Use this guide to connect the foundations of AUD (Auditing and Attestation) to practical audit decisions. Each concept explains a rule or distinction, resolves an original example, and identifies a specific mistake. Work through professional responsibilities and planning before applying the concepts to controls, account balances, and reports.
Professional responsibilities and ethical foundations
1. Reasonable assurance and audit limitations
A financial statement audit seeks reasonable assurance that the statements are free of material misstatement, whether caused by fraud or error. This is a high level of assurance, but evidence, estimation uncertainty, sampling, and concealed misconduct prevent absolute certainty. The objective concerns material misstatement rather than every possible error.
Worked example: An auditor supports an inventory balance through observation, testing, and valuation evidence. A later discovery of a small concealed theft does not by itself establish that the audit opinion was inappropriate.
Mistake to avoid: Treating an unmodified opinion as a guarantee that every transaction is correct.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
2. Professional skepticism and professional judgment
Professional skepticism means maintaining a questioning mind and critically evaluating evidence. Professional judgment means applying relevant knowledge and experience to choose and evaluate actions. Skepticism identifies a concern; judgment determines the response. Neither requires assuming that every explanation is false or accepting explanations merely because management seems trustworthy.
Worked example: Management attributes a margin increase to lower freight costs. The auditor questions the explanation, compares freight records with sales, and investigates when freight savings explain only a small portion of the increase.
Mistake to avoid: Recording management's explanation without testing whether it fits the evidence.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
3. Independence in mind and appearance
Independence involves both an unbiased state of mind and circumstances that allow an informed observer to regard the auditor as objective. Personal confidence in impartiality does not resolve a prohibited financial interest or relationship. Evaluate the applicable independence rules for the engagement rather than relying solely on individual intentions.
Worked example: An engagement team member directly owns shares in the audit client. Saying that the investment will not influence the work does not resolve the independence issue; the relationship requires action under the applicable rules.
Mistake to avoid: Equating honest intentions with compliance with independence requirements.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
4. Ethical threats and effective responses
Self-interest, self-review, advocacy, familiarity, and intimidation can threaten objectivity or independence. Identify the actual relationship or pressure, evaluate its significance, and apply responses permitted by the governing rules. Some situations require eliminating the relationship or declining the work; additional review cannot cure every restriction.
Worked example: A client threatens to replace the auditor unless an unsupported adjustment is dropped. The auditor identifies intimidation, escalates the issue, and evaluates whether the engagement can continue without compromising professional responsibilities.
Mistake to avoid: Assuming that labeling a threat automatically makes an ordinary review an adequate safeguard.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
5. Engagement acceptance and continuance
Before accepting or continuing an engagement, evaluate management integrity, independence, available competence and resources, and whether the engagement's preconditions can be met. A desirable client does not compensate for missing expertise or obstructed access. New information can require reconsidering a previously acceptable engagement.
Worked example: A prospective client refuses access to records supporting its largest asset. The firm investigates the restriction before accepting, rather than assuming that a reporting modification will solve the underlying acceptance problem.
Mistake to avoid: Treating acceptance as a commercial decision with no effect on audit quality.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
6. Agreeing on engagement terms
Clear engagement terms establish the objective and scope, applicable reporting framework, respective responsibilities, and expected reporting. They reduce misunderstandings about what the auditor will do and what management must provide. An engagement letter records the agreement; it does not transfer management's responsibilities to the auditor.
Worked example: A client expects the auditor to choose accounting policies and approve transactions. The proposed terms clarify that management retains those decisions, and the misunderstanding must be resolved before proceeding.
Mistake to avoid: Using a signed engagement letter as evidence that inappropriate responsibilities are acceptable.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
7. Management and auditor responsibilities
Management prepares the financial statements, maintains relevant internal control, and provides information and access. The auditor independently obtains evidence and expresses an opinion within the engagement's scope. Audit adjustments and advice can support management's process, but management must understand and accept responsibility for the resulting statements.
Worked example: The auditor proposes correcting a misclassified loan. Management evaluates and approves the entry; the auditor then assesses whether the corrected statements are adequately supported.
