Explorer

The firm performed procedures to observe inventory on dates other than year end. The firm did not apply appropriate tests of intervening transactions in inventory between the count dates and year end. (AS 2510.12)

The issuer performed inventory counts prior to year end. The firm obtained issuer-prepared roll-forward analyses but did not perform procedures to test the completeness of the intervening transactions. (AS 2510.12)

The firm did not perform any procedures to test the existence of certain inventory. (AS 2510.09)

Due to the deficiency discussed above the firm did not obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence that the cycle-count procedures the issuer used for this inventory were sufficiently reliable to produce results substantially the same as those that would have been obtained by a count of all items each year. (AS 2510.11)

For another business unit the issuer performed full physical counts of inventory at various locations before year end. To test the existence of inventory at these locations the firm observed the issuer's physical counts and made certain independent test counts. The following deficiencies were identified: · For one of these locations the firm obtained an inventory listing from a date subsequent to the issuer's physical count. The firm did not inspect any records of the issuer's counts and apply appropriate tests of intervening transactions between the date of the issuer's counts and the date of the inventory listing. (AS 2510.12)

The firm's substantive procedures to test the unit cost of certain manufactured inventory consisted of (1) selecting a sample of inventory items for testing and (2) performing substantive analytical procedures. The following deficiencies were identified: · For the substantive analytical procedures the firm did not determine whether the expectations it used in these analytical procedures were based on predictable relationships. Further the firm identified differences in excess of the firm's established threshold but did not evaluate certain of these differences beyond in some instances inquiring of management. (AS 2305.13 .14 and .21)

The firm's substantive procedures to test certain inventory costs consisted of analytical procedures. The firm did not perform procedures to obtain evidence that the expectations it used would be predictive of the inventory costs as of year end. (AS 2305.13 and .14)

The firm did not obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence that the cycle-count procedures the issuer used for this inventory were sufficiently reliable to produce results substantially the same as those that would have been obtained by a count of all items each year. (AS 2510.11)

Due to the deficiency discussed above the firm did not obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence that the cycle-count procedures the issuer used for this inventory were sufficiently reliable to produce results substantially the same as those that would have been obtained by a count of all items each year. (AS 2510.11)

The firm did not obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence that the issuer's inventory cycle count procedures were sufficiently reliable to produce results substantially the same as those that would have been obtained by a count of all items during the year due to the deficiencies in the firm's control testing discussed above. (AS 2510.11)

As a result of the firm's control testing deficiencies the firm did not perform sufficient other audit procedures as follows: · The firm did not obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence that the cycle-count procedures the issuer used for certain inventory were sufficiently reliable to produce results substantially the same as those that would have been obtained by a count of all items each year. (AS 2510.11)

The firm's substantive procedures to test the existence of inventory at one of the issuer's locations were not suitable because they did not provide any evidence of the quantity and physical condition of the inventory. (AS 2510.09)

Due to the deficiency discussed above the firm did not obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence that the cycle-count procedures that the issuer used for this inventory were sufficiently reliable to produce results substantially the same as those that would have been obtained by a count of all items each year. (AS 2510.11)

The issuer performed cycle counts of inventory at a location. The following deficiency was identified: · Due to the deficiencies described the firm did not obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence that the cycle-count procedures the issuer used for this inventory were sufficiently reliable to produce results substantially the same as those that would have been obtained by a count of all items each year. (AS 2510.11)

The firm's substantive procedures to test certain inventory included performing substantive analytical procedures. The firm did not determine whether the expectations it used in these substantive analytical procedures were based on predictable relationships. (AS 2305.13 and .14)

The firm's substantive procedures to test certain unbilled receivables included selecting a sample of customer balances for testing. The firm did not perform procedures to determine whether the performance obligation had been satisfied when revenue was recognized. (AS 2301.08 and .13)

The firm performed inventory observations at two business units subsequent to year end and performed roll-back procedures for the period from the date of the inventory observations to year end. For one of the business units the firm did not perform procedures beyond reviewing a schedule of inventory movement to test transactions between the date of the inventory observation to year end. (AS 2510.12)

