Explorer

The issuer had certain agreements outstanding with counterparties as of year end. The following deficiencies were identified: · The firm did not test the valuation of the underlying collateral. (AS 2502.15)

The issuer used a service organization to initiate and process transactions related to certain assets and identified relevant user controls. The firm did not identify and test a complementary user control over the valuation of these assets or identify and test any other controls that addressed the valuation of these assets. (AS 2201.39 and .B22)

The firm did not test the valuation of a certain asset including whether the write off of that asset at year end was appropriate. (AS 2502.15)

Deficiency testing the year-end valuation of certain assets beyond their inception amounts.

The issuer reported certain assets and performed an evaluation of whether the assets were impaired. The following deficiencies were identified: · The firm did not perform any procedures to establish whether the issuer had control of the assets. (AS 2301.08)

The issuer reported certain assets and performed an evaluation of whether the assets were impaired. The following deficiencies were identified: · The firm did not perform any procedures to test the reliability of external information it used to test these assets. (AS 1105.04 and .06)

The issuer reported certain assets and performed an evaluation of whether the assets were impaired. The following deficiencies were identified: · The firm did not perform procedures to test the issuer's impairment analysis beyond testing its clerical accuracy. (AS 2501.07)

The issuer held certain assets at multiple locations. The following deficiencies were identified: • The firm did not identify and test any controls over the valuation of certain assets. (AS 2201.39)

The issuer engaged an external specialist to determine the fair value of certain assets. The company's specialist used discounted cash flow models in its valuation. The following deficiency was identified: · The firm did not evaluate the relevance and/or reliability of certain data from sources external to the issuer that the company's specialist used to develop significant assumptions. (AS 1105.A8a)

The issuer performed an assessment of certain assets for possible impairment using forecasted cash flows that assumed significant revenue growth and the firm used an auditor-employed specialist to assist it with testing the issuer's impairment assessment. The auditor-employed specialist's approach consisted of (1) developing expectations of the value-in-use of these assets and (2) evaluating events occurring after the measurement date. The following deficiency was identified: · The firm did not sufficiently evaluate the work of the auditor-employed specialist and identify that the auditor-employed specialist's evaluation of events occurring after the measurement date did not provide sufficient appropriate audit evidence because it did not take into account certain changes in the issuer's circumstances and other relevant conditions during the evaluation period. (AS 1201.C6 and .C7; AS 2501.28 and .29)

The issuer held certain assets at multiple locations. The following deficiencies were identified: • The firm did not identify and test any controls over the valuation of certain assets. (AS 2201.39)

With respect to other assets the firm selected a sample for testing. The firm did not consider whether the lack of supporting documentation for certain assets represented a misstatement and if so the potential effect on the evaluation of its sample. (AS 2315.25)

The firm did not evaluate the relevance and reliability of information from external sources used to test the valuation of the assets. (AS 1105.04 and.06)

In addition the issuer recognized income related to the valuation of the assets. The firm did not perform any procedures to evaluate whether the recognition of the income was appropriate. (AS 2301.08)