Belot Enterprises Case

895 Words4 Pages
Belot Enterprises Case 1. Auditor David Robinson’s suggested compromise on the review of the Belot’s interim financial report (second quarter-from April1 through June 30) is appropriate. Because Belot Company has been struggled to survive in a mature and intensely competitive industry for several years, and the company has planned to implement an organizational Nail the Number campaign from April1 through June 30 to boost its quarterly operating income by 100 percent so that Belot Company will not be eliminated by its parent company, Helterbrand. During those three months, Belot Company has made many changes on its operation activities, such as products line, sales program, cost-cutting initiatives, and its accounting measurement, etc. Belot’s accounting general manager, Zachariah Crabtree decided to change the accounting method from “conservatism” to “precise point estimate” to record the company’s major discretionary accruals during its second quarter financial report; therefore, the company operating income dramatically has been increased 140 percent higher than the second quarter of prior year. According to AU 230.05(Due Professional Care), an auditor should possess “the degree of skill commonly possessed” by other auditors and should exercise it with “reasonable care and diligence.” Furthermore, based on the statement of AS No. 11 (Consideration of Materiality in Planning and Performing an audit) paragraph 8, “the auditor should determine the amount or amounts of tolerable misstatement for purposes of assessing risks of material misstatement and planning and performing audit procedures at the account or disclosure level. The auditor should determine tolerable misstatement at an amount or amounts that reduce to an appropriately low level the probability that the total of uncorrected and undetected misstatements would result in material misstatement of the

More about Belot Enterprises Case

Open Document