To test certain costs related to inventory the firm performed a substantive analytical procedure and developed a percentage as its expectation. The firm compared its expectation to the actual percentage and applied the percentage difference to the wrong amount. As a result the firm did not identify and evaluate a significant difference between its expectation and the actual amount. (AS 2305.21)

The issuer held certain inventory at external warehouses. The firm did not perform any procedures to test the existence of this inventory. (AS 2510.14)

The firm did not obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence with regard to the issuer's inventory cycle-count procedures. Specifically the firm did not obtain an understanding of the issuer's cycle-count process test the sampling methodology and selection parameters used by the issuer or perform other procedures to evaluate whether the issuer's cycle-count procedures were sufficiently reliable to produce results substantially the same as those which would be obtained by a count of all items during the year. (AS 2510.11)

Due to the deficiency discussed above the firm did not obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence that the cycle-count procedures the issuer used for this inventory were sufficiently reliable to produce results substantially the same as those that would have been obtained by a count of all items each year. (AS 2510.11)

Due to the deficiency discussed above the firm did not obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence that the cycle-count procedures the issuer used for this inventory were sufficiently reliable to produce results substantially the same as those that would have been obtained by a count of all items each year. (AS 2510.11)

Due to the deficiency discussed above the firm did not obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence that the cycle-count procedures the issuer used for this inventory were sufficiently reliable to produce results substantially the same as those that would have been obtained by a count of all items each year. (AS 2510.11)

The issuer valued inventory for one of its segments using the last-in first-out (LIFO) method and determined its quarterly LIFO adjustments based on the LIFO inventory balances for each of its inventory categories. The following deficiencies were identified: · The firm's substantive procedures to test the issuer's year-end LIFO adjustment consisted of performing substantive analytical procedures. The firm did not determine whether the expectations it used in these analytical procedures were based on predictable relationships. (AS 2305.13 and .14)

The issuer valued inventory for one of its segments using the last-in first-out (LIFO) method and determined its quarterly LIFO adjustments based on the LIFO inventory balances for each of its inventory categories. The following deficiencies were identified: · The firm's substantive procedures to test the issuer's year-end LIFO adjustment consisted of performing substantive analytical procedures. The expectations the firm used were not sufficiently precise to identify differences that could be potential material misstatements individually or in the aggregate because the data used to develop the expectations did not address the issuer's determination of LIFO adjustments at the inventory-category level. (AS 2305.17)

The firm did not perform sufficient inventory test count procedures because it did not test (1) inventory transactions between the date of the count and year end and (2) the completeness of the issuer's inventory. (AS 2510.09 and .12)

The firm's substantive procedures to test inventory included observing inventory after year end and obtaining a roll-back schedule from the date of the inventory observation to the balance sheet date. The firm did not test certain types of transactions in this schedule. (AS 2510.12)

To test the existence of inventory at another location the firm performed a virtual observation of inventory but did not perform any test counts. (AS 2510.09)

The firm did not perform any procedures to test the existence of certain inventory. (AS 2510.09)

The issuer held inventory at multiple locations. Inventory counts were performed subsequent to year end for each location. The firm obtained an issuer-prepared inventory roll-back analysis to perform tests of intervening transactions. The following deficiency was identified: · For certain of the above inventory the firm did not perform any procedures to test the completeness of the intervening transactions unrelated to purchases or sales. (AS 2510.12)

Due to the deficiency related to the cycle-count control discussed above the firm did not obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence that the cycle-count procedures the issuer used for this inventory were sufficiently reliable to produce results substantially the same as those that would have been obtained by a count of all items each year. (AS 2510.11)

The issuer performed full physical counts of inventory at various locations before year end. For certain locations the firm observed the issuer's physical counts and performed independent test counts. The following deficiencies were identified: · For certain inventory the firm did not apply appropriate tests of intervening transactions between the date of the issuer's counts and year end. (AS 2510.12)

For certain other locations the firm did not perform any procedures to test the existence of inventory. (AS 2510.09)

The firm observed the issuer's physical counts and performed independent test counts of inventory after year end. The following deficiencies were identified: · The firm did not perform procedures beyond inquiring of management to test intervening transactions between year end and the date of its inventory observations. (AS 2510.12)

