CPA Quiz: Threats To Professional Skepticism
20 questions · exam conditions
0:00
Threats To Professional SkepticismQuestion 1 of 20

A firm is performing an audit of an issuer company. Management pressures the engagement team to meet an accelerated reporting deadline and suggests that, because internal audit tested controls, the external auditor should reduce substantive testing without further evaluation; the engagement team is considering accepting this to avoid missing the filing date. What action should the auditor take to mitigate this skepticism threat?

Accept internal audit's testing as sufficient and reduce substantive procedures, because deadline pressure is not a valid reason to expand testing
Maintain an objective evaluation by assessing the competence and objectivity of internal audit, performing necessary procedures in higher-risk areas, and resisting undue deadline pressure
Switch to AICPA audit standards for this engagement because they are more flexible about reliance on internal audit work
Document that management requested reduced testing and proceed, since documentation alone mitigates professional skepticism threats
← Back to quizzes

CPA Quiz

CPA Quiz: Threats To Professional Skepticism

Practice Threats To Professional Skepticism in CPA with focused quiz questions that help you check what you know, review explanations, and build confidence with test-style prompts.

What this quiz covers

This quiz focuses on Threats To Professional Skepticism, giving you a quick way to practice the rules, question types, and explanations that matter most for CPA.

How to use this quiz

Try each quiz question before looking at the correct answer. Use the explanations to review missed ideas, then come back to similar questions until the pattern feels familiar.

All questions

Question 1

A firm is performing an audit of an issuer company. Management pressures the engagement team to meet an accelerated reporting deadline and suggests that, because internal audit tested controls, the external auditor should reduce substantive testing without further evaluation; the engagement team is considering accepting this to avoid missing the filing date. What action should the auditor take to mitigate this skepticism threat?

  1. Accept internal audit's testing as sufficient and reduce substantive procedures, because deadline pressure is not a valid reason to expand testing
  2. Maintain an objective evaluation by assessing the competence and objectivity of internal audit, performing necessary procedures in higher-risk areas, and resisting undue deadline pressure (correct answer)
  3. Switch to AICPA audit standards for this engagement because they are more flexible about reliance on internal audit work
  4. Document that management requested reduced testing and proceed, since documentation alone mitigates professional skepticism threats
Explanation: This question tests threats to professional skepticism under PCAOB Auditing Standard 2301, which requires auditors to exercise due professional care and maintain skepticism despite external pressures. The key facts involve management exerting deadline pressure to reduce substantive testing by relying on internal audit without evaluation, potentially leading the engagement team to compromise objectivity. Choice B aligns with guidance by emphasizing the need to assess internal audit's competence and objectivity, perform necessary procedures in high-risk areas, and resist undue influence, thereby mitigating the threat as per AS 2301 and AS 2605. Choice A is incorrect because accepting unevaluated internal audit work succumbs to pressure and violates requirements to independently assess reliance under AS 2605. Choice C is incorrect as auditors cannot switch to AICPA standards for issuers, which must follow PCAOB rules; Choice D is wrong because mere documentation does not mitigate threats without substantive action, contrary to AS 1215. Auditors should apply a decision rule of evaluating pressures against standards for due care to preserve skepticism. This framework involves documenting threats and safeguards to ensure objective judgments in time-constrained environments.

Question 2

An auditor is conducting an audit of a nonissuer restaurant group. The engagement partner's adult child is employed by the client as a staff accountant and is responsible for preparing the monthly bank reconciliations that will be used as audit evidence for cash. Which situation presents a threat to professional skepticism?

