Safeguards
E N D
Presentation Transcript
Safeguards Gary Hannaford, Task Force Chair IESBA Meeting New York, USA November/ December, 2015
Summary of Revisions Made to Proposals • Overarching requirement to comply with the CF retained • Supported with explicit requirements for the PA to identify, evaluate and address threats to compliance to the fundamental principles • Refinements to the description of “reasonable and informed third party” • Improved, affirmative explanation of the term “acceptable level” • Clarification of what constitutes a safeguard • New requirement relating to the PA’s re-evaluation of threats
Application of the CF Reasonable and Informed Third Party Test (R120.4) New Information Re-evaluation of Threats (R120.9)
Reasonable and Informed Third Party (RITP) • Concept involves a hypothetical person • Person possess skills, knowledge and experience to objectively evaluate the PA’s judgments and conclusions • Ultimately, RITP evaluation is to determine whether the PA has complied with the fundamental principles (i.e., that the PA has eliminated threats or reduced them to an acceptable level) • RITP evaluation is based on information available to PA at the time of original evaluation of threats
Revised Definition of “Acceptable Level” • CAG and IESBA members expressed concerns with previously presented S100.15 • Revisions are responsive to suggestions made and are intended to clarify what is meant by “acceptable level” in an affirmative manner • An acceptable level is a level at which a reasonable and informed third party would likely conclude that the PA has complied with the fundamental principles • Questions have been raised about whether revised definition is appropriate as application material
Identifying and Evaluating Threats • Understand facts and circumstances, including professional activities, interests and relationships, that may might compromise compliance with the fundamental principles • Determine whether there are qualitative or quantitative factors (e.g., combined effect of multiple threats, if applicable) • Identify the conditions, policies and procedures that might impact the level of the threat • Are they functioning effectively?
Addressing Threats • A PA addresses threats by either: • Applying safeguards; or • Declining or discontinuing the specific professional activity or service involved (i.e., when safeguards are not available, or cannot be applied)
Revision to Proposed Description of Safeguards • Safeguards are actions, individually or in combination, that the PA takes to eliminate threats to compliance with the fundamental principles or reduce them to an acceptable level • Actions are safeguards when they are effective in eliminating threats or reducing them to an acceptable level, such that the PA complies with the fundamental principles
Features of Safeguards • Must be effective to address specific threats • May be an individual or a combination of specific actions • Effective when they eliminate or reduce the level of the threat such that the fundamental principles are complied with • PA needs to exercise professional judgement to determine whether an action is a safeguard
Re-evaluating Threats • Does not require the PA to do a radical re-think • Re-evaluation is necessary only if the PA becomes aware of new information that might impact whether a threat has been eliminated or reduced to an acceptable level • Facts and circumstances might change over time • New information about threats might become available • Appropriateness of safeguards might change • PA should remain alert throughout the professional activity or service in order to identify such changes
Application of CF for PA in Public Practice • Stronger linkage and improved alignment between S120 that applies to all PAs and S300 that applies to PAs in public practice • New requirement in S300 that emphasizes the PA’s responsibility to comply with each of the fundamental principles and apply the CF set out in S120 • New introductory material to clarify how the CF set out in S120 applies to PAs in public practice • Application material builds on, but does not repeat the material in S120
Matters for Further Consideration – Phase II • Revision of safeguards that pertain to NAS in extant S290 of the Code • Consequential amendments pertaining to safeguards • Documentation requirements related to safeguards, if deemed necessary, and whether there is a need for further alignment to ISA 220