According to IIA guidance,which of the following is true about the supervising internal auditor's review notes? 1. They are discussed with management prior to finalizing the audit. 2. They may be…

Question

Options

• A1 and 3 only
• B1 and 4 only
• C2 and 3 only
• D2 and 4 only

• A
  2% (1)
• B
  2% (1)
• C
  5% (2)
• D
  90% (38)

Explanation

D (statements 2 and 4) is correct because supervisory review notes serve an internal quality control purpose between the supervisor and staff auditor - once the auditor corrects the working papers in response to those notes, the notes themselves have fulfilled their purpose and may be discarded. Additionally, review notes are not the evidentiary foundation for audit observations; the working papers themselves carry that burden, so review notes are not required to support reported observations.

Statement 1 is wrong because review notes are strictly an internal supervisory tool - they flow between supervisor and staff auditor, never to management. Management receives findings and conclusions, not the supervisor's internal markup of working papers.

Statement 3 is wrong because it reverses who creates review notes - it's the supervising auditor who writes them, not the staff auditor. Staff auditors create working papers to document their own fieldwork.

Memory tip: Think of review notes like a teacher's red-ink corrections on a student's draft essay - once the student revises the essay, the red-ink draft can be thrown away, and the teacher's comments never become part of the final published paper. That maps perfectly to statements 2 and 4.

No community discussion yet for this question.