  1. A close family relationship with an employee who prepares audit evidence in a significant area, increasing familiarity and bias risk (correct answer)
  2. The auditor's decision to perform surprise cash counts at certain locations
  3. The auditor's use of bank confirmations to verify cash balances
  4. The auditor's decision to update the risk assessment after performing preliminary analytical procedures
Explanation: This question tests the identification of threats to professional skepticism as outlined in the AICPA Code of Professional Conduct and AU-C Section 200, which emphasize maintaining a questioning mind and critical assessment of audit evidence. The key fact is the engagement partner's adult child being employed by the client in a role that prepares significant audit evidence, such as bank reconciliations for cash, creating a familiarity threat. Choice A correctly identifies this as a threat because close family relationships can increase bias risk, impairing the auditor's ability to objectively evaluate evidence in line with standards requiring independence in mental attitude. Choice B is incorrect because performing surprise cash counts enhances skepticism by introducing unpredictability and does not represent a threat under AU-C 240. Choice C is incorrect as using bank confirmations is a standard substantive procedure that supports skepticism, not threatens it, per AU-C 330; similarly, Choice D is incorrect because updating risk assessments after analytical procedures demonstrates ongoing professional judgment, aligning with AU-C 315 rather than posing a threat. Auditors should regularly evaluate personal relationships for familiarity threats to ensure skepticism remains unimpaired. Applying a framework of identifying self-interest, familiarity, and undue influence threats helps in maintaining objectivity across engagements.

Question 3

A practitioner is engaged to perform a review of a nonissuer not-for-profit organization that relies heavily on grant revenue with compliance requirements. The executive director insists the practitioner not contact grantors or request grant agreements, stating that "in a review you can't ask for that level of detail," and pushes for completion before the board meeting. Which situation presents a threat to professional skepticism?

  1. Management pressure and attempts to restrict access to relevant information supporting significant revenue recognition considerations (correct answer)
  2. The practitioner's performance of inquiry and analytical procedures as the primary review procedures
  3. The practitioner's decision to obtain management representations regarding completeness
  4. The practitioner's use of PCAOB AS 1215 documentation requirements because the entity receives federal grants
Explanation: This question tests the identification of threats to professional skepticism as outlined in the AICPA Code of Professional Conduct. The key facts include management's restriction on contacting grantors and accessing agreements amid deadline pressure, indicating an undue influence threat. Choice A is correct because limiting access to evidence for significant revenue can impair critical assessment in reviews under AR-C 90. Choice B is incorrect as inquiry and analytics are core review procedures without threatening skepticism; choice C is wrong because representations support, rather than compromise, skepticism. Choice D is incorrect since PCAOB AS 1215 applies to audits, not reviews of nonissuers with grants. Practitioners should challenge restrictions as threats and seek alternative evidence or consider scope limitations. Professional skepticism in reviews requires pursuing corroboration when management limits information, ensuring reliable conclusions.

Question 4

An issuer consumer products company is undergoing a financial statement audit under PCAOB standards. The audit committee emphasizes that the company will consider changing auditors if the audit fee increases, and management requests the auditor "avoid expanding testing" over a new rebate program with significant estimates. Which factor most impacts professional skepticism?

  1. Economic and client-retention pressure that may bias judgments about whether to expand procedures over a high-estimation area (correct answer)
  2. The auditor's use of confirmations, because confirmations inherently eliminate the need to consider management bias
  3. The company's status as an issuer, which shifts responsibility for skepticism to the audit committee rather than the auditor
  4. The existence of a rebate program, which is a routine transaction and therefore does not affect risk assessment or skepticism
Explanation: This question tests threats to professional skepticism from economic pressure and client retention concerns under PCAOB AS 2401. The audit committee's threat to change auditors over fee increases combined with management's request to limit testing creates a self-interest threat that could bias the auditor's judgment about the extent of procedures needed for a high-risk estimation area. This economic pressure may cause the auditor to rationalize accepting less evidence or avoiding necessary expanded procedures to maintain the client relationship. Option B is incorrect because confirmations don't eliminate the need to consider management bias - they address existence and accuracy but not valuation estimates. Option C is incorrect because issuer status increases rather than shifts the auditor's responsibility for maintaining skepticism. Option D is incorrect because rebate programs with significant estimates are not routine and require careful evaluation of management's assumptions and calculations. When facing economic pressures, auditors must resist compromising professional skepticism and ensure that business considerations do not influence professional judgments about the nature, timing, and extent of audit procedures.