Mistake to avoid: Assuming that proposing an adjustment makes the auditor responsible for preparing the client's statements.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
8. Audit documentation that supports conclusions
Documentation should connect the assessed risk, procedure performed, evidence obtained, and conclusion reached. It should allow an experienced auditor unfamiliar with the engagement to understand significant work and judgments. A checked box without the population, selection, findings, or resolution may fail to explain what the auditor actually established.
Worked example: A workpaper identifies the invoices tested, the cutoff criterion, two exceptions, their resolution, and the effect on the conclusion. This explains the result more clearly than a note saying 'cutoff satisfactory.'
Mistake to avoid: Documenting only the final conclusion while omitting the evidence and reasoning supporting it.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
Planning and assessing audit risk
9. Assertions as links between risks and procedures
Assertions describe what the financial statements imply about transactions, balances, and disclosures. Examples include occurrence, completeness, accuracy, cutoff, existence, rights and obligations, valuation, and presentation. Identify the relevant assertion before selecting a procedure, because the same account can be misstated in several different ways.
Worked example: Inspecting a recorded machine supports existence. Inspecting its purchase agreement addresses ownership. Testing depreciation addresses valuation. None of these procedures alone resolves all three assertions.
Mistake to avoid: Naming an account as the audit objective without identifying the potential misstatement.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
10. Understanding the entity and its environment
Business conditions, operations, financing, ownership, and performance measures help explain where misstatements could arise. Translate this understanding into financial statement risks rather than collecting background facts without a purpose. Operational changes can affect recognition, estimates, disclosures, and the reliability of information used in the audit.
Worked example: A wholesaler shifts from outright sales to consignment arrangements. The auditor identifies a revenue occurrence risk because shipment may no longer represent a completed sale.
Mistake to avoid: Reusing last year's risk assessment despite a meaningful change in the business model.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
11. Reporting frameworks and auditing standards
The financial reporting framework determines how transactions and disclosures should be accounted for. Auditing standards govern how the auditor obtains assurance and reports. Determine both from the engagement's facts. The requirements applicable to one entity or engagement type should not automatically be imported into another.
Worked example: A proposed adjustment concerns when revenue is recognized. The auditor evaluates it under the applicable accounting framework, then designs and documents evidence procedures under the applicable auditing standards.
Mistake to avoid: Confusing an accounting recognition rule with a rule about how to perform the audit.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
12. Materiality includes qualitative considerations
Materiality concerns whether a misstatement could reasonably influence users' decisions. Its assessment considers amount, nature, and circumstances. A benchmark can inform judgment, but no single percentage determines every engagement. A small error may matter because it changes a trend, conceals misconduct, or affects a sensitive disclosure.
Worked example: An omitted related-party transaction is small compared with total assets. Its nature still requires evaluation because users may consider the relationship important when assessing management's decisions.
Mistake to avoid: Automatically dismissing every amount below a numerical planning threshold.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
13. Performance materiality and aggregation risk
Performance materiality is set below overall materiality to reduce the risk that aggregate uncorrected and undetected misstatements exceed overall materiality. It informs audit work rather than establishing a universal acceptable error. Its determination reflects judgment about the engagement, including expected misstatements and experience with the entity.
Worked example: In a hypothetical engagement, overall materiality is $100,000 and performance materiality is $65,000. Two uncorrected errors of $45,000 and $40,000 must be considered together, even though each is below $65,000.
Mistake to avoid: Treating performance materiality as permission to ignore individually smaller errors.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
14. The audit risk model
Audit risk reflects the risk of material misstatement and the risk that audit procedures fail to detect it. Inherent risk concerns susceptibility before controls; control risk concerns controls failing to prevent or detect and correct misstatement. Higher assessed risk generally requires lower acceptable detection risk through stronger audit evidence.
Worked example: In a simplified teaching model, 0.8 × 0.5 × 0.1 equals 0.04, or 4%. Holding other factors constant, doubling control risk requires halving detection risk to maintain that modeled audit risk.
Mistake to avoid: Treating illustrative risk percentages as precise measurements or mandatory audit targets.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
15. Identifying significant risks
Some risks demand particular attention because of factors such as complexity, subjectivity, uncertainty, change, or susceptibility to fraud. Evaluate the potential likelihood and magnitude of misstatement rather than ranking accounts only by size. A significant risk requires a focused response appropriate to the applicable auditing standards.
