FAE Advanced Audit elective

Torres999

Thats just simply untrue. Inventory systems is basic and comes up at Cap 2 level regularly

Dellboy2007

Torres999 wrote: »

Thats just simply untrue. Inventory systems is basic and comes up at Cap 2 level regularly

You're missing the point.

So should people in FS who are doing cap 2 go mad that inventory comes up?

Torres999

Yeah if you want I dont really care

Dellboy2007

Torres999 wrote: »

Yeah if you want I dont really care

Funny how you cared 2 minutes ago

Confused Accountant

Torres999 wrote: »

Thats just simply untrue. Inventory systems is basic and comes up at Cap 2 level regularly

I'd agree with this. Inventory etc. are basic areas of a basic company that even though we in FS don't see it in our day to day work it doesn't take a genius to know how they should work. Even working in FS, I'd be screwed if aircraft leasing came up because I don't work in that area (only a relatively small portion do) and they would have a way bigger advantage over everyone else than someone working in general audit has when it comes to something simple like inventory or debtors.

A lot of people had a big cry last year when they failed because it's so general audit focused but the reality is this isn't that big an advantage and the specific areas they ask are basic areas that we've seen in all exams to date!

Dellboy2007

I think people working in industry would have been able to look at that industry cycle last year and immediately see issues. So despite it being a "basic" area of auditing, there is still an advantage there. My point is that even if they examined an FS area once every couple of years it might balance it out a bit!

Confused Accountant

They're not gonna do any highly specialised areas such as funds or aircraft leasing any time soon. They'll stick with general areas like inventory, debtors, purchases etc. that FS people can practice through the numerous cases that deal with them areas. There's no workbook cases or anything that deal with investing activities in a fund so no way for prior practice!

20 Times 20 Times

Possibly a charity but apart from that I think it wil be the usual industry's !

Getting a bit apprehensive about this exam now at this stage ! Still 7 full days left to clear things off though !

Dellboy2007

Confused Accountant wrote: »

They're not gonna do any highly specialised areas such as funds or aircraft leasing any time soon. They'll stick with general areas like inventory, debtors, purchases etc. that FS people can practice through the numerous cases that deal with them areas. There's no workbook cases or anything that deal with investing activities in a fund so no way for prior practice!

Yeah that's a good point actuall, didn't think of that

AuditAgain

Yeah, I can see how it might be frustrating for FS people. But even though it's a large industry in Ireland, it is specialised. 'Industry' is a catch all term for 'normal' companies in a worldwide sense.

I don't think it's beyond coming up though. Financial advisors came up in 2013 and I think aircraft leasing has been on either CAP2 FR or core. Can anybody remember a question to do with aircrafts? Want to look at it now I'm paranoid it's been jinxed haha.

AuditAgain

Did the 2014 paper today under time constraints and think I possibly would have scrapped a pass.

Which isn't that great considering I sat that paper last year, analysed it at length afterwards, and have been through the mark scheme.

20 Times 20 Times

AuditAgain wrote: »

Did the 2014 paper today under time constraints and think I possibly would have scrapped a pass.

Which isn't that great considering I sat that paper last year, analysed it at length afterwards, and have been through the mark scheme.

Sitting it tomorrow , looking forward see how ip get on

Dellboy2007

20 Times 20 Times wrote: »

Sitting it tomorrow , looking forward see how ip get on

I think it's so different doing it without the pressure on, like I could barely read the paper last year after the 2 days of doing core.

Torres999

I did it again last week and actually could barely remember it from last year, it was all a blur day 3. I actually thought it was ok with no pressure on. Didnt have a clue what was going on with the group audit question last year but found it grand then last week. There just seems to be so much more in the audit elective compared with the other two and after 2 days of core its just a step too far

Confused Accountant

I think anyone repeating just audit elective this year is in a strong position. Thinking about it logically were graded on a curve (no offence meant) but we're not gonna have two days of core on our backs when we walk in. We have also devoted FAR more time to the elective this year compared to last year and will purely be in an audit headspace rather than an "I have to think of everything" headspace you need in core. Hopefully I don't jinx anything but I think things could be worse!

Torres999

Yeah I agree, my main worry was that I wouldn't be to speed with doing case studies like people doing the core but think i've done enough cases in the last 2/3 weeks now. Its always a worry for things like FR but even if worst case scenario and an obscure FR indicator comes up its 1/9 indicators.

If I think back to last year I used to do one elective day a week so probably looked it 10-12 times in total last year before the exam, I had never even heard of things like ISQC 1 and some other basics going in to the exam.

AuditAgain

Yeah I hope it works out that way. I definitely feel more confident with the material. I've been into that APB standards book more than I ever though I would. Used to think it was useless.

My worry though (can't help but worry) is that people sitting both are definitely more practiced at doing case studies under time pressure/spotting things in cases and also this year with the increased focus in FR they'll be stronger in that department too.

The truth is though if there wasn't only one sitting a year I'd feel fully confident. The fact that there's only one leaves me liable to panic/freak out.