The firm performed independent test counts of inventory after year end. The following deficiencies were identified: · The firm did not apply tests of intervening transactions in inventory between year end and the date of its test counts. (AS 2510.12)

The firm observed physical inventory counts on various dates prior to year end. The firm did not perform procedures to test intervening transactions between the dates of its inventory observations and the issuer's year end beyond obtaining a reconciliation of inventory balances from the count dates to year end. (AS 2510.12)

The firm observed physical inventory counts on various dates prior to year end. The firm did not perform any procedures to test the existence of certain inventory. (AS 2510.09)

The firm did not perform procedures to test the existence of inventory beyond comparing inventory counts from the issuer's inventory records to records from the issuer's warehouses. (AS 2510.09)

The firm performed substantive analytical procedures to extend its conclusions on the existence of inventory from the interim dates at which it performed physical observations to year end. The firm did not perform procedures to obtain evidence that the expectations it used in these analytical procedures would be predictive of inventory as of year end. Further the firm identified a significant difference between the expected and actual year-end inventory balances for one location but did not evaluate this difference beyond inquiring of management. (AS 2305.13 .14 and .21)

The issuer performed cycle counts of this inventory and used its IT system to determine the frequency with which the items should be counted by assigning a count designation to each inventory item. The following additional deficiencies were identified: · Due to the deficiencies discussed above the firm did not obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence that the cycle-count procedures the issuer used for this inventory were sufficiently reliable to produce results substantially the same as those that would have been obtained by a count of all items each year. (AS 2510.11)

The principal auditor also instructed the firm to substantively test inventory. To test the existence of inventory the firm confirmed certain inventory quantities held in a public warehouse and observed the issuer's physical inventory counts at other locations including verifying the weight of select inventory items using the issuer's scales and obtaining certificates of scale calibration from management. The following deficiency was identified: · The firm's observation procedures at the other locations were not suitable because the firm did not perform procedures to match the scale calibration certificates obtained from management to the specific scales used by the firm to weigh the selected items of inventory. (AS 2510.09)

The issuer held certain inventory at a public warehouse. The firm performed an inventory observation subsequent to year end. The firm did not test (1) whether the contents of counted pallets and boxes matched the items included in the issuer's year-end inventory; and (2) intervening transactions between the issuer's year end and the date of its inventory observation. (AS 2510.14)

The issuer performed a combination of cycle counts and full physical counts of inventory held at certain locations. To test the existence of inventory at these locations the firm performed independent physical counts of inventory before year end. The firm did not test any intervening transactions and did not inspect any records of the issuer's counts and procedures on which the year-end inventory was based. (AS 2510.12)

The firm observed physical inventory counts on various dates subsequent to year end. The firm did not perform procedures to test intervening transactions between the issuer's year end and the dates of its inventory observations beyond testing the purchase activity for one location. (AS 2510.12)

The firm observed physical inventory counts on various dates subsequent to year end. The firm did not perform any procedures to test certain identified differences in inventory quantities between the count dates and year end. (AS 2510.12)

The issuer maintains inventory at multiple locations and performs physical inventory counts at year end. The following deficiencies were identified: · For another location the firm's counts identified a significant number of misstatements and the firm determined the issuer had not performed a year-end physical inventory count. The issuer then performed a physical inventory count ('subsequent count'). The firm did not perform any testing of the subsequent count or any other procedures to determine the effectiveness of the method used by the issuer to perform the subsequent count and the reliance that could be placed upon the issuer's representations of quantities and physical condition of inventories at that location. (AS 2510.09)

For inventory at one subsidiary the firm did not make or observe any physical counts of the inventory. (AS 2510.12 and .13)

For inventory at a third subsidiary the firm performed inventory observations subsequent to year end. The firm did not test any intervening transactions between the date of its inventory observations and year end. (AS 2510.12 and .13)

The issuer performed physical inventory counts and cycle counts and the firm was not present at the counts. The firm did not make or observe some physical counts of inventory and apply appropriate tests of intervening transactions. Further the firm did not inspect the records of the issuer's counts and perform procedures relating to the physical inventory on which the balance-sheet inventory was based. (AS 2510.12)