Worked example: A modest balance depends on an unusually complex valuation with highly uncertain assumptions. The auditor gives the valuation focused attention instead of overlooking it because larger accounts exist.
Mistake to avoid: Assuming that the largest account must always contain the most significant risk.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
16. Fraud, error, and fraud risk factors
Fraud involves intentional deception; error is unintentional. Incentives or pressures, opportunities, and attitudes or rationalizations can indicate fraud risk, but they are not proof that fraud occurred. Consider how these conditions could produce specific misstatements and what evidence would distinguish an innocent error from deliberate manipulation.
Worked example: A bonus depends on meeting a revenue target, and one manager can post sales without review. These conditions increase concern about fabricated revenue but do not establish that any sale is fictitious.
Mistake to avoid: Treating a fraud risk factor as a finding of fraud.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
17. Responding to management override
Management may bypass controls that otherwise operate effectively. Relevant responses include examining journal entries and adjustments, considering bias in estimates, and evaluating the business rationale for unusual transactions. Selection should reflect the entity's processes and risks; ordinary approval controls do not eliminate the possibility of override.
Worked example: The auditor investigates a late revenue entry posted by a senior executive. The entry lacks a customer order or delivery evidence, so the executive's authorization does not establish that the revenue is valid.
Mistake to avoid: Excluding senior management's entries because they were posted by authorized personnel.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
18. Planning analytical procedures
Planning analytics identify unexpected relationships that may signal risks requiring further investigation. Compare financial data with prior periods, budgets, industry information, or relevant nonfinancial measures. An unexpected movement is a starting point for inquiry and corroboration, rather than an automatic conclusion that an account is misstated.
Worked example: Sales rise 20% while shipped units rise 2% and prices remain stable. The auditor investigates revenue timing, product mix, and data reliability instead of assuming normal growth explains the difference.
Mistake to avoid: Accepting a broad explanation that does not reconcile the conflicting measures.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
19. Overall and assertion-level risk responses
Financial statement-level risks can affect the engagement broadly, calling for changes in supervision, staffing, skepticism, or procedure unpredictability. Assertion-level risks require procedures targeted to a particular misstatement. Connect each response to its risk so that additional work increases relevant assurance rather than merely increasing workload.
Worked example: Weak management integrity prompts closer supervision across the audit. A separate inventory valuation risk prompts testing obsolete stock and selling-price evidence. The broad response does not replace the account-specific work.
Mistake to avoid: Responding to every risk by increasing sample size without reconsidering the procedure.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
20. Evaluating a specialist's work
A specialist may provide expertise in areas such as valuation or engineering. Evaluate relevant competence, capabilities, objectivity, the agreed work, and whether methods, assumptions, and findings support the audit objective. Using expertise does not remove the auditor's responsibility to evaluate the evidence and reach the audit conclusion.
Worked example: A valuation specialist estimates a property using comparable sales. The auditor checks that the selected properties are relevant and that the conclusion addresses the reporting date and valuation basis.
Mistake to avoid: Accepting a specialist's conclusion solely because the specialist holds a professional credential.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
Understanding and testing internal control
21. The components of internal control
Internal control encompasses the control environment, risk assessment, control activities, information and communication, and monitoring. These components interact. A well-designed transaction check may be undermined by management pressure, unreliable information, or absent follow-up. Understanding controls therefore requires more than listing approvals and reconciliations.
Worked example: A controller reviews bank reconciliations, but unresolved differences remain open indefinitely. The review activity exists, while the lack of follow-up raises concerns about monitoring and effective operation.
Mistake to avoid: Concluding that controls are strong simply because a procedures manual is detailed.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
22. Walkthroughs, design, and implementation
A walkthrough follows a transaction through the process to understand records, personnel, systems, and controls. Design evaluation asks whether a control could address the risk. Implementation asks whether the entity actually uses it. Neither alone establishes that the control operated consistently throughout the period under audit.
Worked example: Following one purchase shows that an approval requirement is configured and used. This supports understanding and implementation, but additional evidence is needed before relying on the control's operation over the year.
Mistake to avoid: Treating one successful walkthrough as proof of year-long operating effectiveness.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
23. Operating effectiveness
Operating effectiveness concerns whether a control worked as designed, was applied consistently, and was performed by someone with appropriate authority and competence. Evidence should address the relevant period and control precision. Inquiry alone generally cannot establish operating effectiveness; inspection, observation, or reperformance may provide necessary support.
