What's New | Probe 2024.20.13 

1. Caseware Working Papers 2024 

The following describes the features and fixes included in Working Papers 2024 and related products. 

1.1 Features 

1.1.1 Imports and exports 

• Added support for imports from the following software packages: 

  • QuickBooks 2024 (Australia, Canada, UK) 
  • Sage 50 Accounting 2024 (Canada) 

• Added support for exports to the following software packages: 

  • ProFile 2023 (Canada) 

• The import process for QuickBooks US files now matches the process to import QuickBooks Canada, UK and Australia files. This process requires the QuickBooks Export Utility.   

1.1.2 Protection Setup 

Split the existing Set Protection On/Off group right into Set Protection On and Set Protection Off. This can be used to expand the number of users that can enable file protection without giving them the ability to disable it. 

1.1.3 History and Milestones 

• Added an option to display document insertion events in the file history log. 

1.1.4 Engagement lockdown 

• Added an option to the Engagement Lockdown Wizard to set all content in a file’s directory to read-only after lockdown. This read-only mode also applies to any sync copies of the file. 

1.1.5 Annotations 

The Annotation column is now visible in trial balance automatic documents using the Consolidated view. 

1.1.6 More informative Error Messaging 

Added a more informative error dialog when attempting to open a compressed file that contains documents with file paths exceeding 260 characters. 

1.1.7 Caseview Scripting 

• Increased the character limit for CaseView script names to 31 characters. This increased character limit aligns with the existing CaseView UI limit and prevents some potential scripting errors. 

1.1.8 Data Store Administrative Tool 

• The Data Store Administration Tool (DSAT) can now be used with Microsoft SQL Server 2022. 

1.2 Fixes 

• When importing a trial balance with map numbers, nonexistent map numbers will not be created. This reduces the risk of assigning accounts to map numbers which are not catered for in the rest of the product.  

• Attempting to access a computer’s system drive through CaseView causes CaseView to close unexpectedly. 

• After performing a silent installation to a newer version of Working Papers, the older version is uninstalled, but the shortcut folder remains in the Windows 10 Start menu. 

2. Universal 

2.1 Speed improvements 

We have made significant speed enhancements to some of the documents within Probe. Please note that these improvements are only available on new files. You will have to refer to the speed guide for existing files.  

The below documents have been enhanced for speed: 

2.2 Caseware Q 

We have removed Q. This decision was made to improve the overall performance of your files. Q will be replaced by Sherlock, our new and improved tool, which offers enhanced features and better performance. By removing Q, you will notice that your engagement files will close faster, streamlining your workflow and improving efficiency. 

3. Audit 

3.1 NEW Engagement types 

To provide for group audit engagements (refer to par 3.1 below) Probe now provides for the following 4 different engagement types: 

Selecting the engagement type is now the first question the user completes, followed by procedures to verify the type of engagement selected. The freeze will continue to distinguish between audit and review, and in the case of audit it will inform the user whether the group audit relates to group audit single or group audit multiple.    

The term group audit engagements will be used in the remainder of the document when reference is made to “Audit group single” and “Audit group multiple”. 

3.2 Features 

3.1.2 NEW Add entity in group audits 

Users can now add entities and business units that form part of the group being audited using the new addition to the risk button. Users click on Risk button and select “Add entity or component”.    Users then select “Add entity” in 11.20G Identification of components using the new feature.   

After adding the entities and business units in 11.20G Identification of components, users will be able to: 

• Assign the entities and business units to components.  Refer to para 3.2.2 for information on how to add components. 

• Link the entities of business units to specific COTABDs per column in 10.50G Plan extent of risk assessment procedures. User can click on ‘Add/edit’ which will bring up a different screen with a list of entities and business units recorded in 11.20G Identification of components. If none have been added yet, users can use the link to 11.20G that will take them to the screen that will allow them to add new entities and business units. Users can then return to 10.50G afterwards and link them, as necessary. 

Only entities and business units added on 11.20G will be available for selection in 10.50G.  

3.2.2 NEW Add components in group audits 

Users can now add components (refer to par 3.3.1 for definition of component) using the new addition to the risk button. Users click on risk button and select “Add entity or component”.  Users then select “Add component” in 11.20G Identification of components.  After adding component(s) users will be able link the entities and business units that were added using “Add entity” to a component.     

