Docsity
Docsity

Prepare for your exams
Prepare for your exams

Study with the several resources on Docsity


Earn points to download
Earn points to download

Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan


Guidelines and tips
Guidelines and tips

Resolving Ethical Dilemmas in Auditing: A Case Study on XY Ltd, Lecture notes of Auditing

A case study on ethical dilemmas faced by an auditor named joe in relation to xy ltd. The document identifies various threats to joe's objectivity and integrity, including self-interest, self-review, advocacy, intimidation, and familiarity. It applies a conceptual framework to evaluate the significance of each threat and proposes safeguards for joe to address the significant threats.

What you will learn

  • What are the ethical dilemmas faced by Joe in relation to XY Ltd?
  • What safeguards should Joe implement to address the significant threats?
  • How does the conceptual framework help evaluate the significance of each threat?

Typology: Lecture notes

2021/2022

Uploaded on 09/27/2022

kitriotak
kitriotak 🇮🇳

4.5

(13)

220 documents

1 / 3

Toggle sidebar

This page cannot be seen from the preview

Don't miss anything!

bg1
Resolving an ethical dilemma – suggested answers
There are a number of threats present.
First, there is a self
-
interest threat to Joe’s objectivity. This
is because Joe is reliant on the income from XY Ltd as his major client and thus, would not want to
do anything that could damage his relationship with them and compromise his revenue from them.
Second, there is a self
-
review threat which could impact on his integrity and his objectivity. That is,
Joe performs certain non-audit work and is asked to sell and promote the sale of shares of XY Ltd.
He is required to audit the sale of shares and some of the non-audit work that he did as part of the
external audit. Thus, in a sense, Joe would be auditing himself and his own work.
rd, there is an advocacy threat.
Selling and promoting the shares of his audit client would impair
his independence as he would have a vested interest in the company. A reasonable third party
would conclude that Joe is not independent of XY Ltd and thus his independence in appearance is
also impaired.
Fourth, there is an intimidation threat present. The board of XY Ltd are
threatening Joe by
potentially not renewing his contract.
And last, there is also a familiarity that since Joe has been the auditor for the past three years, he
may have developed personal relations with the client.
pf3

Partial preview of the text

Download Resolving Ethical Dilemmas in Auditing: A Case Study on XY Ltd and more Lecture notes Auditing in PDF only on Docsity!

Resolving an ethical dilemma – suggested answers There are a number of threats present. First, there is a self

  • interest threat to Joe’s objectivity. This is because Joe is reliant on the income from XY Ltd as his major client and thus, would not want todo anything that could damage his relationship with them and compromise his revenue from them. Second, there is a self - review threat which could impact on his integrity and his objectivity. That is, Joe performs certain non-audit work and is asked to sell and promote the sale of shares of XY Ltd.He is required to audit the sale of shares and some of the non-audit work that he did as part of theexternal audit. Thus, in a sense, Joe would be auditing himself and his own work. Thi rd, there is an advocacy threat. Selling and promoting the shares of his audit client would impair his independence as he would have a vested interest in the company. A reasonable third partywould conclude that Joe is not independent of XY Ltd and thus his independence in appearance isalso impaired. Fourth, there is an intimidation threat present. The board of XY Ltd are threatening Joe by potentially not renewing his contract. And last, there is also a familiarity that since Joe has been the auditor for the past three years, he may have developed personal relations with the client.

Applying step 2 of the conceptual framework, it is likely that Self

  • interest self
  • review and advocacy threats are evaluated as significant. This is because they affect more than one fundamental principle and the likelihood of the threats occurring are high. Intimidation threat is evaluated as less than significant. This is because it can be argued tha t the board did not intentionally attempt to intimidate Joe. Further, they indicated that, based on thesale of shares, they would ‘consider’ the renewal of his contract and did not explicitly indicate thatfailure to meet their share sale target would result in a ‘definite termination’ of future contracts. Familiarity threat in this example is evaluated as not significant. This is because it is common for auditors to audit their clients for a number of years. It is important to identify this as a potentialthreat and then to evaluate it every year that the audit is being done.