Question 5

A firm is engaged to perform an audit of an issuer software company. The engagement partner has served the client for nine consecutive years, and management frequently references the partner's "deep understanding of our business" when disputing proposed audit adjustments. Which condition would most likely compromise the auditor's skepticism?

  1. Partner familiarity and potential complacency from a longstanding relationship with management (correct answer)
  2. The auditor's requirement to communicate critical audit matters in the auditor's report
  3. The audit team's use of specialists to test stock-based compensation valuation
  4. The auditor's decision to increase professional skepticism only when misstatements exceed performance materiality
Explanation: This question tests the identification of threats to professional skepticism as outlined in PCAOB standards. The key facts involve the partner's long tenure and management's references to it when disputing adjustments, creating a familiarity threat. Choice A is correct because longstanding relationships can lead to complacency and overreliance on management, impairing skepticism under PCAOB AS 2301. Choice B is incorrect as communicating critical audit matters is a PCAOB requirement that promotes transparency, not threatens skepticism; choice C is wrong because using specialists enhances audit quality without compromising skepticism. Choice D is incorrect since skepticism is required throughout, not just when misstatements exceed materiality. Auditors should monitor long-term engagements for familiarity threats and rotate personnel if necessary. Professional skepticism involves maintaining independence in mindset, regularly reassessing relationships to avoid undue trust in management.

Question 6

An auditor is performing an audit of a nonissuer healthcare clinic that has recently expanded rapidly and is experiencing cash flow constraints. Management pressures the auditor to issue the report before completing testing of related-party transactions, stating the clinic needs the audited statements to renew a line of credit. Which situation presents a threat to professional skepticism?

  1. The auditor plans to perform additional procedures over related-party transactions due to increased risk
  2. Management-imposed deadline pressure that could cause the auditor to curtail procedures in a higher-risk area (correct answer)
  3. The auditor's decision to confirm cash balances directly with financial institutions
  4. The auditor's use of a materiality threshold to scope audit procedures
Explanation: This question tests the identification of threats to professional skepticism as outlined in the AICPA Code of Professional Conduct. The key facts include management pressuring for early issuance before completing related-party testing due to credit needs, presenting an undue influence threat. Choice B is correct because deadline pressure may lead to curtailing procedures in risky areas, compromising objective evaluation under AICPA standards. Choice A is incorrect as additional procedures over related parties enhance skepticism, not threaten it; choice C is wrong because confirming cash is a standard substantive procedure without impacting skepticism. Choice D is incorrect since materiality thresholds are used in planning under AU-C 320 and do not pose threats. Auditors should identify deadline pressures as threats and extend procedures or apply safeguards as needed. Professional skepticism requires resisting pressures that could bias judgments, ensuring sufficient evidence is obtained in high-risk areas.

Question 7

A nonissuer agricultural cooperative is engaged for an examination-level attestation engagement under AICPA standards on compliance with a debt service coverage ratio covenant. The cooperative's chief executive officer insists the practitioner use management's covenant calculation worksheet without testing underlying data, citing "tight reporting deadlines to the bank." What action should the practitioner take to mitigate this skepticism threat?

