ISA 600R: En konsekvensanalyse af revisors planlægning af en koncernrevision ved implementeringen af den nye ISA 600R

Philip Overgaard

Student thesis: Master thesis


Even though group audits generally are some of the most complicated audits, there has never before been an international audit standard on the subject. Back in time, IAASB issued the old ISA 600 regarding the use of other auditor’s work, but this standard did not consider the entire group audit from acceptance to closing procedures. The work process for the new ISA 600R began back in 2002, and actually started out as an update‐project of the old ISA 600 in connection with IAASB’s Clarity‐project. The Clarityproject involved the revision and redrafting of a wide variety of ISA’s. But with the ISA 600‐ project IAASB soon realized that 9 out 10 times the standard was used in connection with group audits. At the same time both authorities and other organizations began to ask for a specific set of rules for group audits, so the update‐project evolved to a complete revision and redrafting of the old standard. During the entire project IAASB issued a total of three exposure drafts, and it took five years before the final standard was released in October 2007, with effect for accounting periods starting on December 15th 2009 or after. The new standard summarizes the entire group audit and the specific requirements needed in order to sign off on the final group figures. Specifically, the standard emphasizes the focus needed on group wide controls, including the consolidation process. The standard also issues a risk‐based approach to the group audit, in close relation to the risk‐related standards IAASB has also issued. There seems to be intentions from IAASB to have the group auditor see the group as a whole and try to focus the resources on where the risks are. The standard also asks the group auditor to pay close attention to the component auditor, both in relation to accessing the underlying documentation and evaluating the component auditor’s competences. This is done because the IAASB whishes for the group auditor to be involved in the audit of the components, and not only be involved at group level. Finally, there are also some specific requirements to the calculation of the materiality level, and a few other specific documentation needs. If we compare the above topics to what is done in real life regarding the audit of groups, it becomes clear that the auditor has a pretty good grip on what constitutes a good group audit. It actually seems like there will be very few changes in how the group audits are performed; since they have already incorporated many of the requirements beforehand in their group audits back in time.

EducationsMSc in Auditing, (Graduate Programme) Final Thesis
Publication date2010
Number of pages114