Worked example: For a monthly reconciliation control, the auditor inspects selected reconciliations and how differences were resolved. A signature without evidence of meaningful review may not demonstrate effective operation.
Mistake to avoid: Equating the presence of an approval mark with a properly performed control.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
24. Segregation of duties and compensating controls
Separating authorization, custody, recording, and reconciliation reduces opportunities to commit and conceal errors or fraud. Smaller entities may lack enough personnel for full separation. A compensating control must directly address the resulting risk with sufficient precision and independence; an unrelated supervisory activity is not an equivalent substitute.
Worked example: One employee receives customer payments and records receipts. An owner independently compares bank deposits with customer remittances and investigates gaps, addressing the risk that receipts could be diverted and concealed.
Mistake to avoid: Calling any owner involvement a compensating control without examining what it detects.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
25. Preventive and detective controls
Preventive controls aim to stop a problem before it occurs; detective controls identify problems after occurrence so they can be corrected. Both can support reliable reporting. Evaluate what risk the control addresses, how quickly it operates, and whether detected exceptions lead to correction.
Worked example: A system blocks payment when required approval is missing, making the control preventive. A duplicate-payment report reviewed after processing is detective; its effectiveness depends on timely investigation and recovery or correction.
Mistake to avoid: Assuming that a detective control is ineffective merely because it operates after processing.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
26. IT general controls
IT general controls address the environment supporting applications, including access management, program changes, and operations. Weaknesses can undermine reliance on automated controls or system-generated information. Evaluate the relevant dependency rather than assuming that every IT weakness has an identical effect on every account.
Worked example: A billing calculation works correctly, but unrestricted administrator access permits unauthorized changes. The auditor considers whether evidence about the calculation alone is sufficient to support reliance throughout the period.
Mistake to avoid: Testing an automated calculation once while ignoring who can change its logic.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
27. Application controls and data integrity
Application controls address the completeness, accuracy, and validity of transactions processed by a particular system. Examples include input validation, sequence checks, automated calculations, and exception handling. A control is useful only if its criteria address the relevant risk and exceptions receive appropriate attention.
Worked example: An invoice system rejects entries without customer identifiers. This supports valid customer identification, but it does not establish that goods were delivered or that the customer owes the recorded amount.
Mistake to avoid: Assuming that one successful input check validates every assertion about the transaction.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
28. Service organizations and user controls
Outsourcing a process does not eliminate the entity's reporting responsibilities. Understand the services, relevant controls, report scope and period, and controls expected at the user entity. A report describing control design differs from one also addressing operation over a period; neither automatically covers every audit risk.
Worked example: A payroll processor's report assumes the client approves employee changes. The auditor evaluates that client-side approval because the processor's controls alone cannot prevent unauthorized employees from entering payroll.
Mistake to avoid: Treating a service organization's assurance report as blanket evidence for all outsourced balances.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
29. Choosing when to test controls
Understanding controls is part of assessing risk, but reliance requires suitable evidence of operating effectiveness. Tests of controls may be needed when planning to rely on controls or when substantive procedures alone cannot provide sufficient appropriate evidence. Effective controls do not automatically eliminate substantive procedures required by the applicable standards.
Worked example: A high-volume process retains little evidence outside the automated system. The auditor evaluates relevant controls and their dependencies rather than assuming that year-end balance testing alone can address all risks.
Mistake to avoid: Claiming low control risk based only on the client's description of its process.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
30. Assessing control deficiencies
Evaluate a control deficiency by considering the likelihood and potential magnitude of misstatement, not merely the errors already found. Deficiencies may interact, and compensating controls may affect severity. Communication depends on the applicable standards and the nature of the deficiency; precise classifications require the relevant criteria.
Worked example: No one reviews changes to vendor bank details. Even without a detected loss, the weakness warrants evaluation because unauthorized changes could redirect substantial payments.
Mistake to avoid: Concluding that a deficiency is insignificant solely because no actual misstatement was discovered.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
Obtaining and evaluating audit evidence
31. Sufficiency and appropriateness of evidence
Sufficiency concerns evidence quantity; appropriateness concerns relevance and reliability. Higher risk generally calls for more persuasive evidence, but increasing the volume of weak evidence may not resolve its limitations. Reliability depends on circumstances, including source, controls over preparation, and how the auditor obtains the information.
