[Srednas12388]

Does anyone know if this question is wrong? I know your not allowed to issue a disclaimer of opinion or adverse opinion on the financial statements as a whole while issuing an unmodified opinion on any one of the financial statements. So I guess the financial statements “as a whole” doesnt mean one of the financial statements individually then? Or is this question just wrong?

I know its confusing but if you look at the question you can kinda see what im saying. Not that it will make a big difference on the test but this questions been annoying me cause it seems to directly contradict whats in one of the pass keys of the Becker review about piecemeal opinions.

Park, CPA, was engaged to audit the financial statements of Tech Co., a new client, for the year ended December 31, Year 3. Park obtained sufficient audit evidence for all of Tech’s financial statement items except Tech’s opening inventory. Due to inadequate financial records, Park could not verify Tech’s January 1, Year 3, inventory balances. Park’s opinion on Tech’s Year 3 financial statements most likely will be:

Balance sheet Income statement

a.Unmodified Adverse

b.Disclaimer Disclaimer

c.Unmodified Disclaimer

d.Disclaimer Adverse

Choice C is correct. Unmodified on Balance sheet and Disclaimer on income statement. I thought you couldnt issue the unmodified on the balance sheet cause of the disclaimer on the income statement? Or does financial statements as a whole mean you can still issue a disclaimer or adverse on one of the financial statements, and an unmodified on the other?

Anyone see what im sayin? Any help is appreciated. Got a 74 last time I took it and wanna make sure I dont have to retake this crap again.

FAR-84

AUD-74, Retaking

REG-

BEC-