The description of components will automatically pull through from 11.20G Identification of components to:  

• 12.20G Further audit work at components that enables group auditors to determine at which components further audit work per SCOTABD and material COTABD are required. 

• 12.22G Use of component auditors that allows group auditors to determine whether they have executed their responsibilities as group auditor related to each component and component auditor. 

Furthermore, the description of the component will pull through to 12.23G Component performance materiality when users selected on 12.20G Further audit work at component level that further audit work is required at that component. 

The combine features “Add entity” and “Add component” provides user with the functionality to track work to be performed at entities and business units as well as components. 

3.2.3 NEW Add specific performance materiality item 

Users can add a COTABD for which specific materiality will be determined using the “Add specific materiality item”.  A new line will be added as follows: 

3.3 Group audits 

Content related to group audit engagements previously scoped out of Probe Audit is added in this release. The content is based on ISA 600 (Revised), Audits of Group Financial Statements (Including the Work of Component Auditors) effective for audits of group financial statements for periods beginning on or after 15 December 2023. 

The following key factors were considered in the design of the template for group audit engagements: 

• The emphasis placed in ISA 600 (Revised) on group auditors’ responsibilities to: 

  • Identify, assess and respond to the RoMM of the group financial statements. 

  • Determine the nature, timing and extent direction and supervision of component auditors, and the review of their work.  

• Including new key engagement team members, being component auditors, in Probe Audit. 

• In which engagement file should the audit procedures expected to be performed by group auditors and component auditors respectively, be included, considering that component auditors could be members of the firm (either the same as the group audit team or different), their network firm, another firm, or a combination thereof.    

Taking these key factors into account, the following principle is applied in Probe Audit, after consultation with the CO Forum and customers: 

The group audit file only includes audit procedures to be performed by group auditors in their capacity of group auditors. Audit procedures to be performed on components by component auditors is not included in this engagement file. 

The objective is to enable group auditors to compile a stand-alone audit file that supports the group auditor’s evaluation as to whether sufficient and appropriate audit evidence has been obtained on which to base the group audit opinion.  

3.3.1 Key terms used  

• Group auditor refers to the group engagement partner and members of the engagement team other than component auditors (ISA 600 (Revised) par 14(h)).   

• Component auditors are auditors who perform audit work related to components for purposes of the group audit (ISA 600 (Revised) par 14(i)). All the requirements related to component auditors, for example communication to and from components auditors, applies to the group auditor when they perform work in the capacity of component auditor. 

• Components is an “entity, business unit, function or business activity, or some combination thereof, determined by the group auditor for purposes of planning and performing audit procedures in a group audit” (ISA 600 (Revised) par 14 (b)).  

• Audit work includes risk assessment procedures (RAP) and further audit procedures (test of detail or test of control).  When a COTABD balance is the accumulation of financial information of several components further audit work can be done centrally or at component level: 

  • Centrally. Audit procedures may be designed and performed centrally when sufficient and appropriate audit evidence related to the COTABD can be obtained by testing one population for several components. The balance of the COTABD will not be disaggregated across components. Relevant factors to determine whether further audit procedures can be performed centrally include:  

    • The level of centralisation of activities relevant to financial reporting.  

    • The nature and extent of commonality of controls.  
    • The similarity of the group’s activities and business lines (ISA 600(Revised).A125). 
  • At component level. The balance of the COTABD is disaggregated across components and audit work at components are required. 

• Consolidation balance only:  The balance of a COTABD is only initiated and accounted for through the consolidation process, for example non-controlling interest.  The balance is not the accumulation of financial information of entities or business units. 

• Group audit engagements:  When the What’s New refers to group audit engagements it includes both for “Audit Group Single” and “Audit Group Multiple”.   The changes noted in paragraph 3.3 applies to the group audit engagements, unless otherwise indicated. 

3.3.2 Terms entity vs group   

The term to describe the reporting entity in procedures and questions in documents and letters are used as follows: 

• Entity:  For “Audit Single” and “Audit Group Single” the term “entity” is used as these engagements relates to a single legal entity. 

• Group:  The term “group” is used for “Audit Group Multiple”, except where the requirement of ISA 600 (Revised) relates to the entities or business units within the group. 

3.3.3 Group audit only documents 

Documents that are intended only for the group audit engagements are identified with a “G” after the number of the document.  

A warning will appear in these documents when users selected “Audit Single” or “Review” informing users that the document is only applicable to group audit engagements. 