Worked example: Twenty copies of the same unsupported internal schedule do not establish a receivable more convincingly than one copy. Independent customer evidence may address the existence question more directly.
Mistake to avoid: Measuring evidence quality by the number of documents in the workpaper.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
32. Nature, timing, and extent of procedures
Nature identifies the procedure and its purpose; timing identifies when it is performed or the period it covers; extent identifies how much work is done. Adjust all three to the risk. Work performed before year-end may require additional procedures addressing the remaining period and subsequent changes.
Worked example: Receivables are tested two months before year-end. The auditor evaluates intervening activity and performs appropriate remaining-period work rather than treating the earlier result as automatically applicable to the closing balance.
Mistake to avoid: Increasing the number of items tested while leaving an unsuitable procedure or timing unchanged.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
33. Inspection, observation, and inquiry
Inspection examines records or assets; observation watches a process; inquiry seeks information from knowledgeable people. Each has limits. Observation relates to the time observed and may alter behavior. Inquiry can identify useful explanations, but corroboration is often needed. Physical inspection may support existence without proving ownership or value.
Worked example: Watching employees count inventory shows how the count is performed at that moment. It does not establish that the same process operated at every location or that counted goods belong to the client.
Mistake to avoid: Extending a procedure's conclusion beyond the assertion and period it actually addresses.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
34. External confirmations
Confirmations obtain information directly from an external party. The auditor maintains control over the process and evaluates response authenticity and relevance. A nonresponse is not agreement. Exceptions require investigation, and alternative procedures must address the same audit objective rather than merely produce convenient supporting documents.
Worked example: A customer does not answer a receivable confirmation. The auditor examines subsequent cash receipts and related delivery records, while checking whether the evidence actually supports the specific year-end balance.
Mistake to avoid: Counting unanswered requests as confirmed balances.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
35. Recalculation and reperformance
Recalculation checks mathematical accuracy. Reperformance independently carries out a procedure or control originally performed by the entity. Correct arithmetic does not validate assumptions, classification, completeness, or underlying data. Decide whether the audit objective requires checking a computation or independently reproducing the broader process.
Worked example: An auditor recalculates $120,000 divided by six years as $20,000 annual depreciation. That confirms the arithmetic, but the asset's depreciable amount, useful life, and applicable method still need evaluation.
Mistake to avoid: Treating an arithmetically correct calculation as proof that its inputs and accounting treatment are appropriate.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
36. Substantive analytical procedures
A substantive analytical procedure develops a sufficiently precise expectation using reliable data, establishes an acceptable difference, and investigates significant deviations. Predictability and disaggregation matter. A broad comparison may reveal a risk without being precise enough to provide the intended substantive assurance.
Worked example: For 20 occupied units renting at $900 monthly for 12 months, expected rent is $216,000 before concessions. Recorded revenue of $190,000 leaves a $26,000 difference requiring investigation and supporting evidence.
Mistake to avoid: Accepting an unexplained variance because the overall trend looks plausible.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
37. Sampling populations and selection
An audit sample should be drawn from a population appropriate to the objective. Statistical sampling uses probability-based selection and evaluation; nonstatistical sampling still requires careful design and judgment. Testing only large or suspicious items can be valuable, but conclusions from targeted selections do not automatically represent the untested population.
Worked example: To test missing liabilities, the auditor selects from subsequent payments and relevant unmatched documents. Sampling only recorded payables would omit the very liabilities the procedure seeks to find.
Mistake to avoid: Choosing a convenient population that cannot reveal the targeted misstatement.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
38. Sampling risk and nonsampling risk
Sampling risk arises when a sample leads to a conclusion different from examining the whole population. Nonsampling risk includes choosing an unsuitable procedure or misinterpreting evidence. In substantive testing, incorrect acceptance threatens effectiveness; incorrect rejection can create unnecessary work. Larger samples do not cure an incorrectly designed procedure.
Worked example: An auditor tests many recorded invoices for approval when the objective is detecting unrecorded purchases. Increasing the sample size does not fix the population and procedure mismatch.
