Chapter 2 Organization and Structure of the Auditing Profess(19)

蒙特马利审计2-2

Commission has, however, adopted the general policy of relying on the public accounting profession to establish auditing standards, largely because of the profession's willingness to address issues the SEC deems significant. The policy stated by the Commission in 1940 in Accounting Series Release No. 19 continues to be effective.

Until experience should prove the contrary, we feel that this program is preferable to its alternative-the detailed prescription of the scope of and procedures to be followed in the audit for the various types of issuers of securities who file statements with

us-and will allow for further consideration of varying audit procedures and for the

development of different treatment for specific types of issuers.

This is not to suggest that the SEC has not or will not influence the development of auditing standards. Indeed, it has done so on several occasions and is likely to continue doing so. That influence takes essentially two forms: stimulating the ASB to issue a pronouncement when the Commission believes one is needed (as occurred with , Review of Interim

Financial Information) and informing the ASB of its views during the standard-setting process. The ASB must continually acknowledge the presence of the SEC throughout its deliberations, but must not sacrifice the independence and objectivity that are essential to its

standard-setting function.

Despite numerous opportunities to interpret auditing standards when auditors have been the subject of litigation, only rarely have the courts failed to apply the profession's own auditing standards, and then it was primarily in areas involving reporting standards. Conformity with promulgated professional auditing standards has generally been an effective defense for auditors.

(d) Standards for Internal Auditing

The Institute of Internal Auditors in 1978 adopted a series of Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing. Those standards, which are reproduced in Figure 2.2, address the independence of internal auditors, their professional proficiency, the scope and

performance of their work, and the management of internal auditing departments. The IIA standards differ somewhat in their philosophy from the AICPA standards for external auditors in that the former represent the practice of internal auditing as it should be, whereas to a large extent SASs represent the Auditing Standards Board's view of the consensus among practitioners-what is "generally accepted." That difference should not be exaggerated, however; the IIA standards are also a consensus, but of the best of practice rather than of what is minimally acceptable. The IIA periodically issues Statements on Internal Auditing Standards to provide guidance on issues of interest to internal auditors.

Figure 2.2 Summary of General and Specific Standards for the Professional Practice of

Internal Auditing

100 INDEPENDENCE-Internal auditors should be independent of