100% testing vs. sampling.


Statements made in a recent article, "Take My Manual Audit, Please" (JofA, June98, page 33), could set a dangerous precedent for auditors. The author wrote that "audit software lends itself to conducting 100% testing—not just sampling—of client data" and went on to describe the benefits of 100% testing.

Replacing sampling procedures with 100% testing of all data could raise expectations for the audit to a level that I think is unacceptable.

Published articles could be a source of authoritative support, and, if the author's views are followed, this could elevate testing standards to a level of practice that practitioners may not choose, or may be unable, to follow.

Our standard audit report tells the statement user, "An audit includes examining, on a test basis." The word test is intended to denote sampling rather than 100% testing. If the standards are to be changed, let the standard setters do it.

Charles Chazen, CPA
Los Angeles

SPONSORED REPORT

2018 financial reporting survey: Challenges and trends

Learn the top reporting challenges that emerged in a survey of more than 800 finance, accounting, and compliance professionals across the world, and compare them with your organization's obstacles.

PODCAST

How the skill set for today’s CFO is changing

Scott Simmons, a search expert for large-company CFOs, gives advice for the next generation of finance leaders and more, including which universities are regularly producing future CEOs and CFOs.