Should only be made a to meet payments due from a

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: iod, normally no more than five years. This period is the period running from the date of the financial statements that the member first reported on in the capacity of engagement partner. This would include the period in which the member has been the engagement partner for the audit client prior to the listing of the audit client (if at all) or 142 By-Laws (On Professional Ethics, Conduct and Practice) of the Malaysian Institute of Accountants [Issued January 2007] APPENDICES APPENDIX IV the change in status of the audit client to that of a public interest entity, as the case may be. The Council has concluded that it is appropriate to allow a transitional period of two (2) years for paragraph 290.154 in so far as it relates to the engagement partner. Consequently, while the length of time the engagement partner has served the audit client in that capacity should be considered in determining when rotation should occur, the member may continue to serve as the engagement partner for two (2) additional years from 1 July 2004 for assurance engagements for which the financial period commences on or after this date, before rotating off the engagement. In such circumstances, the additional requirements in section 290 to apply equivalent safeguards in order to reduce any threats to an acceptable level should be followed. Transitional Provision 290-03 Serving as an Officer or in other capacity with the Assurance Client Paragraph 290.149 provides that if a partner or employee of the member firm serves as an officer or as a director on the board of an assurance client or as a liquidator, provisional liquidator, receiver, receiver and manager, special administrator or persons of like description, the self-review and self-interest threats created would be so significant no safeguard could reduce the threats to an acceptable level. In the case of an audit engagement, if a partner or employee of a network firm were to serve as an officer or as a director on the board of an audit client the threats created would be so significant no safeguard could reduce the threats to an acceptable level. Consequently, if such an individual were to accept such a position, the only course of action for the member firm is to refuse to perform, or to withdraw from the assurance engagement. The Council has concluded that where a partner or employee of the member firm has already been appointed as a liquidator, provisional liquidator, receiver, receiver and manager, special administrator or persons of like description of the assurance client prior to the date of implementation, it would be appropriate that paragraph 290.149 will only apply to assurance engagements for which the financial period commences on or after 1 July 2004. However, paragraph 290.149 will apply to all assurance engagements if a partner or employee of the member firm serves as an officer or as a director on the board of an assurance client whenever appointed as such, or if the partner or employee of the member firm...
View Full Document

This document was uploaded on 09/23/2013.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online