[Anonymous]

I just blew this SIM on audit Evidence, thought i had this down. Question is what type of assertion is being tested.

SIM question was asking the following about what assertion is being tested (which is it Accuracy, Completeness, etc.)

Obtain Bank Confirmations and Prepare Reconciliations

Compare Managements Cash Budget with Year End Balance

Vouch a Sample of Cash Receipts to A/R and Customer Orders

Prepare a Proof of Cash

Now my method for doing this is usually:

Existence or Occurrence – Is it in the books and it shouldn’t be (start with the books and find the supporting)

Completeness – Is it not in the books and it should be (start with the supporting and go to the books)

Accuracy – Calculated right?

Valuation and Allocation: Is the derived value correct?

To me a bank rec. checks for both, what is and isn’t in the books, but if I had to pick one, you are starting with outside documentation (i.e., the bank confirmation) and reconciling to the book figure, so completeness makes more sense. I know what the book says when I looked it up (Existence), I’m just trying to find a way to think about it so I don’t make the same mistake.

Compare Mgt Cash Budget – What the, it’s an analytical procedure, it could indicate that things either are booked or aren’t booked. Answer is Existence. How so, any more than completeness???

Vouch a Sample of Cash Receipts – Yes I know it says vouch and I know that usually is existence. But cash receipts from where, on the bank statement, that’s what I assumed and if I’m going from deposits shown the bank statement to the books, that’s completeness.

Proof of Cash – Here same thing, a proof of cash is just like a bank rec with more analysis of the activity. As such it checks for both completeness and existence (and accuracy) as well. So why is the answer existence.