  1. Accept the worksheet as sufficient evidence because the engagement is attestation and not an audit of financial statements
  2. Expand procedures to test the underlying data and assumptions supporting the covenant calculation and consider the implications of any scope limitation (correct answer)
  3. Request that the bank provide a waiver letter and then reduce testing because the covenant is no longer relevant
  4. Perform a PCAOB-required engagement quality review before deciding whether to test the worksheet inputs
Explanation: This question tests the practitioner's response to scope limitations and management pressure in attestation engagements under AT-C 205 and AT-C 315. Management's insistence on using their worksheet without allowing testing of underlying data represents both a scope limitation and a threat to professional skepticism, as the practitioner cannot obtain sufficient appropriate evidence to support their conclusion. In an examination engagement, the practitioner must obtain reasonable assurance, which requires testing the reliability and accuracy of information used, especially for a critical metric like debt service coverage. Option A is incorrect because examination engagements require the same level of evidence as audits, and accepting untested management information violates professional standards. Option C is incorrect because a waiver doesn't eliminate the need to test the calculation's accuracy, and reducing testing based on a waiver misunderstands the practitioner's responsibilities. Option D is incorrect because PCAOB requirements don't apply to nonissuer attestation engagements. When facing scope limitations or pressure to accept management assertions without corroboration, practitioners must either expand procedures to obtain sufficient evidence or consider the impact on their ability to issue an unmodified conclusion.

Question 8

A practitioner is performing an attestation engagement (examination) on a nonissuer company's prospective financial information included in a private placement memorandum. The engagement team is offered a success fee if the financing closes, and management emphasizes that an unfavorable conclusion would "kill the deal." Which condition would most likely compromise the practitioner's professional skepticism?

  1. A success fee tied to the transaction outcome that creates a self-interest threat to objective evaluation (correct answer)
  2. The practitioner's decision to obtain written representations about the assumptions used
  3. The practitioner's use of sensitivity analyses to evaluate the reasonableness of key assumptions
  4. The practitioner's application of PCAOB attestation standards because the memorandum may be read by potential investors
Explanation: This question tests the identification of threats to professional skepticism as outlined in the AICPA Code of Professional Conduct. The key facts involve a success fee and management's emphasis on deal impact, creating a self-interest threat. Choice A is correct because tying fees to outcomes can bias objective evaluation in attestations under AT-C standards. Choice B is incorrect as representations are standard without threatening skepticism; choice C is wrong because sensitivity analyses enhance reasonableness assessments. Choice D is incorrect since PCAOB applies to issuers, not nonissuer prospective information. Practitioners should avoid contingent fees that influence judgments to preserve skepticism. Professional skepticism in attestations requires mitigating self-interest threats through fee structures that maintain independence.

Question 9

An auditor is conducting an audit of an issuer financial services company with significant allowance for credit losses (current expected credit losses model). Management provides an overly optimistic macroeconomic forecast and emphasizes that a higher allowance would negatively affect executive compensation tied to earnings per share. Which condition would most likely compromise the auditor's skepticism?

  1. Management's incentive-based compensation tied to reported results that increases bias risk in significant estimates (correct answer)
  2. The auditor's use of a specialist to evaluate the reasonableness of the forecast assumptions
  3. The auditor's decision to compare forecast assumptions to external economic data
  4. The auditor's conclusion that skepticism is not required for estimates because they are inherently uncertain
Explanation: This question tests the identification of threats to professional skepticism as outlined in PCAOB standards. The key facts involve management's optimistic forecast affecting compensation, increasing bias risk in estimates. Choice A is correct because incentive ties can pressure auditors to accept biased estimates, compromising skepticism under PCAOB AS 2501. Choice B is incorrect as using specialists enhances objectivity without threatening skepticism; choice C is wrong because comparing to external data supports critical assessment. Choice D is incorrect since skepticism is essential for uncertain estimates. Auditors should identify incentive pressures as threats and apply heightened scrutiny to estimates. Professional skepticism requires evaluating management biases, especially in incentive-driven areas, through independent corroboration.

Question 10

An auditor is conducting an audit of a nonissuer energy trading company that enters into complex derivative contracts and uses hedge accounting. Management provides extensive spreadsheets supporting effectiveness testing and asks the auditor to accept them without recalculation to meet a tight reporting deadline. Which situation presents a threat to professional skepticism?

