An attestation engagement produces an independent practitioner's report concerning subject matter for which another party has responsibility. The requested assurance, measurement responsibilities, subject matter, and applicable requirements determine the reporting form.
For a nonissuer, the practitioner identifies the service and subject matter before selecting the requirements governing the report.
- Standards: Statements on Standards for Attestation Engagements (SSAEs), issued by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA), govern the engagements illustrated here.
- Report: The report follows the common attestation requirements, the requirements for the selected service, and any applicable subject-specific provisions.
- Boundary: Historical financial statement reviews, interim reviews, and integrated reporting on internal control over financial reporting follow their respective engagement requirements.
For an issuer, the practitioner likewise identifies the service and subject matter before selecting the requirements governing the report.
- Standards: Issuer status alone does not convert an SSAE engagement into a financial statement audit under Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) standards.
- Report: An eligible operational engagement governed by SSAEs retains the applicable attestation form; engagements within PCAOB jurisdiction follow the relevant PCAOB requirements.
Common mistakes
- Wrong measurement owner. An examination opinion on a management-prepared schedule can remain assertion-based; the opinion's grammatical object does not assign measurement responsibility.
- Restriction treated as permission. Limiting a report to one lender does not permit a review of internal control or a financial projection.
- Assertion rules merged. A third-party refusal requires the review's specific disclosure and restriction analysis; removing the assertion requirement from direct examination does not remove representations.
Bottom line
- Both examination forms provide reasonable assurance; reviews provide limited assurance, and agreed-upon procedures provide findings without assurance.
- Assertion-based examinations rely on another party's measurement and assertion; direct examinations assign measurement to the practitioner while retaining another party's underlying responsibility.
- Criteria must be relevant, objective, measurable, complete, and separately available to intended users.
- Independence, ethics, competence, eligible subject matter, and sufficient appropriate evidence support issuance of the selected report.
Exam shortcut
The requested output identifies the starting branch: opinion, limited-assurance conclusion, or findings. Subject-specific requirements determine whether that service is eligible. Measurement responsibility distinguishes examination forms. An opinion naming the schedule does not independently establish a direct examination. “Records establish” identifies a departure; “records unavailable” identifies an evidence problem. The examination matrix applies after that distinction.
The full lesson (about 5,809 words, 39 min read) adds 4 worked examples, all 6 common mistakes, a self-check, free in the app.
Learning objectives
- IV.B1
Browse all free CPA AUD lessons or jump into free CPA AUD practice questions.