Revision of International Education Standard 8

Project Status

Active

Staff

David McPeak

Task Force

Eileen Walsh (Chair)

Greg Owens (Secretary)

Andrew Barry

Marcelo Canetti

Kazuo Hiramatsu

Koichi Inoue

Objective(s) of project

To improve the clarity and implementation of IES 8 by (1) applying the new IAESB drafting conventions, (2) updating the concepts and terminology to conform to the revised Framework for International Education Standards for Professional Accountants, and (3) clarifying issues resulting from changes in the environment of accounting education and the experience gained from implementation of the Standards by IFAC member bodies.

Scope

IES 8 shall be revised to assist IFAC member bodies in understanding their obligations and the learning and development requirements for area of competence requirements for audit professionals.

Background

IES 8 was approved for publication in 2006 and became effective July 1, 2008.

At its November 2006 meeting, the IAESB agreed to conduct a detailed review of existing IESs and the framework underpinning the IESs, to determine areas where the clarity of standards could be improved and/or additional guidance most usefully developed. The IAESB agreed to suspend any further work on redrafting or revising the IESs until the work on the Framework project was substantially complete.

At its October 2009 meeting the IAESB agreed the project direction to redraft and revise all eight IESs.

In December 2009 the IAESB published the new Framework for International Education Standards for Professional Accountants, which enhances the relevancy, consistency, and applicability of its publications to IFAC members. The Framework also includes an appendix, "IAESB Drafting Conventions," which will be used to increase the clarity of its standards.

Issues

Issues that this project will consider include:

IES 8 - Competence Requirements for Audit Professionals
(i)Revise the Standard’s use and interpretation of the following key definitions: Significant judgment, Audit professional, Education and development program, and Advanced level.
(ii) Clarify the Standard’s explanation surrounding:

• Precise roles in a transnational audit;
• Acceptance of the need for progression through a variety of roles, over time, whilst part of a larger team;
• How the shared responsibility between IFAC member bodies, firms and regulatory authorities should work in practice;
• The practical application of an IES that has requirements written primarily to individuals who are practicing members of Member Bodies; and

(iii) Revise the Standard's scope to clarify the coverage of the following key areas:

• Engagement Partner Competences
• Specific Industries
• Practical Experience

Task Force progress / Board discussions to date

IAESB Meetings:

March 2013: The IAESB received an Analysis of Respondents Comments document on the Exposure Draft of IES 8 and an Issues paper that identified the substantial issues as a result of comments from respondents. The IAESB agreed with task force proposals on: (1) continuing to develop IES 8 and to develop separately guidance to assist in the implementation of IES 8; (2) amending the Objective paragraph, but to indicate that the responsibility was shared and needed to have a broader perspective than IFAC member bodies which should be reflected in the scope of IES 8; (3) on retaining Table A of IES 8, but the column for proficiency level was not necessary and could be removed from Table A; (4) on continuing to focus IES 8 on the engagement partner rather than aspiring engagement partner and to remove the distinction between newly appointed and serving engagement partner; (5) on continuing to focus IES 8 only on the audit engagement of financial statements, but indicated that other IESs or guidance should cover areas such as assurance services; (6) on redrafting the explanatory material to make it clear that requirements apply to all engagement partners irrespective of size of practice or firm and that there is no difference in respect of competence areas or learning outcomes based on the size of practice of the engagement partner, just a difference in respect of depth of use depending on the nature of the engagement; and (7) withdrawing withdraw Requirement paragraph 19 of IES 8 .  The IAESB also requested that the mastery level be removed from Appendix 1 of IES 8. As a result the IAESB instructed the task force to consult with the CAG on these issues and then to develop a revised draft that included the suggestions of the IAESB and CAG.  

June 2012: The IAESB reviewed a revised draft of IES 8 and discussed task force’s proposals on drafting issues relating to the revised draft. The IAESB agreed with the task force’s proposals on (1) on a requirement for continuing professional development for those serving as engagement partners and on explanatory material which provides explanation on how serving engagement partners can participate in appropriate learning and development activities; (2) the definitions for aspiring engagement partner, partner authorization criteria, and engagement team. After a page-by-page review of the revised draft the IAESB approved the content of the Exposure Draft of IES 8 for a 120-day public exposure period ending on December 11^th, 2012.  IES 8, Professional Development for Engagement Partners Responsible for Audits of Financial Statements

March 2012: The IAESB reviewed a revised draft of IES 8 and discussed task force’s proposals on content issues relating to the revised draft. The IAESB agreed with the task force’s proposals on (1) the diagram of competence progression, (2) the structure and content of the competence matrix for the aspiring engagement partner, (3) the roles of Engagement Partners, Audit Teams and Sole Practitioners; (4) the requirement on professional development for engagement partners serving on complex audit engagements; and (5) the explanation of professional judgment and professional skepticism. IAESB members requested further clarification on the definitions of aspiring engagement partner, partner authorization, learning outcomes, and professional knowledge. The IAESB directed the task force to develop a revised version of IES 8 which includes any amendments resulting from the comments of the Board for discussion at its June 2012 meeting.

October 2011: The IAESB received a revised draft of the revised IES 8 and Issues paper which identified proposal for a requirement on competence matrix for the audit engagement partner. The IAESB discussed issues relating to: (1) clarifying the scope section; (2) clarifying the format and content of the competence framework; and (3) including competence requirements for complex, transnational and publicly traded entity audits. As a result of the IAESB discussion the Board instructed the task force to consult with the CAG on issues discussed by the IAESB and then to prepare a revised draft for IAESB discussion at the next meeting.

May 2011: The IAESB received a first draft of the revised IES 8 and Issues paper which identified proposal for a requirement on competence matrix for the audit engagement partner. The IAESB discussed issues relating to: the aspiring audit engagement partner; the need for bright lines; and how to address more complex audit engagements. As a result of the IAESB discussion, the Board instructed the task force to develop a proposed requirement that includes a presentation of competences to be associated with the development of audit engagement partner for discussion at the next meeting.

March 2011: The IAESB discussed content issues with the aim of developing 1st draft of IES 8. The IAESB agreed that the IAASB definition of an engagement partner was appropriate for IES 8, but the Standard needed to describe the progression of competence that occurs to become an engagement partner within a team environment.

November 2010: The IAESB reviewed and discussed the findings from the consultation paper on IES 8. The IAESB agreed to:

• direct the requirements of the proposed Standard to member bodies but to set out the implications of the requirements to other interested stakeholder groups through the Explanatory Materials section;
• focus the Standard's scope on the audit engagement of historical financial engagements;
• eliminate the term 'advanced level' as this implied some sort of prestige for auditors as compared to other accounting professionals; and
• direct the requirements of the proposed IES 8 do not go beyond the requirements inherent in the ISAs/ISQC1 and that the content of the proposed IES 8 is focused on 'education' principles common to all audit engagements;

May 2010: The IAESB received a report on the progress of the task force's deliberation of preliminary consultation findings and on the next steps for preparing an Issues paper to present at the November meeting.

February 2010: The IAESB identified key issues and questions for the public consultation paper on the revision of IES 8.

October 2009: The IAESB considered the project proposal and agreed a project direction for revising the eight International Education Standards.

June 2009: The IAESB identified key issues that should be covered in the project's proposal.

Next Steps

June 2013: The IAESB will receive and discuss issues and task force’s proposals as a result of the redrafting of IES 8.