4. Group information interaction 

3.3.5 Risk dialog 

Two additions have been included to the risk dialog for group audit engagements: 

• Inherent risk factors – When users record an inherent risk using the record button, users will now have the option to select “Consolidation process” as an inherent risk factor.  Refer to para 3.3.18 and  3.3.20 for further detail about the new audit procedure “Consolidation process”. 

• Entity or business units to which risks relates - Users can select the entity or business unit the risk relates to (if any) from a dropdown list populated based on the entities and business units added on 11.20G.  The name of the entity or business units to which the risk relates will be included in 11.60 Risk assessment at assertion level.  

3.3.6 Aggregated or consolidated financial information   

The following documents will include the consolidated or aggregated financial information for the group audit engagements when the CWWP consolidation function is used: 

• 10.60 Overall materiality assessment.   

• 10.51 Types and volumes of transactions. 

• 10.50G (New) Plan extent of risk assessment procedures. 

• 10.52 Preliminary analytical review. 

• 12.20 Audit plan and strategy (to determine whether the COTABD is material). 

• 02.30 Overall analytical review. 

• 02.40 Evaluation of misstatements 

Please take note that when the CWWP Consolidation function is used, the balances of COTABDs will only include balances of entities and business units.  It does not include the balances of components, unless every entity or business unit is treated as a component.  Components are not necessarily a reflection of the legal structure used to consolidate; components can be a combination of entities or business units.  Refer to par 3.3.13 for further information on identification of components. 

3.3.7 FIRMSETT Probe Firm Settings 

3.3.8 Pre-engagement planning 

3.3.9 Planning and risk assessment procedures 

3.3.10 Audit planning 

3.3.11 Execution 

3.3.12 Finalisation 

3.3.13 NEW Identification of components  

10.20 Engagement evaluation now includes questions for group audit engagements to identify components. As part of client acceptance and continuance for group audit engagements, users will be required to identify components, i.e. “entity, business unit, function or business activity, or some combination thereof, determined by the group auditor for purposes of planning and performing audit procedures in a group audit” (ISA 600 (Revised) par 14 (b)).     

Group auditors identify components during client acceptance and continuance to determine at which entities or business units, individually or in combination, audit work is expected to be performed, to determine the resources needed, including the involvement of component auditors. Together with the other information gathered during client acceptance or continuance, group auditors will use the information gathered related to the components and component auditors to determine whether they expect to obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence to provide a basis for forming an opinion on the group financial statements (ISA 600 (Revised) par 17).  

Components are not necessarily a reflection of the legal structure used to consolidate; components can be a combination of entities or business units.  Based on their understanding of the group, including  matters such as  similar business characteristics, operating in the same geographical location, under the same management, and using a common system of internal control, group auditors consider whether the financial information of certain entities or business units included in the group's organisational structure can be considered together for planning purposes and further audit work to be performed (ISA600.4-5 & A6-9).     

The following actions are performed in Probe to identity and record components: 

1. Obtain an understanding of the group and its environment and identify all entities and business units forming part of the group.  Document details of them on 11.20G (New) Identification of components, using the new “Add Entity” feature.    Extended users are provided with additional columns to document details of entities and business units. 

2. Consider whether the entities and business units within the group have similar activities or business lines, and whether the group has centralised activities or common controls. Users record whether any of the aforementioned exist in the new section ”Plan extent of risk assessment procedures” on 10.50 Gathering of information.            

3. Based on their understanding of the group, users determine whether entities or business units can be considered together and assign the identified entities and business unit to components. Users add components using the new “Add Component” feature.    The description of the components added will be available for selection in a dropdown list in the “Assign to component” column. 

Only entities and business units as well as the components added on 11.20G will be available for selection in other documents such as 10.50G and 12.20G. 
 

3.3. 14 Preliminary assessment of resources  

10.20 Engagement evaluation now also includes questions for group audit engagements to identify the components at which it is expected that audit work will be performed to determine availability of required resources and whether unrestricted access to those components and the component auditors is possible (ISA 600 (Revised) par 22).   As explained in par 3.3.13 the information may impact the decision to accept or retain the client. 

To determine the components at which it is expected that audit work will be performed, and the resources needed, users complete:  

1. 10.50G (New) Plan extent of risk assessment procedures to determine per COTABD whether it is a “Consolidation balance only”, whether audit work will be performed centrally and the involvement of component auditors in RAP, taking into account whether audit work is expected to be performed centrally.   Refer par 3.3.14 below for an explanation on the completion of 10.50G.   

