← Back to Explorer
KPMG Cardenas Dosal, S.C.
Mexico · KPMG International Cooperative · Triennially Inspected
- Inspection year
- 2024
- Report date
- 25-Sep-2025
- PCAOB release
- 104-2025-149
- Audits reviewed
- 3
- Audits w/ Part I.A deficiencies
- 2
- Part I.A deficiency rate
- 67%
- Part I.A deficiencies
- 8
- Part I.B deficiencies
- 4
- Report
- View PDF ↗
Deficiencies (8)
Grouped by issuer and in the same order as the PCAOB report, so each item ties back directly to the source.
Issuer A6 deficiencies
| # | Area | Deficiency | Standard | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Revenue | The issuer recognized revenue from multiple revenue streams. The following deficiency was identified: • The firm selected for testing a control over the disclosure of certain revenue that consisted of the issuer's review and approval of its financial statement disclosures. The firm did not identify and test any controls over the accuracy of certain data used in the operation of this control. (AS 2201.39) Both financial statement and ICFR audits | AS 2201.39 | |
| 2 | Revenue | The issuer recognized revenue from multiple revenue streams. The following deficiency was identified: • The firm used certain issuer-prepared data to substantively test one of the issuer's revenue disclosures but did not perform any procedures to test or test any controls over the accuracy of this data. (AS 1105.10) Both financial statement and ICFR audits | AS 1105.10 | |
| 3 | Goodwill and Intangible Assets | The issuer engaged an external specialist to assist in performing its annual impairment analysis for certain goodwill and intangible assets with indefinite lives. The issuer with the assistance of the company's specialist used various inputs and assumptions some of which the engagement team considered to be significant to prepare the valuation models used in the impairment analysis. Certain of these assumptions were developed using data derived from comparable companies. The company's specialist also prepared a sensitivity analysis using certain assumptions based on the statistical data points of the assumptions. The firm's approach for testing the goodwill and indefinite lived intangible assets for impairment was to test the issuer's process and the firm used an auditor-employed specialist to assist it with testing the valuation models used by the issuer. The following deficiency was identified: • The firm selected for testing a control over the valuation of the goodwill and indefinite lived intangible assets that consisted of the issuer's review of key assumptions used in the valuation models. The firm did not evaluate the specific review procedures the control owner performed to assess the reasonableness of certain assumptions used in the valuation models including the relevance of the comparable companies used to develop those assumptions. (AS 2201.42 and .44) Both financial statement and ICFR audits | AS 2201.42; AS 2201.44 | Significant risk |
| 4 | Goodwill and Intangible Assets | The issuer engaged an external specialist to assist in performing its annual impairment analysis for certain goodwill and intangible assets with indefinite lives. The issuer with the assistance of the company's specialist used various inputs and assumptions some of which the engagement team considered to be significant to prepare the valuation models used in the impairment analysis. Certain of these assumptions were developed using data derived from comparable companies. The company's specialist also prepared a sensitivity analysis using certain assumptions based on the statistical data points of the assumptions. The firm's approach for testing the goodwill and indefinite lived intangible assets for impairment was to test the issuer's process and the firm used an auditor-employed specialist to assist it with testing the valuation models used by the issuer. 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 work did not provide sufficient appropriate audit evidence regarding whether the goodwill and indefinite lived intangible assets were impaired because the auditor-employed specialist did not perform sufficient procedures to evaluate the reasonableness of certain significant assumptions used in the valuation models including the relevance of the comparable companies used to develop certain of those assumptions. (AS 1201.C6 and .C7) Both financial statement and ICFR audits | AS 1201.C6; AS 1201.C7 | Significant risk |
| 5 | Goodwill and Intangible Assets | The issuer engaged an external specialist to assist in performing its annual impairment analysis for certain goodwill and intangible assets with indefinite lives. The issuer with the assistance of the company's specialist used various inputs and assumptions some of which the engagement team considered to be significant to prepare the valuation models used in the impairment analysis. Certain of these assumptions were developed using data derived from comparable companies. The company's specialist also prepared a sensitivity analysis using certain assumptions based on the statistical data points of the assumptions. The firm's approach for testing the goodwill and indefinite lived intangible assets for impairment was to test the issuer's process and the firm used an auditor-employed specialist to assist it with testing the valuation models used by the issuer. The following deficiency was identified: • The auditor-employed specialist did not perform procedures to evaluate the reasonableness of certain significant assumptions used in the valuation models beyond reperforming the sensitivity analysis prepared by the company's specialist. (AS 2501.16) Both financial statement and ICFR audits | AS 2501.16 | Significant risk |
| 6 | Goodwill and Intangible Assets | The issuer engaged an external specialist to assist in performing its annual impairment analysis for certain goodwill and intangible assets with indefinite lives. The issuer with the assistance of the company's specialist used various inputs and assumptions some of which the engagement team considered to be significant to prepare the valuation models used in the impairment analysis. Certain of these assumptions were developed using data derived from comparable companies. The company's specialist also prepared a sensitivity analysis using certain assumptions based on the statistical data points of the assumptions. The firm's approach for testing the goodwill and indefinite lived intangible assets for impairment was to test the issuer's process and the firm used an auditor-employed specialist to assist it with testing the valuation models used by the issuer. The following deficiency was identified: • The auditor-employed specialist did not perform procedures to evaluate the relevance of the comparable companies used to develop these significant assumptions beyond determining whether those companies operated in the same industry as the issuer. (AS 1105.04 and .06) Both financial statement and ICFR audits | AS 1105.4; AS 1105.6 | Significant risk |
Issuer B2 deficiencies
| # | Area | Deficiency | Standard | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Inventory | To test the existence of certain inventory the firm virtually observed the inventory at selected locations through video calls as of an interim date confirming only that inventory was present and performed certain roll forward procedures from the interim date to year-end. The following deficiency was identified: • The firm did not identify and test any controls over the existence of this inventory. (AS 2201.39) Both financial statement and ICFR audits | AS 2201.39 | |
| 2 | Inventory | To test the existence of certain inventory the firm virtually observed the inventory at selected locations through video calls as of an interim date confirming only that inventory was present and performed certain roll forward procedures from the interim date to year-end. The following deficiency was identified: • The firm did not perform sufficient procedures to test the existence of this inventory because the firm's observation procedures were not suitable as the firm did not perform any test count procedures during the observations. Therefore these observations did not provide any evidence of the quantity and physical condition of the inventory. (AS 2510.09) Both financial statement and ICFR audits | AS 2510.9 |