- Inspection year
- 2024
- Report date
- 24-Jul-2025
- PCAOB release
- 104-2025-119
- Audits reviewed
- 3
- Audits w/ Part I.A deficiencies
- 2
- Part I.A deficiency rate
- 67%
- Part I.A deficiencies
- 6
- Part I.B deficiencies
- —
- Report
- View PDF ↗
Deficiencies (6)
Grouped by issuer and in the same order as the PCAOB report, so each item ties back directly to the source.
Issuer A5 deficiencies
| # | Area | Deficiency | Standard | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Certain Liabilities | The issuer engaged specialists to assist in determining the valuation of certain liabilities. The firm's approach for substantively testing these liabilities was to test the issuer's process. The following deficiency which involved two types of significant assumptions applied across multiple locations was identified: · The firm engaged an external specialist to evaluate the reasonableness of certain significant assumptions developed by the company's specialist. The firm did not identify that the auditor-engaged specialist did not evaluate the reliability of data it obtained from external sources and used to evaluate the reasonableness of these significant assumptions and perform additional procedures or request the specialist perform additional procedures to address the issue. (AS 1105.04 and .06; AS 1210.09 and .12) Financial statement audit only | AS 1105.4; AS 1105.6; AS 1210.9; AS 1210.12 | Significant risk |
| 2 | Certain Liabilities | The issuer engaged specialists to assist in determining the valuation of certain liabilities. The firm's approach for substantively testing these liabilities was to test the issuer's process. The following deficiency which involved two types of significant assumptions applied across multiple locations was identified: · The firm did not perform sufficient procedures to evaluate the reasonableness of certain significant assumptions developed by the issuer because it limited its procedures to inquiry and comparing the assumptions to information within certain other company specialists' reports. Further the firm did not perform procedures to evaluate the work of those company specialists. (AS 1105.A6 - .A10; AS 2501.16) Financial statement audit only | AS 1105.A10; AS 1105.A6; AS 1105.A7; AS 1105.A8; AS 1105.A9; AS 2501.16 | Significant risk |
| 3 | Certain Liabilities | The issuer engaged specialists to assist in determining the valuation of certain liabilities. The firm's approach for substantively testing these liabilities was to test the issuer's process. The following deficiency which involved two types of significant assumptions applied across multiple locations was identified: · The firm did not perform sufficient procedures to evaluate the reasonableness of certain other significant assumptions developed by the issuer. Specifically the firm developed expectations of these assumptions using in part information in certain other company specialists' reports but did not perform procedures to evaluate the work of those company specialists. (AS 1105.A6 - .A10; AS 2501.16) Financial statement audit only | AS 1105.A10; AS 1105.A6; AS 1105.A7; AS 1105.A8; AS 1105.A9; AS 2501.16 | Significant risk |
| 4 | Certain Liabilities | The issuer engaged specialists to assist in determining the valuation of certain liabilities. The firm's approach for substantively testing these liabilities was to test the issuer's process. The following deficiency which involved two types of significant assumptions applied across multiple locations was identified: · The firm did not perform sufficient procedures to demonstrate that it had a reasonable basis for its expectations of additional significant assumptions the issuer developed because it did not take into account the issuer's written plans or other relevant documentation. (AS 2501.16 and .17) Financial statement audit only | AS 2501.16; AS 2501.17 | Significant risk |
| 5 | Certain Liabilities | The issuer engaged specialists to assist in determining the valuation of certain liabilities. The firm's approach for substantively testing these liabilities was to test the issuer's process. The following deficiency which involved two types of significant assumptions applied across multiple locations was identified: · The firm did not perform any procedures to evaluate the reasonableness of other significant assumptions. (AS 2501.16) Financial statement audit only | AS 2501.16 | Significant risk |
Issuer B1 deficiency
| # | Area | Deficiency | Standard | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Equity Instruments | The firm did not identify and evaluate a GAAP departure related to the issuer not reclassifying noncontrolling interests to additional paid in capital upon the exchange of equity instruments that was required by FASB ASC Topic 810 Consolidation. (AS 2810.30 and .31) Unrelated to our review the issuer reevaluated its accounting for the exchange of equity instruments 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. Financial statement audit only | AS 2810.30; AS 2810.31 |