2. 12.20 Audit plan and strategy and 12.20G (New) Further audit work at component level to determine the level at which further audit work will be performed.  Refer par 3.3.18 below for further detail. 

The above determination of involvement of component auditors is a preliminary determination for purposes of client acceptance and continuance. The group auditor will revisit this determination after gathering further information and performing further RAP during planning.  Users are prompted to document their understanding on the appropriate planning document, instead of 10.20 Engagement evaluation, to prevent duplication of effort.  This approach recognise that the iterative planning process may require group auditors to update their understanding as they complete the audit plan, and the documentation thereof.   

3.3.15 NEW Plan extent of risk assessment procedures  

RAP can be performed centrally or component level, by group auditors or component auditors or combination thereof.    Refer to par 3.3.1 for explanations of these terms. The group auditor can involve component auditors in the design and performance of risk assessment procedures.  

To assist with the determination of whether risk assessment procedures will be performed by the group auditor, component auditors or a combination, the following actions are performed: 

1. Determine whether COTABD is a “Consolidation balance only”.   The group audit will obtain the understanding of these balances, required by the ISAs.  In the following instances, the answer to “Consolidation balance only” will be populated as “Yes” on 10.50G, because it is required that the group auditor performs audit work in accordance with relevant ISAs: 

• Related parties  

• Statement of Cash Flows 

The users will not be able to change the “Yes” response. 

2. Determine whether the balance of the COTABD is based on accounting estimates or fair value measurement.    Whether the understanding of the accounting estimates will be obtained by the group auditor, component auditor or combination, will be influenced by determination of “Consolidation balance only” and whether it is expected that audit work will be performed centrally. 

3. Determine whether audit work can be done centrally:   When users determined that there are centralised activities or common controls, users will perform the following on 10.50G (New) Plan extent of risk assessment procedures: 

• Select the COTABD the group centralised activities or group common controls relate to.  

• Click on “Add/Edit” and select from the list of entities or business units captured on 11.20G, the entities of business units the group centralised activities and group common controls relate to.   

4. Select whether it is expected that audit work will be performed centrally, taking into account the information related to similar activities and business lines, group centralised activities and group common controls.  This determination informs the determination on 11.20G whether entities and business units can be considered together with others for planning and performing audit work.  When it is expected that audit work will be performed centrally, the group auditor will obtain the understanding of the COTABD as required by the ISAs, with or without the involvement of component auditors. 

The selections in 10.50G (New) determine the inclusion of content in the following documents: 

• 10.50 Gathering information and 10.51 Types and volumes of transactions.   Refer to par 3.3.15 for further information. 

• 11.50 Information system and control activities.  Refer to par 3.3.16 for further information. 

3.3.16 Gathering information of COTABDs 

The firm can elect in FIRMSETT Probe Firm Settings to what extent the group auditor obtains an understanding of the COTABDs included in the group financial statements versus placing reliance on the work performed by component auditors to gain the understanding.  This approach considers that RAP can be done centrally or component level, and it can be performed by the group auditor, component auditors or a combination thereof, as noted above.   

The table below explains the impact of each option in 10.50 Gathering of information and 10.51 Types and volumes of transactions: 

Further explanation related to Audit Group Multiple/Not required or Elected per group audit - multiple entities and “No” on 10.50: 

The questions that relate to COTABDs on 10.50 applies to some COTABDs, not all. For example, assets held by third parties relate to Property, Plant and Equipment (PPE), but not Trade and other payables. For Audit Group Multiple, the questions that relates to a COTABDs should be included on 10.50 when:  

1. The question relates to the COTABD , and  

2. Any of the following for the COTABD was selected on 10.50G:  

   1. Consolidation balance only, or 

   2. Plan to perform centrally.  

Reason being the group auditor obtains the understanding of the COTABD as the group auditor may perform further audit work on that COTABD pending risk identification and assessment, and determination of the selected assertion of a material COTABD without any inherent risk.  

Looking at the earlier example of the 'assets held by third parties' question. The question will not appear when users selected either 2(a) or (b) above for Trade and Other payables on 10.51, since the question does not apply to Trade and Other payables.  

In the case of PPE, the question will appear if either 2(a) or (b) was selected.  

