1 / 18

Assurance track session 6 An auditor’s perspective :

21st XBRL International Conference “One Language, Common Vision: Role of XBRL Technology in the Post Crisis Era 19-21 October 2010 Beijing, China. Assurance track session 6 An auditor’s perspective :

varian
Download Presentation

Assurance track session 6 An auditor’s perspective :

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. 21st XBRL International Conference“One Language, Common Vision: Role of XBRL Technology in the Post Crisis Era19-21 October 2010Beijing, China Assurance track session 6 Anauditor’sperspective: A case study – Setting marketexpectationson the quality of XBRL data in the Netherlands Prof. dr. Hans Verkruijsse Re RA

  2. Agenda • The Dutch SBR Project • Development • Architecture • Financial statement report • Assurance engagement • Auditobjectives • Assurance report • Conclusion • Limitation

  3. The Dutch SBR Project • Project started in 2004; • first version Dutch Taxonomy in 2006; • supporting communication infrastructure and second version end 2007; • facilitates the reporting of small, medium size and large companies to Tax Authorities, Chamber of Commerce, National Buro of Statistics in the Netherlands in 2007 • and Banks in 2009.

  4. The Dutch SBR Project • The Dutch Taxonomy is an ‘authoritative’ taxonomy: the governmental agencies involved have stated the taxonomy is compliant with Dutch legislation • Multilayered architecture: the top level of the Dutch Taxonomy are “Formsets”, which are the equivalent of paper based forms/reports

  5. The Dutch SBR Project Reports Smallcompany Financial Statement Largecompany Financial Statement Income Tax filing TAXONOMY LAYERS

  6. Multilayeredarchitecture Presentation Elements Labels References

  7. Financial statement report • Large Company Financial Statement Report(Commercieel Jaarrapport – Groot) • General information • Balance sheet • Income statement • Cash Flow statement • Accounting policies • Disclosures • Other Information 14 presentation views, Only presentation definitions No calculations at all

  8. Financial statement report • Contains only (but on the other hand also: all) reporting data elements required by Dutch Law • Discussion: • Is this a true and fair financialreportingframework? OR • Is this a compliancefinancialreportingframework?

  9. Our case study Reports Smallcompany Financial Statement Largecompany Financial Statement Income Tax filing TAXONOMY LAYERS

  10. Anassurance engagement • An appropriate subject matter is: • Identifiable, and capable of consistent evaluation or measurement against the identified criteria; and • Such that the information about it can be subjected to procedures for gathering sufficient appropriate evidence to support a reasonable assurance or limited assurance conclusion, as appropriate.

  11. Anassurance engagement • Characteristics of suitable criteria: • Relevant: contribute to conclusions • Complete: all relevant factors that could affect the conclusions • Reliable: allow reasonably consistent evaluation • Neutral: free from bias • Understandable: clear, comprehensive, and not subject to significantly different interpretations

  12. Anassurance engagement • The Large Company Financial Statement Report qualifies as “suitable criteria” (ISAE 3000) because of: • the unambiguous scope of this report: • reporting all data elements required by Dutch Law • reporting only data elements required by Dutch Law • being part of the Dutch Taxonomy • the ‘authoritative’ status of the Dutch Taxonomy and therefore this report

  13. Anassurance engagement • Scope of the assurance engagement based on our discussion about the framework is to examine the compliance to these criteria, not a ‘true and fair view’ statement

  14. Auditobjectives • Audit objectives regarding content: • Correct labeling/tagging of all data elements • Correct values of all data elements in the instance • The instance contains all mandatory information elements that are present in a companies paper based FS (completeness) • The instance does not contain data elements that are not present in (and worst-case contradictory to) a companies paper based FS

  15. Auditobjectives • Technical validation: • Use of correct base taxonomy (optionally taxonomy extensions) • Use of correct dimensions (period, currency, scenarios) • Compliance to XML, XBRL, FRIS standards

  16. Assurance report Inherent limitation: An important characteristic of XBRL is the fact that multiple presentations of the XBRL Instance documents are possible, without a single one presentation being the ‘normative’ or ‘default’ presentation. The ‘CommercieelJaarrapport’ report is only one of many possible presentations of the data contained in the instance document. Our examination and our conclusion are limited to this presentation.

  17. Assurance report Conclusion paragraph: Based on our examination, we conclude the data contained in the instance document ‘ABC 2010.xbrl’ are, in all material respects, in accordance with the criteria on which the ‘CommercieelJaarrapport – Groot’ report, which is part of the Dutch Taxonomy 2010.1, is based.

  18. Prof. dr.Hans Verkruijsse RE RAHuub Lucassen RE RA Ernst & Young Accountants LLP The Netherlands

More Related