20 Times 20 Times

Why is the pass rate for second time repeats not better then ?? If we have spent more time and less obstacles in our way ! I had this conversation with a friend and that's what I can't get my head around!

Confused Accountant

AuditAgain wrote: »

Yeah I hope it works out that way. I definitely feel more confident with the material. I've been into that APB standards book more than I ever though I would. Used to think it was useless.

My worry though (can't help but worry) is that people sitting both are definitely more practiced at doing case studies under time pressure/spotting things in cases and also this year with the increased focus in FR they'll be stronger in that department too.

The truth is though if there wasn't only one sitting a year I'd feel fully confident. The fact that there's only one leaves me liable to panic/freak out.

What do you find yourself using the standards book for? I find I have rarely used it up to now, more using the lecture notes and my own knowledge. The only time I really open the standards book is for something very specific I need to look up. I don't use it that much because I know they don't like transposing from standards.

Torres999

20 Times 20 Times wrote: »

Why is the pass rate for second time repeats not better then ?? If we have spent more time and less obstacles in our way ! I had this conversation with a friend and that's what I can't get my head around!

I purposely haven't looked at the pass rate for repeats just so I wouldn't get nervous, I'm hoping a lot for those repeats are also doing core

AuditAgain

Confused Accountant wrote: »

What do you find yourself using the standards book for? I find I have rarely used it up to now, more using the lecture notes and my own knowledge. The only time I really open the standards book is for something very specific I need to look up. I don't use it that much because I know they don't like transposing from standards.

I spent time going back over the standards by using the lecture notes and going to the paragraphs he'd referenced.

I think I found it helpful tbh. I just found his notes ****e without any elaboration.

AuditAgain

Did people use the text book for many topics? Find it good for anything in particular?

I used it last year but have avoided it this year.

20 Times 20 Times

AuditAgain wrote: »

Did people use the text book for many topics? Find it good for anything in particular?

I used it last year but have avoided it this year.

Kelly book or the Nolan book ??

I've bee. Through Kelly cover to cover now

Dellboy2007

Last year I think I wasted too much time looking for answers in books and notes that weren't there. When I saw what the solution was then I realised that I already knew it and was just not confident enough in putting the answer down without seeing it written somewhere else.
I know it's a cliche, but the answers really are in the case study.

This year I intend to keep notes to a minimum and try to maintain confidence to trust my judgement enough to write points down.

Regarding the pass rates for repeats, the institute will only publish the individual elective results on the day, these are not included in the board reports. From memory, the audit elective has been anything up to 80% (2013) but on the flip side id say on bad years it has been as low as 55-60% like last year or 2011.

AuditAgain

Two questions:

1. Extended audit reports - The changes to audit reports where they include the principle risks to the audit and the responses - Am I right that this isn't examinable?

2. Does anyone know where there are any decent notes are on the acceptance of assurance and assurance related engagements? This might be something really simple. It's something that's always confused me a bit.

Dellboy2007

AuditAgain wrote: »

Two questions:

1. Extended audit reports - The changes to audit reports where they include the principle risks to the audit and the responses - Am I right that this isn't examinable?

2. Does anyone know where there are any decent notes are on the acceptance of assurance and assurance related engagements? This might be something really simple. It's something that's always confused me a bit.

In relation to question 2, ISQC 1 covers all assurance engagements.

Sorry can't confirm answer for 1st but I hope not!

Torres999

I've never heard of the first thing regrading extended audit reports so I'd probably prefer its not examinable

AuditAgain wrote: »

Two questions:

1. Extended audit reports - The changes to audit reports where they include the principle risks to the audit and the responses - Am I right that this isn't examinable?

2. Does anyone know where there are any decent notes are on the acceptance of assurance and assurance related engagements? This might be something really simple. It's something that's always confused me a bit.

20 Times 20 Times

he hasn't asked a planning indicator since 2013 - surely he is going to this year

AuditAgain

Anyone know where there's a template/standard Planning Memo and/or Audit Strategy?

There was a question (maybe 2013) asking to provide feedback on the audit planning memo. The answer contained stuff that should be in a planning memo but wasn't. I think I would have missed out on quite a lot of that stuff.

AuditAgain

Dellboy2007 wrote: »

In relation to question 2, ISQC 1 covers all assurance engagements.

Sorry can't confirm answer for 1st but I hope not!

Can there ever be an Ethical (specifically ES5) conflict when approached about an assurance (or AUP/Compilation) engagement?

For most the objective is in the same line as an audit so I don't think there is. But is there ever a case where a client would ask you to do an engagement where you will end up auditing an area that you've already provided a report on (and would in appearance be less likely to challenge it), so you'd need to implement safeguards or not accept?

For example, if a large client asked us to provide an assurance report over their revenue figures for the first 9 months of the year (for whatever reason). In practice I'd be inclined to think that's a bad idea - as if we come along at the year end and notice a load of adjustments we're going to look bad (clearly there's an incentive not to challenge the revenue figure there). But in an exam scenario, for an assurance (or AUP/Compilation) engagement on an audit client, do we always accept?

This is definitely basic, but it's just something that's always confused me.