Explorer

For three types of revenue the firm selected a sample of revenue transactions for testing. The following deficiencies were identified: · For two of these types of revenue the firm did not test whether revenue was recognized according to the contractual terms for certain of the transactions selected for testing. (AS 2301.08 and .13)

For three types of revenue the firm selected a sample of revenue transactions for testing. The following deficiencies were identified: · For one of these types of revenue the firm did not perform any substantive procedures to test whether certain performance obligations had been satisfied before revenue was recognized. (AS 2301.08 and .13)

For four types of revenue the firm selected a sample of revenue transactions for testing. The following deficiencies were identified: · For three of these types of revenue the firm did not test whether revenue was recognized according to the contractual terms for certain of the transactions selected for testing. (AS 2301.08 and .13)

For four types of revenue the firm selected a sample of revenue transactions for testing. The following deficiencies were identified: · For three of these types of revenue the firm did not perform any substantive procedures to test whether performance obligations had been satisfied before revenue was recognized. (AS 2301.08 and .13)

For four types of revenue the firm selected a sample of revenue transactions for testing. The following deficiencies were identified: · For one of these types of revenue the firm did not evaluate whether the issuer was acting as a principal or as an agent. (AS 2301.08 and .13)

The issuer recognized revenue from certain arrangements as single performance obligations satisfied over time on a straight-line basis. The firm selected a sample of these arrangements for testing. The following deficiencies were identified: · For certain of the arrangements selected for testing the firm did not perform any procedures to test whether the performance obligation was being satisfied before revenue was recognized. (AS 2301.08 and .13)

For revenue at one of these five business units the following additional deficiencies were identified: · The firm did not perform any substantive procedures to evaluate the terms and conditions included in customer contracts. (AS 2301.08)

For revenue at another business unit the following deficiencies were identified: · The firm did not evaluate the reliability of certain external information that it used in its substantive testing. (AS 1105.04 and .06)

For revenue at another business unit the following deficiencies were identified: · The issuer recorded this revenue net of certain deductions. The firm did not perform any substantive procedures to test these sales deductions. (AS 2301.08)

For one type of revenue the firm selected the revenue transactions from the issuer's largest customers for testing but did not perform any substantive procedures to test the remaining portion of this revenue. (AS 1105.27; AS 2301.08 and .13)

For another type of revenue the firm did not perform any substantive procedures to test whether certain performance obligations had been satisfied before revenue was recognized. (AS 2301.08 and .13)

For both of these types of revenue certain of the issuer's arrangements included multiple performance obligations. The firm did not perform any substantive procedures to evaluate whether the issuer's allocation of revenue to separate performance obligations was based on the relative standalone selling prices. (AS 2301.08)

For a second type of revenue the firm did not evaluate the reliability of certain external information it used in its substantive testing of this revenue. (AS 1105.04 and .06)

For a third type of revenue the firm did not perform any substantive procedures to test whether performance obligations had been satisfied before revenue was recognized. (AS 2301.08 and .13)

The issuer recognized certain revenue over time based on labor costs incurred to date relative to total estimated labor costs to complete the contract. The following deficiencies were identified: · The firm did not perform any procedures to evaluate certain differences it identified in its testing of labor costs incurred. (AS 2301.08 and .13)

For another type of revenue the firm did not perform any substantive procedures to test whether the performance obligations had been satisfied before revenue was recognized. (AS 2301.08 and .13)

For a third type of revenue the firm did not perform any substantive procedures to evaluate the terms and conditions included in customer contracts. (AS 2301.08 and .13)

For revenue at three business units one of which was affected by the audit deficiencies discussed above the following additional deficiencies were identified: · The firm did not evaluate whether the issuer was acting as a principal or as an agent. (AS 2301.08)

The issuer recorded revenue net of customer discounts returns rebates and other deductions. The firm did not perform any substantive procedures to test these revenue deductions. (AS 2301.08 and .13)