Mistake to avoid: Assuming that all audit testing risk can be reduced simply by selecting more items.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
39. Evaluating sample deviations and misstatements
A control deviation concerns failure to perform a control; a substantive misstatement concerns incorrect reported information. Evaluate findings according to the test's purpose, including their causes and implications. Projection methods and sampling uncertainty require an appropriate sampling design; one detected error should not automatically be treated as isolated.
Worked example: In a simple equal-size-item illustration, a representative sample of 100 from 1,000 items contains $300 of overstatement. A basic projection is $3,000, before considering sampling uncertainty and qualitative implications.
Mistake to avoid: Applying a simple projection mechanically to a targeted or otherwise unsuitable sample.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
40. Contradictory evidence and written representations
Evidence must be evaluated together, including information that conflicts with the expected conclusion. Written management representations support certain matters but do not replace other necessary audit evidence. When reliable evidence contradicts a representation, investigate the discrepancy and reconsider related conclusions and management's reliability.
Worked example: Management states that goods have no return rights, but a customer contract permits unrestricted returns. The auditor examines the contract's accounting implications rather than allowing the representation to override it.
Mistake to avoid: Selecting only evidence that supports management's position.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
Applying procedures to accounts and transactions
41. Cash reconciliations and reconciling items
A bank reconciliation explains differences between bank and book balances. Test reconciling items for validity, timing, and subsequent clearance, and examine book adjustments. Agreement after reconciliation does not itself prove that every reconciling item is legitimate or that transfers are recorded in the correct period.
Worked example: A bank balance of $54,000 plus $8,000 deposits in transit minus $5,000 outstanding checks gives $57,000 adjusted cash. A $57,100 book balance less an unrecorded $100 bank fee also gives $57,000.
Mistake to avoid: Accepting a deposit in transit without checking supporting receipts and subsequent bank credit.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
42. Receivable existence and customer disputes
Receivable existence concerns whether recorded amounts represent actual claims at the reporting date. Confirmation differences can arise from timing, disputes, or errors, so investigate their causes. Evidence of later collection can help, but match the collection to the specific balance and consider side agreements or unusual arrangements.
Worked example: A customer reports owing $18,000 rather than $21,000. Inspection identifies a $3,000 credit for goods returned before year-end, indicating that the recorded receivable needs correction.
Mistake to avoid: Explaining every confirmation difference as timing without examining the underlying transaction.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
43. Receivable valuation and allowance estimates
A genuine receivable can still be overstated if collection is uncertain. Evaluate the applicable impairment approach, aging information, historical experience, current conditions, and relevant forecasts where required. Subsequent receipts help assess collectibility, but the estimate must reflect the relevant reporting-date conditions and framework.
Worked example: In a hypothetical aging calculation, $80,000 at 1% and $20,000 at 15% produce an allowance of $800 + $3,000 = $3,800. The auditor separately evaluates whether the rates and aging data are supportable.
Mistake to avoid: Using confirmation of the amount owed as proof that the full amount is collectible.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
44. Revenue recognition and cutoff
Revenue testing should address whether the applicable recognition conditions were met and whether transactions belong in the correct period. Invoice dates, cash receipts, and shipment dates can be relevant, but none universally determines recognition. Examine contractual terms, performance, acceptance provisions, and evidence around the reporting date.
Worked example: Goods are invoiced December 30, but the contract makes delivery the relevant transfer event and delivery occurs January 3. The invoice alone does not support December revenue.
Mistake to avoid: Applying a universal rule that revenue always follows the invoice date.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
45. Inventory count direction and movement control
Testing from count records to physical goods primarily addresses existence; testing from goods to count records primarily addresses completeness. Count observation also involves evaluating instructions, identifying damaged goods, and considering movements during counting. Physical presence does not by itself establish ownership or appropriate valuation.
Worked example: A pallet found on the warehouse floor has no entry on the count sheet. Tracing it from floor to sheet reveals a completeness exception that sheet-to-floor testing might miss.
Mistake to avoid: Testing only recorded items when the objective includes detecting omitted inventory.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
46. Inventory valuation and obsolescence
Inventory valuation involves testing assigned costs and evaluating impairment or write-down requirements under the applicable framework. Slow movement, damage, technological change, and selling-price declines can indicate reduced recoverability. Quantity evidence and valuation evidence answer different questions; an item can exist but be worth less than its recorded amount.
