulations. 

4.3.7 Disclosure items

4.4 Going concern conclusion – insufficient audit evidence 

4.4.1 02.20 Going concern conclusion 

4.4.2 02.50 Consideration of assurance reports 

4.5 IAS 1

​​​​​4.6 Supplementary or other unaudited information ​​​​​

4.7 Probe Work Programs

4.8 Probe Work Programs

• Included new procedures 
• Added and removed assertion allocations  
• Updated the wording of procedures. 
• Updated visibility conditions for when procedures show based on: 
  • Small and large selection in 10.20. 
  • Legal form of the entity selected in 10.20. 
  • Country selected in 10.20. 
  • Accounting framework selected in 10.20. 
  • Entity specific selections in 10.50. 
  • Types of transactions selected in 10.51. 
  • Sections and relevant TRABs 
• Updated extended tests of detail and sampling procedures with procedure numbering and extend step references. 

5. Review 

5.1 ISQM2 Engagement Quality Reviews 

5.2 Going concern conclusion – insufficient evidence 

6. Compilation 

7. Updated document summary 

   Related Articles

   Search Results