Questions that relate to ISA requirements and questions expected to be answered by the group auditor because audit work is expected to be performed centrally, and not component level, will always be included in 10.50.  

3.3.17 Information system and control activities 

11.50 Information system and control activities was updated to include the following: 

1. Centralised activities and common controls (New) 

The content of the new section “Centralised activities and common controls” will be based on the answers in section ”Plan extent of risk assessment procedures” on 10.50 Gathering of information.  

When users selected in 10.50G that the centralised activities or common controls relates to a COTABD, and an inherent risk was recognised for the relevant COTABD (i.e. it is considered a SCOTABD), users will be prompted to document their understanding in the relevant SCOTABD section in 11.50.  

2. For SCOTABD sections  

• The procedures that prompt the group auditor to obtain the understanding of the information system required by ISA 315 (Revised 2019) will be included in the following instances: 

  • Users selected on 10.50G that the COTABD is a “Consolidation balance only”, or 

  • Users selected on 10.50G that the centralised activities and common controls relate to the specific COTABD. 

Take note that the inclusion of the above content is based on the selection ‘Centralised activities’, or ‘Common controls’ in 10.50G and not ‘ Plan to perform centrally’ in 10.50G, which is the basis of the inclusion of questions in 10.50 and 10.51.  The reason for this ‘different’ treatment is that ISA 600 (Revised) par 30 (c)(i) & (ii) requires the group auditor to take responsibility for obtaining an understanding of the group’s system of internal control related to nature and extent of common controls and group centralised activities.   It is expected that the group auditor will obtain the understanding since the common controls and centralised activities is established and managed by group management.   The group auditor may elect to involve component auditors in obtaining the understanding, but it is not expected that component auditors will obtain the understanding on their own. 

• For the other SCOTABD sections, the group auditor will be prompted to communicate to component auditors their responsibility to obtain an understanding. 

3.3.18 NEW Further audit work at component level  

In 12.20 Audit plan and strategy the auditor is required to formulate an audit plan for each SCOTABD and material COTABD without an inherent risk.  Probe Audit requires the auditor, including the group auditor, to select and test at least one assertion for material COTABD for which no inherent risk has been identified. (ISA 600 (Revised) par 22).  

For each SCOTABD and material COTABD on 12.20 Audit plan and strategy the group auditor will be prompted to complete 12.20G (New) Further audit work at component level to determine at which level the audit work will be performed.     

12.20G (New) Further audit work at component level, is deemed an extension of 12.20 Audit plan and strategy.    The following actions will be performed: 

1. Level at which audit work will be performed 

For each SCOTABD and material COTABD users will determine on 12.20G whether further audit work should be performed for each component identified and added on 11.20G.  Users will select from the following dropdown options: 

• Consolidation - Group auditor 

• Centrally - Group auditor 

• Centrally - Component auditor with group auditor 

• At component level -Component auditor 

• No audit work required. 

During preliminary planning and performing risk assessment procedures, group auditors were required on 10.50G to determine whether it is a “Consolidation balance only” and to make a preliminary determination whether they plan to perform further audit work centrally.  This selection made on 10.50G will be included in each section in 12.20G to be considered by the group auditor when determining at which level further audit work should be performed.    

For the extended users, group auditors will be prompted to consider the factors that may influence the group auditor’s determination at which components further audit work should be performed (ISA600 (Revised).A51).  

For example, users are prompted to consideration whether the risk identified on the group financial statements relates to a specific entity or business unit.  Users can refer back to 11.60 Risk assessment at assertion level that provides information of whether the recorded risks relate to a specific entity or business unit.  In case of a material COTABD, this column will be pre-populated with a “N/A” response. 

2. Scope of work at components and resources 

The components where further audit work is required to be performed by the component auditor, with or without the group auditor, will pull through to “Scope of work at components and resources”.  For each of these components, the group auditor determines and document the nature, timing and extent of audit work to be performed. 

For the extended users, group auditors will be prompted to  

• Consider the factors whether it is appropriate to perform further audit procedures on the entire financial information of the component (ISA 600 (Revised).A133).     

• Determine at which level the audit work should be performed at the component level. Users will select form entire financial information, one or more COTABD, and specific audit procedures.   

• Document detail of the component auditors. 

The extended users are also provided with a summary of the level of audit work per COTABD that is required to be performed per component. 

