Pathways Commission Report (July 2012)

The Pathways Commission Report (July 2012) summarizes two years of collective effort by over 50 individuals representing stakeholders in a broadly defined accounting profession – encompassing public and corporate accounting, education, and government. The impetus for this project came from the US Department of the Treasury’s Advisory Committee on the Auditing Profession (ACAP) report recommending that the American Accounting Association (AAA) and American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) study the possible future structure of higher education for the accounting profession.

With a mission to consider accounting education and the accounting profession in the broadest sense, the Commission’s recommendations are expansive in scope; they demonstrate the need to address difficult and persistent issues and impediments so that the discipline and profession of accounting can better meet the challenges and opportunities of the future.

The Future Outlook section of the Report (on page 133) concludes that “As accounting and business evolve, the required knowledge and skills will also change. Adoption of more principle-based standards will require more judgment. More judgment may lead to a wider variability in decisions and, possibly, increase the risk of litigation. At the same time, pressures to conform to economic forces may increase. Measurement issues and fair value calculations may enhance financial reporting, but they are also more subject to manipulation. Therefore, responsible judgment becomes even more important as does ethical behavior consistent with the accounting profession’s responsibilities.”

For more information, visit the Pathways Commission Homepage on the website of the American Accounting Association and read the highlights in the Indiana CPA Society blog posting “It Won’t Be Easy, But It’s Worth Doing” dated December 13, 2012.

Principles-Based Reasoning about Accounting Estimates

Wally Smieliauskas, PhD

According to the abstract, this research article proposes a key principle and related concepts for reasoning about accounting estimates. The reasoning is consistent with a principles-based professional judgment framework proposed by Ross Skinner and the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Scotland. The principle deals with reasonable ranges and related risk assessments in the audit of accounting estimates. It does so by using concepts first introduced by Boritz and Skinner and updates them for the requirements of CAS/ISA No. 540 and International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS).

The article identifies the conditions for the existence of the benchmark ranges proposed by Wally Smieliauskas in identifying fairly presented estimates. The need for a professional judgment framework and related guidance has been recognized recently by the International Federation of Accountants (IFAC), a 2010 EU Green Paper, and the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) as a result of challenges auditors have been facing in the current reporting environment. This recognition echoes calls first made by Ross Skinner in his pioneering 1995 article, and reinforced by the FASB/IASB 2006 proposal for principles-based accounting standards.

The full article “Principles-Based Reasoning about Accounting Estimates” by Wally Smieliauskas is available from the Wiley Online Library (published in AccountingPerspectives, Volume 11, Issue 4, pages 259–296, Winter 2012).

The Pros and Cons of Professional Scepticism

A recent article in GAA Accounting notes that “Professional scepticism is central to audit quality, but a balance must be struck between doubt and practicality.” Furthermore, “Professional scepticism is a skill considered by many as the cornerstone of audit quality.” In fact “A review of the International Standards on Auditing (ISAs) reveals the need for auditors to “exercise professional judgment” more than 200 times. To assist assurance providers to enhance their professional scepticism, the New Zealand Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (NZAuASB) is developing an Explanatory Guide which contains references to practical guidance on professional scepticism in an audit of financial statements.”

 

“The essence of scepticism is doubt, and that doubt stimulates informed challenge and inquiry. Doubts often arise from apparent conflicts between what drivers exist in the wider environment in which a client operates (i.e. macro level) and how clients believe they have performed within the context of that environment (i.e. micro level). Professional scepticism encourages a structured consideration of an alternative point of view.” “However, being too sceptical can be detrimental to the audit. Too much scepticism can lead to over-auditing, which can lead to problems meeting deadlines and with the overall economics of the audit engagement. Therefore, just as it is important to demonstrate scepticism, it is also important to ensure the level of scepticism is appropriate in the circumstances – achieving the right balance.”

 

The audit scepticism issue is not confined to New Zealand. In their recent auditor inspections, the UK Audit Inspection Unit (AIU) and the US Public Company Accountants Oversight Board (PCAOB) cited a lack of professional scepticism as a serious problem for auditors. A common argument as to why professional scepticism is not as prevalent as it should be is that the barriers are too high. A number of barriers have been identified internationally. Learn more by reading the article “The Pros and Cons of Professional Scepticism” by Zowie Murray, CA, Audit and Assurance Specialist, New Zealand Institute of Chartered Accountants (NZICA) Technical Services Team. In addition, see the previous posts on Professional Skepticism.