For one type of revenue the firm did not perform any substantive procedures to test whether performance obligations had been satisfied before revenue was recognized. (AS 2301.08 and .13)

The issuer recognized revenue from certain arrangements as single performance obligations satisfied at a point in time. The firm selected a sample of these revenue transactions for testing. The following deficiencies were identified: · The firm did not perform procedures to test whether the performance obligations had been satisfied before revenue was recognized beyond comparing the transactions selected for testing to an issuer-produced report. (AS 2301.08 and .13)

The firm did not sufficiently evaluate whether the issuer's accounting for certain other transactions as revenue was appropriate because it did not evaluate whether one or more of the scope exceptions under FASB ASC Topic 606 were applicable. (AS 2301.08 and .13)

The issuer recorded certain revenue based on transactions that occurred on applications maintained by external parties. The following deficiencies were identified: · For two types of revenue the firm did not perform substantive procedures to evaluate whether the performance obligations had been satisfied before revenue was recognized. (AS 2301.08 and .13)

For another type of revenue the firm did not perform procedures to test whether the issuer's performance obligation had been satisfied before revenue was recognized. (AS 2301.08 and .13)

The firm's substantive procedures to test revenue included selecting samples of transactions for testing. The following deficiencies were identified: · The firm did not perform procedures to test or test controls over the completeness of the populations it used to make its selections. (AS 1105.10)

The issuer recognized revenue from certain contracts over time using an input method based on costs incurred. The following deficiencies were identified: · The firm did not perform substantive procedures to evaluate whether the costs incurred had been allocated to the appropriate contract. (AS 2301.08 and .13)

The firm's substantive procedures to test revenue included selecting samples of transactions for testing. The following deficiencies were identified: · The issuer recognized certain of this revenue upon (1) delivery and customer acceptance of products or (2) completion of its services. For certain selections the firm did not perform procedures to test whether (1) the customer had accepted the products or (2) the issuer had completed its services. (AS 2301.08 and .13)

The firm used information obtained from external parties to test revenue. The firm did not perform any procedures to evaluate the relevance and reliability of this information. (AS 1105.04 and .06)

The firm used data from external sources in its substantive testing of certain revenue but did not perform any substantive procedures to evaluate whether this data was reliable. (AS 1105.04 and .06)

The firm selected revenue transactions for testing. The following deficiency was identified: · The firm did not perform any procedures to test or test any controls over the completeness of the listing from which revenue transactions were selected for testing. (AS 1105.10)

The firm selected revenue transactions for testing. The following deficiency was identified: · The firm did not perform procedures to evaluate whether (1) performance obligations were appropriately identified (2) the allocation of revenue between performance obligations was appropriate and (3) appropriate amounts were deferred. (AS 2301.08 and .13)

The firm did not sufficiently test the completeness of deferred revenue because the firm selected transactions for testing from items recorded as deferred revenue. (AS 2301.08 and .13)

To substantively test revenue the firm selected sales transactions for testing. For these selections the firm did not evaluate whether all of the relevant revenue recognition criteria had been met. (AS 2301.08)

Certain of the issuer's revenue arrangements included multiple performance obligations. The issuer recognized revenue from certain contracts as either single performance obligations or multiple performance obligations satisfied at a point in time. The firm's substantive procedures to test revenue consisted of selecting a sample of transactions for testing. The following deficiency was identified: • The firm did not sufficiently evaluate the issuer's identification of performance obligations because it did not evaluate (1) the issuer's basis for concluding that the goods or services or bundles thereof represented single or multiple performance obligations including any ‘series' performance obligations; and (2) whether any performance obligations met the criteria for recognition over time. (AS 2301.08 and .13)

The firm did not evaluate whether the issuer's accounting for certain revenue as the principal rather than as an agent was appropriate. (AS 2301.08 and .13)

The issuer generated two types of revenue ('Revenue A' and 'Revenue B'). The following deficiencies were identified: · The firm did not perform any procedures to test Revenue A. (AS 2301.08)