  1. Complex transactions requiring significant judgment, combined with pressure to reduce verification of management-prepared calculations (correct answer)
  2. The auditor's decision to involve a specialist to evaluate derivative valuation inputs
  3. The auditor's use of confirmations with counterparties for open derivative positions
  4. The auditor's documentation of the risk assessment for derivatives in the planning file
Explanation: This question tests the identification of threats to professional skepticism as outlined in the AICPA Code of Professional Conduct. The key facts involve complex derivatives and management requesting acceptance of spreadsheets without recalculation due to deadlines, indicating an undue influence threat. Choice A is correct because pressure to reduce verification in judgmental areas can compromise critical assessment under AU-C 500. Choice B is incorrect as involving specialists enhances evidence quality without threatening skepticism; choice C is wrong because confirmations are standard procedures that support skepticism. Choice D is incorrect since risk assessment documentation is required and does not pose a threat. Auditors should recognize pressure on complex transactions as threats and insist on corroborative procedures. Professional skepticism involves challenging management-provided evidence, especially in high-judgment areas, by seeking independent verification.

Question 11

An auditor is performing an audit of a nonissuer distributor. The audit manager previously served as the client's controller three years ago and maintains close personal friendships with current accounting staff; management requests that the manager lead the engagement due to "institutional knowledge." Which condition would most likely compromise the auditor's skepticism?

  1. Prior employment and close relationships with client personnel that may create familiarity and self-review concerns (correct answer)
  2. The auditor's decision to perform walkthroughs of significant transaction cycles
  3. The auditor's plan to use data analytics to identify unusual journal entries
  4. The auditor's decision to communicate internal control deficiencies to those charged with governance
Explanation: This question tests the identification of threats to professional skepticism as outlined in the AICPA Code of Professional Conduct. The key facts involve the manager's prior employment and friendships with client staff, with management requesting their leadership, presenting familiarity and self-review threats. Choice A is correct because such relationships can lead to bias and overreliance, compromising skepticism under AICPA ethics. Choice B is incorrect as walkthroughs are standard risk assessment procedures without threatening skepticism; choice C is wrong because data analytics enhance detection and support skepticism. Choice D is incorrect since communicating deficiencies is required under AU-C 265 and promotes accountability. Auditors should assess prior employment for threats and apply safeguards like independent oversight. Professional skepticism involves mitigating familiarity biases through rotation or reviews to ensure objective judgments.

Question 12

An auditor is engaged to perform an audit of a nonissuer real estate entity that records investment property at fair value using discounted cash flow models and unobservable inputs. Management insists the auditor use the company's internal valuation team's memo as sufficient appropriate evidence and discourages independent corroboration. Which situation presents a threat to professional skepticism?

  1. Management's attempt to limit corroboration of subjective fair value estimates supported primarily by internal evidence (correct answer)
  2. The auditor's plan to test the mathematical accuracy of the discounted cash flow model
  3. The auditor's selection of a specialist to assist with evaluating capitalization rates
  4. The auditor's decision to use performance materiality to determine the extent of testing
Explanation: This question tests the identification of threats to professional skepticism as outlined in the AICPA Code of Professional Conduct. The key facts include management's insistence on using internal memos without corroboration for subjective valuations, presenting an undue influence threat. Choice A is correct because limiting evidence in fair value areas can impair critical assessment under AU-C 540. Choice B is incorrect as testing accuracy enhances evidence without threatening skepticism; choice C is wrong because specialists support objective evaluation. Choice D is incorrect since materiality determines testing extent but does not pose a threat. Auditors should recognize evidence restrictions as threats and seek independent corroboration. Professional skepticism requires challenging internal evidence, especially in judgmental areas, by obtaining sufficient appropriate audit evidence.

Question 13

A nonissuer construction contractor is engaged for a financial statement audit under AICPA standards. During planning, the in-charge auditor learns their sibling has recently been hired as the client's new revenue accounting manager and will prepare the percentage-of-completion schedules used in the audit. Which situation presents a threat to professional skepticism?

