Omitted Audit Procedure Discovered After the Report Date
Finding an omitted procedure after issuing the report does not automatically mean the report was wrong, but the auditor must evaluate whether the missing work could affect the opinion.
Initial evaluation
The auditor considers the significance of the omitted procedure and whether other audit procedures already performed provide sufficient appropriate evidence for the relevant assertion.
Additional work
If the existing evidence is not enough, the auditor may need to perform the omitted procedure or an appropriate alternative procedure.
Potential reporting consequence
If the new work reveals information that would have affected the report, the auditor evaluates the required steps under the subsequent-discovery guidance.
Exam strategy
Do not jump straight to reissuing the report. First determine whether the omitted procedure was important and whether sufficient evidence already exists.
The takeaway
An omitted procedure triggers an evidence evaluation first; further work and reporting action depend on whether the omission could have affected the audit opinion.
Related Summit resources
FAQ
Does every omitted procedure require a new report?
No.
Can other evidence make the omitted step unnecessary?
Potentially, yes.
What is the first question?
Whether sufficient appropriate evidence already supports the relevant assertion.