Intangible Assets
117 deficiencies · 11 led to a wrong opinion · 40 on a significant-risk area
How audits fail in Intangible Assets
The recurring ways firms fell short. Click any one to read the real inspection findings.
- Estimate assumptions not evaluated42
The firm didn't sufficiently evaluate the reasonableness of the significant assumptions behind an estimate.
6 wrong opinion21 significant risk - Little or no substantive testing21
The firm performed little or no substantive testing over the account, disclosure, or assertion.
1 wrong opinion3 significant risk - Estimate method, model, or data not evaluated16
The firm didn't evaluate the method, model, or underlying data the issuer used to develop an estimate or fair value.
7 significant risk - Accounting or disclosure treatment not evaluated15
The firm didn't evaluate whether the accounting or disclosures conformed with GAAP, or didn't identify departures from GAAP or omitted disclosures.
1 wrong opinion3 significant risk - Management review controls not fully evaluated6
The firm tested a management review control but didn't evaluate the specific procedures the reviewer performed, or the control's precision.
1 wrong opinion3 significant risk - Accuracy/completeness of client data not tested6
The firm used issuer-prepared schedules, reports, or system data without testing that they were accurate and complete.
2 wrong opinion2 significant risk - Controls not identified or tested4
The firm didn't identify and/or test controls it needed to rely on for the account or assertion.
- Reliance on a specialist or pricing service4
The firm relied on a specialist, pricing service, or third party without sufficiently evaluating that work.
- Other testing deficiency2
A deficiency that doesn't fall into one of the more specific patterns above.
- Confirmations / alternative procedures1
The firm didn't obtain confirmations, or didn't perform sufficient alternative procedures when confirmations weren't returned.
1 significant risk