3.3.19 Audit plan and strategy 

Each COTABD now also include Group audit considerations and group audit procedures.   The selection of “Perform audit work at which level” in 12.20G (New) Further audit work at component level, will pull through to 12.20 Audit Plan and strategy.    

Two new audit procedures are added, namely “Use of component auditors” and “Consolidation process”:   

1. Use of component auditors 

When users elected on 12.20G (New) Further audit work at components that component auditors will be used to perform further audit work, with or without the involvement of the group auditor, the new group auditor procedures “Use of component auditors” will be ticked in 12.20 Audit plan and strategy.    

2. At component level (only) 

When users elected that audit work will only be done at component level, “Required procedures” will not be auto-ticked, “Extended analytical review”, “Extended test of detail” and “Substantive sampling” will not be available for selection.    

The audit work for the relevant COTABD will be performed at component level.  The group auditor will not perform audit work, other than “Use of component auditors” and “Consolidation process” when an inherent risk related to the consolidation process for that COTABD has been raised. 
 

3. Centrally or centrally with component auditors 

Extended analytical review and the other audit procedures mentioned above will be available for selection when users elected “Centrally with component auditors” or “Component Auditors”. “Required  procedures” will be auto-ticked as the group auditor will perform audit work, with or without the component auditors. 

4. Consolidation process 

“Consolidation process” in the relevant section in 12.20 will be auto-ticked when the user selected “Consolidation process” in the risk button. 

The user will be required to add audit procedures in the relevant work program to obtain sufficient and appropriate audit evidence to address the ROMM at assertion level that relates to the consolidated process.   

When a significant risk was raised, the “Significant risk response” will be auto-ticked. 

6. Tests of controls 

Audit procedure “Tests of control” continue to be auto-ticked when the user indicated in the “Record Control” that reliance on control is intended. 

3.3.20 Use of component auditors – work programs 

When “use of component auditors’ is ticked in 12.20, audit procedure under the heading “Use of component auditors” will be added to the relevant work program.   

Conclusion questions were added to consider whether the work performed by the component auditors is adequate for the purposes of the group audit. 

Users will be required to determine the assurance obtained through the work performed by the component auditors.  Users should take assessment into account in determination of the audit risk remaining. 

When the group auditor concluded that assurance obtained from component auditors are not adequate, the user should select “Yes” to “A need to revise audit plan?” and “General including laws and regulations” 

Under “Revised audit plan-General” a new type of audit procedure “Additional procedures” is added. 

When the user selects “Additional procedures”, the user is prompted to add audit procedure(s). 

After completion of the additional procedure(s), the group auditor will determine the assurance obtained from the additional procedures and that should be taken into account when determining the estimated audit risk remaining.     

3.3.21 Consolidation process – work programs 

When “Consolidation process” is auto-ticked on 12.20, the relevant work program will include a prompt to add audit procedures to obtain sufficient and appropriate audit evidence to address the ROMM at assertion level that relates to the consolidated process.   

The user will be required to complete “Assurance obtained” for “Consolidation process”. 

3.3.22 Compliance Add – On (South Africa only) 

For engagement type “Group Audit M”, the group auditor can elect in 10.20 whether they want to include the Companies Act procedures in the engagement file. This approach recognises that the Companies Act procedures are applicable to a company.  The Companies Act procedures that address the requirements related to presentation and disclosure in the financial statement, that also applies to group financial statements, will always be included in 18.10 Financial statement presentation work program for “Group Audit M”.  

The inclusion of the Companies Act procedures for “Group Audit S” and “Audit S” is similar to the treatment in the 2023 and earlier market versions, i.e.  

• Large – Always included. 

• Small – Users can elect in10.20. 

The answer to the question in 10.20 Engagement evaluation inter alia includes questions or procedures on the following documents: 

• 10.50 Gathering of information 

• 10.51 Types and volumes of transactions 

• 16.10 Accounting records work program 

• 18.10 Financial statement preparation work program 

• 20.10 Laws and regulations work program 

• 750.10 Operating expenses work program 

• 805.10 Capital or contributions work program 

3.4 IRBA Enhanced Audit Reporting Rule (South Africa only) 

The IRBA Rule on Enhanced Auditor Reporting for the Audits of Financial Statements of Public Interest Entities, published in Government Gazette No. 49309 dated 15 September 2023 (EAR Rule) is effective for audits of financial statements for periods ending on or after 15 December 2024, with early adoption permitted. 

