How audits fail in Deposit Liabilities
The recurring ways firms fell short. Click any one to read the real inspection findings.
- Confirmations / alternative procedures15
The firm didn't obtain confirmations, or didn't perform sufficient alternative procedures when confirmations weren't returned.
- Accuracy/completeness of client data not tested10
The firm used issuer-prepared schedules, reports, or system data without testing that they were accurate and complete.
- Management review controls not fully evaluated7
The firm tested a management review control but didn't evaluate the specific procedures the reviewer performed, or the control's precision.
- Little or no substantive testing5
The firm performed little or no substantive testing over the account, disclosure, or assertion.
- Sample too small or unsupported5
The sample the firm tested was too small, or the basis for the sample size didn't support the conclusion.
- IT general controls not tested5
The firm relied on automated or IT-dependent controls but didn't adequately test the underlying IT general controls (e.g. change management).
- Controls not identified or tested3
The firm didn't identify and/or test controls it needed to rely on for the account or assertion.
1 wrong opinion - Other testing deficiency1
A deficiency that doesn't fall into one of the more specific patterns above.
- Estimate method, model, or data not evaluated1
The firm didn't evaluate the method, model, or underlying data the issuer used to develop an estimate or fair value.
1 wrong opinion