Worked example: Under an applicable lower-of-cost-and-net-realizable-value measurement, goods cost $12,000 and have estimated selling proceeds of $11,000 less $1,000 selling costs. Net realizable value is $10,000, implying a $2,000 write-down.
Mistake to avoid: Concluding that a successful physical count establishes the inventory's carrying value.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
47. Searching for unrecorded liabilities
Payable completeness requires looking beyond recorded balances. Subsequent payments, unpaid invoices, unmatched receiving records, and supplier statements can reveal obligations omitted at year-end. Determine when the obligation arose using transaction facts and the accounting framework, rather than using payment or invoice receipt dates alone.
Worked example: A January payment settles goods received and accepted on December 28. If the obligation existed at year-end, the missing December payable is a completeness error even though the invoice arrived in January.
Mistake to avoid: Testing payable completeness only by examining amounts already recorded in the ledger.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
48. Property costs, capitalization, and depreciation
Evaluate whether spending qualifies for capitalization under the applicable framework or should be expensed. Then test the depreciable amount, useful life, method, and start date. Purchase documentation supports a cost but does not establish that every invoice component belongs in the asset's carrying amount.
Worked example: A machine has a supported depreciable amount of $48,000 and a four-year straight-line life. Full-year depreciation is $12,000; the auditor separately checks when depreciation should begin and whether the life is reasonable.
Mistake to avoid: Capitalizing every cost associated with equipment simply because it appears on the same invoice.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
49. Accounting estimates and sensitivity
Estimate testing examines methods, data, assumptions, uncertainty, and potential management bias. A mathematically correct model can still produce an unsupported estimate. Sensitivity analysis shows how changes in important assumptions affect the result and helps identify which inputs warrant the most persuasive evidence.
Worked example: A forecast-based estimate changes from $500,000 to $420,000 when expected demand falls modestly. The $80,000 sensitivity directs attention to whether management's demand assumption is supportable.
Mistake to avoid: Accepting a model because its formulas work without evaluating the assumptions driving the result.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
50. Related parties and transaction substance
Related-party relationships can affect transaction terms, accounting, and disclosures. Consider whether transactions have a genuine business purpose, whether recorded terms match actual arrangements, and whether the relationship is properly presented. A transaction's formal documentation does not establish that it occurred on ordinary market terms.
Worked example: An entity sells equipment to a company controlled by its chief executive. The auditor evaluates the relationship, price, payment evidence, transaction substance, and disclosure rather than treating it as an ordinary unrelated sale.
Mistake to avoid: Assuming that a signed contract proves a related-party transaction is at arm's length.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
51. Subsequent events and reporting-date conditions
Subsequent events may provide evidence about conditions existing at the reporting date or reveal conditions arising later. The accounting framework determines whether adjustment or disclosure is appropriate. Distinguish the event date from the underlying condition; timing alone does not resolve the accounting treatment.
Worked example: A customer's January bankruptcy confirms financial distress already present in December, informing the year-end receivable estimate. A new January fire generally reflects a later condition and requires a different accounting assessment.
Mistake to avoid: Treating every event after year-end as either automatically adjustable or automatically irrelevant.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
52. Going concern and management's plans
Evaluate conditions that may threaten continued operations and assess management's plans using supporting evidence. Forecasts should reflect realistic assumptions, financing terms, and cash timing. The relevant assessment period and reporting requirements depend on the applicable framework and auditing standards; a hopeful plan is not evidence of feasibility.
Worked example: A cash forecast assumes renewal of an expiring loan, but the lender has made no commitment. The auditor evaluates the unsupported financing assumption and its effect on the conclusion and disclosures.
Mistake to avoid: Treating management's intention to obtain financing as proof that funding will be available.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
Drawing conclusions and communicating results
53. Evaluating accumulated misstatements
Evaluate uncorrected misstatements individually and in aggregate, considering quantitative and qualitative factors. Include relevant effects from prior periods and examine whether findings suggest additional undetected errors. Offsetting amounts can affect the total, but they do not automatically erase classification, disclosure, fraud, or estimation concerns.
Worked example: An expense omission of $28,000 and excess recorded revenue of $22,000 both overstate profit. Their combined profit effect is $50,000, even though they arose in different accounts.