  1. The in-charge auditor's close family relationship with a client employee responsible for significant accounting estimates used as audit evidence (correct answer)
  2. The contractor's use of percentage-of-completion accounting, because it is permitted under the applicable financial reporting framework
  3. The auditor's decision to involve a specialist to evaluate the contractor's project cost-to-complete assumptions
  4. The auditor's documentation of the relationship after fieldwork is completed, since skepticism is evaluated only at the reporting stage
Explanation: This question tests threats to professional skepticism arising from independence impairments as defined in the AICPA Code of Professional Conduct, specifically ET 1.210 regarding immediate family relationships. The in-charge auditor's sibling working as the revenue accounting manager creates a familiarity threat that could impair the auditor's ability to objectively evaluate the percentage-of-completion schedules, which are significant to the audit. This close family relationship with someone responsible for preparing key audit evidence compromises the auditor's ability to maintain professional skepticism when evaluating management's estimates and assertions. Option B is incorrect because the use of percentage-of-completion accounting itself is not a skepticism threat when properly applied under GAAP. Option C is incorrect because involving a specialist demonstrates appropriate skepticism, not a threat to it. Option D is incorrect because the timing of documentation is irrelevant - the relationship creates an immediate threat that must be addressed proactively, and skepticism is required throughout the audit, not just at reporting. Auditors must identify and address independence threats that could impair skepticism, including removing team members with prohibited relationships from areas where they would audit work prepared by immediate family members.

Question 14

An issuer financial services company is subject to a financial statement audit under PCAOB standards. The company holds a portfolio of Level 3 structured notes with limited observable inputs, and management uses an internally developed valuation model with significant unobservable assumptions. Which situation presents a threat to professional skepticism?

  1. The auditor's use of an auditor-employed specialist to assist in evaluating the valuation model and key assumptions
  2. Management's significant judgment in valuing Level 3 instruments using unobservable inputs, increasing susceptibility to bias and error (correct answer)
  3. The auditor's decision to confirm cash balances directly with financial institutions rather than relying on client-prepared reconciliations
  4. The auditor's reliance on internal control testing, which eliminates the need for substantive procedures over fair value measurements
Explanation: This question tests the identification of areas requiring heightened professional skepticism when auditing fair value measurements under PCAOB AS 2502. Management's use of significant judgment with unobservable Level 3 inputs creates substantial opportunities for bias and error, whether intentional or unintentional, requiring the auditor to apply enhanced skepticism. The lack of observable market data means the auditor cannot easily corroborate management's assumptions, increasing the risk that biased or aggressive assumptions could materially misstate the financial statements. Option A is incorrect because using an auditor's specialist demonstrates appropriate skepticism and helps address the valuation complexity. Option C is incorrect because confirming cash balances represents proper audit procedures and skepticism, not a threat. Option D is incorrect because internal control testing never eliminates the need for substantive procedures over significant estimates, and this statement reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of the relationship between controls and substantive testing. When auditing Level 3 fair value measurements, auditors must maintain heightened skepticism by rigorously challenging management's assumptions, considering alternative valuation approaches, and potentially engaging specialists to evaluate complex models.

Question 15

A nonissuer manufacturing company is undergoing a financial statement audit under AICPA standards. The engagement partner has audited the client for 12 consecutive years and frequently socializes with the chief financial officer, who asks the partner to "keep the audit smooth" because the company is negotiating a new bank covenant. Which condition would most likely compromise the auditor's professional skepticism?

