Auditors and Fraud Responsibilities

The main objective of this research is to carry out comparative studies of the fraud assessment techniques used in the USA under provisions of SAS no 99 and its UK/International equivalent ISA 240. To critically assess the similarities, evaluate the differences and further consider and contrasts the criticism of both audit regimes. Explore the audit expectation gap to critically examine whether the standards have helped reduce the audit expectation gap. The findings in this research will be reassuring to those involve in cross border business operations and advocates of a universal system that no matter whether using the U.S or UK/International guidance, the quality of audit will not be affected with respect to auditors responsibilities to fraud. It also shows the efforts the standard setters have made through SAS 99 and ISA 240 in reducing the expectation gap.

Autorentext

Bryant Akonjang is a chartered certified accountant with the Association of Chartered Certified Accountants (ACCA) in the United Kingdom. He has years of experience working as an accountant and auditor both in practice as well as corporations. He also has a Masters in Forensic Accounting from the University of Portsmouth - United Kingdom.