Planning Materiality c a S eS inc lu de d in t hiS Se ction
7
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7.1 Anne Aylor, Inc.
229
Determination of Planning Materiality and Tolerable Misstatement
ot he r c aSe S t h at diScuSS topicS related to thiS Section 5.6
Scoping and Evaluation Judgments in the Audit of Internal Control over Financial Reporting 12.1 EyeMax Corporation . . Evaluation of Audit Differences
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Sarbox Scooter, Inc.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
185
369 379
12.2 Auto Parts, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Considering Materiality When Evaluating Accounting Policies and Footnote Disclosures
…show more content…
Instructors may want to consider simplifying this case assignment by dividing it into two parts. Part one could require students to determine planning materiality while part two could require students to determine tolerable misstatement for individual balance sheet accounts. The approach we recommend for this assignment is to first ask students to review the case assignment materials and conduct a preliminary “in-class” discussion addressing question 1. Students are then asked to complete question 2 outside of class. Once students have completed this assignment, it is important to discuss the solution with them to maximize their learning experience. Students will commonly provide diverse answers for this assignment. This provides an opportunity to highlight the subjective nature of some of these judgments as well as to point out that many audit approaches would be considered reasonable. Cooperative learning activities can easily be adapted to this assignment. The cooperative learning activity called Roundtable could be used for the preliminary in-class discussion (requirement 1). The basic process for this activity is to have students meet in small groups to state aloud and write down on a single sheet of paper their ideas to a question asked by the instructor. For example, students could be asked to explain why different materiality bases are considered when
After Dr. Lagstein left the Army, he worked as a pediatric dentist, and is a Diplomate of the American Academy of Pediatric Dentists. He then went on to complete many hours of training in orthodontics and has been providing orthodontic care to his New York City patients for the last 34 years. He is one of the top lingual braces provider in the country. He also provides Fastbraces for patients of all ages who want a fast-acting orthodontic solution. Dr. Lagstein loves transform
Different materiality bases are considered when determining planning materiality because the magnitude and nature of financial statement misstatements or omissions have different influences on different financial statement users. For example, investors are more interested in the accuracy of numbers involving net income because they are mainly concerned with the company’s ability to increase shareholder wealth. For an audit company, the primary concern when planning materiality is to take into account all expected financial statement users. These different expected users all have different
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Smile! "Over 4 million people in the U.S wear braces"(Margolis). It is not easy to
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
“Over four million people in the U.S. wear braces, and 25 percent of these individuals are adults. If you have a misaligned jaw or out-of-place teeth, be sure to ask your dentist if braces are right for you.” (A Biographical Portrait of Edward Hartley Angle, Nov. 6)
Plan and execute: Based on empirical evidence found in both the animal and human worlds, there are two key elements of
Human beings are imperfect creatures, and the saying “perfectly imperfect” does not apply to their planning skills. They are confident when they should not be and refuse to accept their reality or learn from past experiences - mistakes. Thus allowing the planning fallacy to take place.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Professional trends, particularly the demand for faster reporting of financial information as suggested by Securities Exchange Commission’s (SEC) recent reporting period change[2], put pressure on auditors to rely on internal rather than more persuasive external evidence items (CICA, 1999; Bierstaker et al., 2001; Helms, 2002; Hunton et al., 2003; LeGrand, 2002; SEC, 2002, 2005).
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The article discusses that in 1976 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in one case that omitted financial statement information altering a reasonable investor’s decision proves the material nature of the information. The article continues by describing that lower courts earlier ruled that all financial information whether material or not must have full disclosure in a company’s financial statements. The rejection of the lower courts’ ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court gives the investor the ability to focus on the aspects of the financial statements that are most important by allowing the elimination of minute details (Sauer 2007, 317-357). In essence, this ruling allows for the elimination of financial information below the determined materiality threshold unless otherwise required by the ruling of a regulatory body.