Mistake to avoid: Reviewing each error in isolation or netting unrelated errors without considering their nature.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
54. Audit opinion decisions
Opinion decisions distinguish identified misstatement from inability to obtain sufficient appropriate evidence, then consider materiality and pervasiveness. Material misstatement can lead to a qualified or adverse opinion. Material evidence limitations can lead to a qualified opinion or disclaimer. An unmodified opinion requires a supported conclusion under the applicable reporting framework.
Worked example: A material but nonpervasive accounting departure points toward qualification. A pervasive evidence limitation points toward a disclaimer, rather than an adverse opinion, because the problem is insufficient evidence.
Mistake to avoid: Using an adverse opinion simply because the auditor could not verify a major balance.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
55. Emphasis-of-matter and other-matter paragraphs
Where permitted by the applicable reporting standards, an emphasis-of-matter paragraph draws attention to an appropriately presented or disclosed financial statement matter. An other-matter paragraph addresses a matter outside the statements relevant to understanding the audit or report. Neither substitutes for a required opinion modification or missing disclosure.
Worked example: A significant uncertainty is adequately disclosed and meets the applicable criteria for emphasis. Drawing attention to that disclosure does not automatically mean the auditor has qualified the opinion.
Mistake to avoid: Using an additional paragraph to avoid modifying the opinion for materially inadequate disclosure.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
56. Financial statement audits and reviews
An audit provides reasonable assurance through risk assessment and sufficient appropriate evidence. A financial statement review provides limited assurance and relies primarily on inquiry and analytical procedures, with additional work when necessary. A review is a distinct engagement with a different objective, rather than an audit using a smaller sample.
Worked example: Review analytics reveal an unexplained revenue surge. The practitioner investigates further instead of issuing the review report merely because the planned inquiries and comparisons are complete.
Mistake to avoid: Assuming that limited assurance permits ignoring information suggesting a material misstatement.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
57. Attestation examinations, reviews, and agreed-upon procedures
Attestation engagements evaluate subject matter against suitable criteria. An examination provides reasonable assurance; a review provides limited assurance where applicable standards permit it. Agreed-upon procedures report procedures and findings without expressing an assurance opinion or conclusion. Identify the engagement before deciding what evidence and report are appropriate.
Worked example: A practitioner checks specified invoices against a grant's documented eligibility criteria and reports the exceptions found. This agreed-upon procedures work does not establish an opinion on overall grant compliance.
Mistake to avoid: Turning factual findings from agreed-upon procedures into an unsupported assurance conclusion.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
58. Preparation and compilation engagements
Financial statement preparation and compilation do not provide assurance. A compilation assists presentation and involves a compilation report; preparation is a separate service with its own applicable requirements. Neither involves the evidence work necessary for an audit or review. Understand the service boundaries before interpreting the accompanying communication.
Worked example: A lender receives compiled statements showing positive earnings. The compilation does not establish that the practitioner verified revenue or concluded that the statements are free of material misstatement.
Mistake to avoid: Interpreting a compilation report as a limited-assurance review conclusion.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
59. Communicating with those charged with governance
Governance communication helps oversight bodies understand relevant audit matters, including significant findings, important accounting judgments, difficulties, and disagreements. Distinguish those charged with governance from management, while recognizing that roles may overlap in smaller entities. Communication does not replace the evidence work, financial statement correction, or reporting response required.
Worked example: Management repeatedly delays providing valuation support. The auditor communicates the significant difficulty to the appropriate oversight body and separately evaluates its effect on evidence sufficiency and the report.
Mistake to avoid: Assuming that telling the audit committee resolves an outstanding evidence limitation.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
60. Other information accompanying audited statements
Information accompanying audited financial statements may fall outside the audit opinion. Under applicable standards, the auditor reads and considers relevant other information for material inconsistency or apparent material misstatement. Identifying a conflict calls for investigation and an appropriate response; it does not automatically extend audit assurance to the entire document.
Worked example: An annual report states that all debt was repaid, while the audited statements show substantial outstanding borrowings. The auditor investigates and seeks correction of the misleading statement.
Mistake to avoid: Assuming that publication beside audited statements means every narrative claim has been audited.
Source: Learn what to study for the CPA Exam | Resources | AICPA & CIMA
Official exam sources
Exam identity verified:
Browse all study guides