1143 Documenting significant matters and related significant professional judgments
Jun-2018

Overview

This section explains how to

  • document a significant matter,
  • document information that is inconsistent with conclusions, and
  • document the review of significant matters.

OAG Policy

Significant matters arising during the audit, the conclusions reached thereon, and significant professional judgments made in reaching those conclusions shall be documented. [Nov-2011]

The engagement leader shall ensure all significant matters have been identified and documented appropriately and the matters have been adequately resolved and reviewed on or before the date of the assurance engagement report. This shall include how the auditor addressed any inconsistency identified with the auditor’s final conclusion regarding significant matters. [Nov-2011]

OAG Guidance

The concept of significant matters is recognized in other Canadian assurance standards, most notably in Canadian Standard on Assurance Engagements (CSAE) 3001 Direct Engagements, as an area of focus in Review and Engagement Quality Review. CAS 230—Audit Documentation has been referred to for the principles and guidance on documenting significant matters and related significant professional judgments for all assurance engagements conducted by the Office. The requirements and application guidance found in CAS may be viewed by clicking the “more” feature displayed in the standards information above.

Documenting a significant matter

Audit teams include the following in the documentation to the extent applicable:

  • description of the matter;

  • background facts and circumstances;

  • evidence obtained, including supporting and opposing evidence, and links to other more detailed documentation on file as appropriate;

  • technical references and analysis, including any implication(s);

  • results of consultations with others (as agreed with those consulted) and, if applicable, any significant alternative views or positions that were discussed and the rationale for rejecting them (OAG Audit 3081 Consultations);

  • record of discussion with management and others, including when and with whom the matter was discussed (OAG Audit 1142 and OAG Audit 1112 provide further guidance on documentation and retention of substantive communications);

  • final conclusions reached, the basis for them, and significant professional judgments made in reaching the conclusions, including how the team has addressed any significant information or evidence obtained that contradicts or is inconsistent with the final conclusion (Documenting information inconsistent with conclusions below provides further guidance); and

  • review by the engagement leader, and quality reviewer (if appointed) before the date of the assurance engagement report.

Where a consultation has occurred, the documentation of that consultation will contribute to the required significant matter documentation (OAG Audit 3081 Consultations).

The team may provide evidence of consultation on significant matters by recording the matters discussed and conclusions in the audit file by using the template (preferred option) or by copying into the file some documentation prepared by the party consulted. The Office would ordinarily exclude from audit documentation notes that reflect incomplete or preliminary thinking and previous copies of documents corrected for typographical or other errors.

When determining the nature and extent of the documentation needed for a significant matter, teams consider the general guidance contained in OAG Audit 1141. By their very nature, significant matters will generally require more robust documentation than matters of less significance, both to support the auditors’ work and to enable effective review and supervision. Teams must pay particular attention to the need to retain copies of entity documents and files related to significant matters (e.g., cash flow projections in going concern situations). If there is uncertainty as to the need for more documentation with regard to a significant matter, it is generally better to be conservative and include the documentation in question. Discussion within the team of the nature and extent of significant matter documentation helps determine an effective and efficient approach.

Documenting information inconsistent with conclusions

Teams should not exclude from the documentation information that is inconsistent with final conclusions. Information that was preliminary, inaccurate, or that has been superseded is not considered inconsistent.

Review of significant matters

Before the assurance engagement report is dated, the engagement leader reviews all significant matters. The engagement leader reviews the matters to be satisfied that

  • sufficient appropriate evidence has been obtained,
  • appropriate discussions have been held,
  • conclusions reached are consistent with the work done, and
  • the audit report is appropriate and can be dated.

CAS 230—Audit Documentation and CSAE 3001—Direct Engagements allows changes that are administrative in nature to be made to the documentation after the report issue date. This may include the completion of the documentation of evidence relating to a significant matter, as long as the evidence was obtained, discussed, and agreed before the report was issued. OAG Audit 1171 provides further guidance on documenting evidence after the audit report date.