  1. Rotating engagement staff annually while the engagement partner remains on the engagement without evaluating familiarity threats
  2. A longstanding personal relationship between the engagement partner and the chief financial officer that could create a familiarity bias (correct answer)
  3. Using substantive analytical procedures early in the audit to identify unexpected fluctuations and then designing follow-up tests
  4. Increasing the tolerable misstatement because the client's bank covenant is based on adjusted earnings rather than net income
Explanation: This question tests the identification of threats to professional skepticism arising from familiarity and self-interest as outlined in the AICPA Code of Professional Conduct. The longstanding personal relationship and frequent socializing between the engagement partner and CFO creates a familiarity threat that could impair the auditor's ability to maintain an objective, questioning mindset. Professional skepticism requires critical assessment of audit evidence and management assertions, which is compromised when personal relationships create unconscious bias or reluctance to challenge management. Option A is incorrect because rotating staff while keeping the same partner does not address the primary familiarity threat from the partner's relationship. Option C is incorrect because using analytical procedures with follow-up testing demonstrates appropriate skepticism, not a threat to it. Option D is incorrect because while increasing tolerable misstatement due to external pressure is inappropriate, the question asks for the condition that would 'most likely' compromise skepticism, and the personal relationship presents a more direct and pervasive threat. When evaluating threats to skepticism, auditors should assess whether personal relationships, financial interests, or other pressures could impair their ability to maintain a questioning mind and critically evaluate evidence throughout the engagement.

Question 16

A practitioner is performing an audit of a nonissuer manufacturer that recently implemented a new enterprise resource planning system and is facing lender pressure to maintain a minimum debt service coverage ratio. Management insists the audit be completed two weeks early to meet a bank reporting deadline and repeatedly discourages testing of manual journal entries recorded near year-end as "not necessary." Which condition would most likely compromise the auditor's professional skepticism?

  1. Management pressure to accelerate issuance while discouraging audit procedures over higher-risk journal entries (correct answer)
  2. The engagement team plans to increase sample sizes for revenue testing due to the new system implementation
  3. The auditor communicates the planned audit timeline to those charged with governance at the start of fieldwork
  4. The auditor applies PCAOB AS 1220 requirements because the client has a bank loan covenant
Explanation: This question tests the identification of threats to professional skepticism as outlined in the AICPA Code of Professional Conduct. The key facts involve management imposing an accelerated audit timeline and discouraging testing of higher-risk journal entries amid lender pressures, indicating an undue influence threat. Choice A is correct because such management pressure can compromise the auditor's ability to critically assess evidence and perform necessary procedures, aligning with AICPA guidance on maintaining skepticism. Choice B is incorrect because increasing sample sizes enhances audit procedures and does not threaten skepticism, while choice C is wrong as communicating timelines is a standard planning step under AU-C 260 without impacting skepticism. Choice D is incorrect because PCAOB AS 1220 applies to issuer audits, not nonissuers with bank covenants, and does not relate to skepticism threats here. Auditors should evaluate external pressures like deadlines as potential undue influence threats and apply safeguards such as additional review or consultation. Maintaining professional skepticism requires auditors to remain alert to conditions that may bias judgments, ensuring objective evaluation of audit evidence.

Question 17

A firm is performing an audit of a nonissuer logistics company. The engagement team is understaffed, and management repeatedly calls the audit partner to complain about "too many questions," implying the firm will lose the client if fieldwork is not completed by a fixed date. Based on the scenario, which factor most impacts professional skepticism?

  1. High-pressure deadline and client retention pressure that may bias judgments and reduce follow-up on contradictory evidence (correct answer)
  2. The auditor's decision to perform a fraud brainstorming session with the engagement team
  3. The auditor's use of confirmations for accounts receivable to obtain external evidence
  4. The auditor's determination that professional skepticism is only required for issuers under PCAOB standards
Explanation: This question tests the identification of threats to professional skepticism as outlined in the AICPA Code of Professional Conduct. The key facts include understaffing, management complaints, and retention threats, creating undue influence and self-interest threats. Choice A is correct because such pressures can bias judgments and reduce evidence pursuit under AU-C 230. Choice B is incorrect as fraud brainstorming enhances skepticism; choice C is wrong because confirmations provide reliable evidence. Choice D is incorrect since skepticism applies to all audits, not just issuers. Auditors should identify operational pressures as threats and apply safeguards like additional resources. Professional skepticism requires maintaining objectivity amid pressures, ensuring procedures are not curtailed inappropriately.