The issuer records multiple types of revenue. For one type of revenue the firm compared issuer revenue information to customer sales contracts. The firm did not perform procedures to evaluate whether (1) the issuer met its performance obligations before revenue was recognized; and (2) the method used to recognize revenue for one contract was appropriate. (AS 2301.08 and .11)

The issuer recognized certain revenue pursuant to contracts with new customers. The firm did not perform procedures to evaluate whether these customer contracts met the collectability criteria required to recognize revenue. (AS 2301.08 and .13)

The firm selected a sample of transactions to test revenue. The firm did not perform procedures to evaluate whether the issuer met its performance obligations before revenue was recognized. (AS 2301.08 and .13)

The issuer recognized revenue on a straight-line basis over an estimated performance period. The firm did not sufficiently evaluate the appropriateness of recognizing revenue on a straight-line basis because it did not evaluate whether the issuer's efforts or expected inputs were expended evenly throughout the estimated performance period. (AS 2301.08) In connection with our review the issuer reevaluated its accounting for revenue and concluded that a material misstatement existed that had not been previously identified. The issuer subsequently corrected this misstatement in a restatement of its financial statements and the firm revised and reissued its report on the financial statements.

The issuer recognized revenue on a straight-line basis over an estimated performance period. The firm did not evaluate the reasonableness of the estimated performance period. (AS 2301.08) In connection with our review the issuer reevaluated its accounting for revenue and concluded that a material misstatement existed that had not been previously identified. The issuer subsequently corrected this misstatement in a restatement of its financial statements and the firm revised and reissued its report on the financial statements.

The firm did not perform any procedures to evaluate the relevance and reliability of the external information it used to test revenue. (AS 1105.04 and .06)

During the year the issuer recorded revenue from a bill-and-hold arrangement with one of its customers. The firm did not perform any procedures to evaluate whether the issuer met certain revenue recognition criteria for bill-and-hold arrangements beyond reading a memorandum prepared by the issuer and inquiring of management. (AS 2301.08)

For certain revenue the firm selected a sample of revenue transactions for testing. The firm did not perform any substantive procedures to evaluate whether the issuer's allocation of revenue to separate performance obligations was based on standalone selling prices. (AS 2301.08)

For certain of these business units and another business unit the firm did not perform any substantive procedures to test the completeness of revenue. (AS 2301.08)

The issuer recorded certain revenue net of allowances for contractual adjustments. The firm's procedures to test the estimated portion of these contractual adjustments consisted of (1) developing an independent expectation (2) testing the issuer's process and (3) evaluating transactions occurring after the measurement date. The following deficiencies were identified: · When testing the issuer's process and evaluating transactions occurring after the measurement date the firm used certain issuer-produced reports but did not perform any procedures to test or test any controls over the accuracy and/or completeness of these reports. (AS 1105.10)

The issuer recognized certain revenue based on customer usage data which was produced by one of the issuer's information technology (IT) systems. The firm did not perform procedures to test these data beyond comparing these data to information derived from this IT system. (AS 2301.08 and .13)

The issuer recognized revenue from certain contracts over time using an input method based on the labor hours incurred or number of users. The firm did not perform substantive procedures to test whether the issuer satisfied its performance obligations before recognizing this revenue beyond comparing the number of users and labor hours incurred to issuer-produced reports. (AS 2301.08 and .13)

For revenue which was affected by the audit deficiencies discussed above related to change management and logical access the following additional deficiency was identified: The firm's approach for testing revenue included performing tests of details for a sample of revenue transactions. The firm did not perform sufficient procedures to verify that each individual revenue transaction had an opportunity to be selected for testing because it did not establish a basis to support the sampling interval used to select transactions for testing and as a result did not select a sample that could be expected to be representative of the population. (AS 2315.24)

The firm used certain information in its testing of revenue that was obtained by the issuer from its customers but it did not perform any procedures to evaluate the reliability of this information. (AS 1105.04 and .06)