Audit Reports are categorized into four categories. Each type is briefly described as follows:
UNQUALIFIED OPINION. An unqualified opinion states that the financial statements are presented fairly in conformity with GAAP. However, in some instances, the standard unqualified report may be modified without affecting the unqualified opinion issued on the financial statements.
QUALIFIED OPINION. A qualified opinion is issued when the financial statements present the entity's financial position, results of operations, and cash flows in conformity with GAAP except for the matter of the qualification. Qualified opinions are issued, in some cases, when: (1) a scope limitation, or (2) a departure from GAAP exists.
ADVERSE OPINION. When issuing an adverse opinion, the auditor concludes that the financial statements do not present the entity's financial position, results of operations, and cash flows in conformity with GAAP. This type of opinion is only issued when the financial statements contain very material departures from GAAP.
DISCLAIMER OF OPINION. A disclaimer of opinion is issued when the auditor is unable to form an opinion on an entity's financial statements. A disclaimer may be issued in cases when: (1) the auditor is not independent with respect to the entity under audit, (2) a material scope limitation exists, or (3) a significant uncertainty exists.
SAS No. 58 suggests seven principal reasons why an independent auditor my depart from the wording of the standard report. These are:
AUDPORT: Expert System Evaluation
This knowledged-based system uses the criteria contained in Statement on Auditing Standards No. 58 to determine the type of audit opinion that should be rendered by an external auditor after conducting a financial audit under generally accepted auditing standards (GAAS). Assessment of the educational impact of the Audport expert system is described in a paper by L. Murphy Smith and R. Stephen McDuffie, "Impact of an Audit Reporting Expert System on Learning Performance: A Teaching Note" (forthcoming in Accounting Education). This Web-based HTM (hypertext markup language) approach was developed by Professors Smith and McDuffie, with assistance from Ms. Jennifer Calhoun.
Answer the questions that appear on the screen by clicking on the correct answer. Based upon your answers, the criteria contained in SAS No. 58 will be evaluated. As each criterion is evaluated you will be provided with information on the screen either that a particular type of audit opinion should be rendered by the auditor or that additional evaluation is necessary.
If the type of audit opinion to be rendered has been determined, you have completed the evaluation and can then quit the consultation. If additional evaluation is necessary to determine the type of audit opinion to render, this will be indicated to you and you will need to continue the consultation. The system only considers one audit problem for each consultation. However, many potential problems can be evaluated by the system.
Two sets of terms are important when using this system, material versus pervasive and significant versus severe. Pervasive is of more concern than material, and severe is of more concern than significant. For example, a departure from generally accepted accounting principles that is not immaterial and is not justified either has a material affect on the financial statements or a pervasive affect on the financial statements, but not both. Depending on the situation, either a qualified opinion or an adverse opinion will be rendered.
Significant and severe are used in describing a circumstance-imposed scope limitation. One or the other terms can be used to describe a situation but both terms can not be used to describe the same situation.
A list of the questions that make up the AUDPORT Web-based expert system are available for you to review under 'AUDPORT questions' below. At any time during the consultation you may quit the consultation and return to the AUDPORT homepage.