The EAR Rule prescribes additional disclosures in the independent auditor’s report on the audit of annual financial statements of Public Interest Entities (PIEs), as defined in the IRBA Code of Professional Conduct for Registered Auditors (Revised April 2023), as amended.  The Revisions to the IRBA Code of Professional Conduct for Registered Auditors (Revised April 2023) issued in November 2023 was applied. 

3.5 Other 

3.5.1 Financial reporting frameworks 

The IFRS Foundation® Trade Mark Guidelines, in accordance with the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board’s (IAASB) International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) Liaison Working Group Publication, have been implemented.   

The term IFRS in 10.20 was replaced with “IFRS Accounting Standards as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board”, and similarly the term “IFRS for SME” was replaced with “IFRS for SMEs Accounting Standard as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board”. 

3.5.2 02.55 Key audit matters 

The following audit procedures were added to 02.55.   

• Determine from the matters communicated with TCWG, those matters that required significant attention in performing the audit (ISA701.9). 

• Take into account the following when determining the key audit matters to be communicated in the auditor's report: 

• Areas of higher assessed risk of material misstatement, or significant risks. 

• Significant judgments relating to areas in the financial statements that involved significant management judgment, including accounting estimates that have been identified as having high estimation uncertainty. 

• The effect on the audit of significant events or transactions that occurred during the period. 

The engagement partner sign-off on 02.55 was deleted and a declaration by the engagement partner related to KAMs isare included in the “Engagement partner declaration” on 02.00. 

3.5.3 11.60 Uncategorised risks 

We have included additional functionality to document 11.60 that will indicate to the user when they have a risk that exists that does not belong to any of the existing sections. At the top of the document, you will see a section called uncategorised risks where these risks will be stored. To reallocate these risks to the correct section, you need to edit that risk and select the section you require it to be allocated to or you can choose to delete the risk if it no longer serves a purpose 

3.6 Known matters 

3.6.1 Differences between total assets and total liabilities in 10.52 and 02.40  

There is a difference between the figures of total assets in 10.52 - Preliminary analytical review and 02.40 - Evaluation of misstatements, this relates to technical assets that appear in 10.52 - Preliminary analytical review and not in 02.40 - Evaluation of misstatements. This will be fixed in the next release. 

There is a difference between the figures of total liabilities in 10.52 - Preliminary analytical review and 02.40 Evaluation of misstatements, this relates to deferred tax being offset in 02.40 - Evaluation of misstatements and not in 10.52 - Preliminary analytical review. This will be fixed in the next release. 

3.6.2 11.60 - Blank risks under Uncategorised section 

Upon opening document 11.60, you may note that you have two blank risks under the uncategorised risks section. We have noted this and it can be resolved by opening document 11.20G and closing it, then refreshing risk tables in 11.60. We will resolve this issue in the next release. 

3.6.3 11.60 and 10.70 – Blank risks/LTBMs identified 

When in an audit engagement, 11.60 has an issue where all newly created risks are created twice. Once for the risk you raise and a second one that appears as blank. You may delete the second one that shows as a blank risk. When in a review engagement, the same issue exists in 10.70 and can be resolved the same way by deleting the blank LTBM. We will rectify this issue in the next release. 

 

3.7 Previously reported items fixed with Hotfixes  

https://success.casewareafrica.com/articles/Knowledge/Probe-Hotfix 

The following list is a brief description of fixes that have been made though hotfixes: 

3.7.112.20 – Audit plan and strategy 

The risk assessment at financial statement levels and the overall response increase extent of work on all relevant and selected assertions, are not populating automatically from 11.20, 11.25 and 11.30. 

3.7.2 20.10 – Laws and regulations work program 

• Identified risks table is incorrectly showing in document 20.10.  Risks at assertion level are not applicable to this work program. 

• When updating a file, the required procedures in document 20.10 do not show. 

3.7.3 02.00 – Partner sign-off 

• The audit risk conclusion does not completely pull through from the work programs into document 02.00 with the satisfactory/unsatisfactory selection, sign-off details, and overall comment. 

• Whenever the user switches between 02.00 and a work program, the entire section relating to the open work program (e.g PPE or Inventories) in 02.00 hides away. Only applicable to SMALL engagements. 

4. Review 

No changes were made to Review in this release. 
 

5. Compilation 

No changes were made to Compilation in this release. 
 

6. Updated document summary 

Please download the full release notes to view the updated document summary. 

 

   Related Articles

   Search Results