Question 18

An auditor is performing an audit of an issuer manufacturer with significant revenue recognized on long-term contracts and variable consideration. Management requests that the auditor accept management's contract summaries rather than inspecting underlying customer agreements, citing confidentiality and a tight filing deadline. What action should the auditor take to mitigate this skepticism threat?

  1. Accept the summaries as sufficient because management is responsible for the financial statements and the issuer is subject to regulatory oversight
  2. Insist on access to underlying agreements or perform alternative procedures to obtain sufficient appropriate evidence, and consider scope limitations if access is denied (correct answer)
  3. Delay evaluation of the restriction until after issuance and then document the limitation in the next year's planning file
  4. Apply AICPA review standards because they require fewer procedures when confidentiality concerns exist
Explanation: This question tests the identification of threats to professional skepticism as outlined in PCAOB standards. The key facts include management's request to accept summaries instead of agreements due to confidentiality and deadlines, posing an undue influence threat. Choice B is correct because insisting on access or alternatives mitigates scope limitations, aligning with PCAOB AS 2315 on evidence. Choice A is incorrect as accepting summaries without verification compromises skepticism despite oversight; choice C is wrong because evaluations must be timely. Choice D is incorrect since audit standards apply, not review standards. Auditors should address access restrictions promptly to ensure sufficient evidence. Professional skepticism involves resisting pressures to limit procedures, pursuing corroborative evidence to support conclusions.

Question 19

An auditor is performing an audit of an issuer bank with extensive use of third-party pricing services for investment securities. Management insists the auditor rely solely on the pricing service reports without evaluating the service's methodology or considering contradictory market data, citing time constraints for filing. Which situation presents a threat to professional skepticism?

  1. Pressure to accept evidence without evaluating reliability or addressing contradictory information in a high-estimation area (correct answer)
  2. The auditor's decision to test subsequent sales of securities to corroborate fair values
  3. The auditor's use of external confirmations with custodians for security positions
  4. The auditor's documentation of significant judgments in accordance with engagement documentation requirements
Explanation: This question tests the identification of threats to professional skepticism as outlined in PCAOB standards. The key facts involve management's insistence on relying solely on pricing reports without evaluation, due to filing constraints, indicating an undue influence threat. Choice A is correct because accepting evidence without assessing reliability compromises critical assessment under PCAOB AS 2501. Choice B is incorrect as testing subsequent sales corroborates values without threatening skepticism; choice C is wrong because confirmations enhance evidence quality. Choice D is incorrect since documentation is required and not a threat. Auditors should challenge unevaluated evidence as a threat and perform necessary assessments. Professional skepticism requires evaluating evidence reliability, especially in high-estimation areas, despite time pressures.

Question 20

A firm is performing an audit of an issuer biotech company. The firm's engagement acceptance partner proposes a fee arrangement where a portion of the audit fee is contingent on the client successfully completing an equity offering shortly after the audit report is issued. Based on the scenario, which factor most impacts professional skepticism?

  1. A contingent fee arrangement that creates a self-interest threat tied to a favorable audit outcome (correct answer)
  2. The client's heightened disclosure requirements due to being an issuer
  3. The auditor's use of interim testing to reduce year-end workload
  4. The auditor's choice to apply AICPA ethics rules because they are less restrictive for issuers
Explanation: This question tests the identification of threats to professional skepticism as outlined in PCAOB standards. The key facts include a contingent fee tied to the client's equity offering success, creating a self-interest threat. Choice A is correct because such arrangements can bias the auditor's judgments toward favorable outcomes, violating PCAOB ethics on independence. Choice B is incorrect as issuer disclosure requirements increase scrutiny but do not threaten skepticism; choice C is wrong because interim testing is an efficient approach without impacting skepticism. Choice D is incorrect since PCAOB rules are more restrictive for issuers, not AICPA. Auditors should avoid fee structures that link compensation to client outcomes to preserve objectivity. Professional skepticism requires evaluating financial incentives as threats and ensuring fees do not influence audit conclusions.