PRP Section 4800 Summary Review Memorandum
Transcription
PRP Section 4800 Summary Review Memorandum
00-7 MAR 2013 Summary Review Memorandum 4801 PRP Section 4800 Summary Review Memorandum Contents Section Paragraph 4800 Summary Review Memorandum Instructions ............................................................................................................................... Summary Review Memorandum .............................................................................................. Attachments 1. System Review Engagement Statistics Data Sheet .................................................... AICPA Peer Review Program Manual .01–.05 .06 .07 PRP §4800 4802 System Reviews 00-7 MAR 2013 Instructions .01 This section of the manual contains a summary review memorandum for System Reviews. The purpose of the summary review memorandum is to document (1) the planning of the review, (2) the scope of the work performed, (3) the support for the type of report issued, and (4) items communicated to senior management of the reviewed firm that were not deemed of sufficient significance to effect the report, including support for Findings for Further Consideration (FFC) forms. This documentation is required to enable the administering entity to exercise its oversight function in an effective and consistent manner. .02 The attached form, if properly completed, ordinarily should provide the documentation necessary to meet these objectives. If there is insufficient space to fully describe any matters, additional sheets should be used and attached to the form. .03 Questions regarding the use of this form or any other materials or about the review in general should be directed to the staff of the administering entity or to such other individuals the administering entity may identify for that purpose. .04 This form must be completed on all AICPA Peer Review Program (PRP) System Reviews and must be submitted to the administering entity, whether those reviews are conducted by a review team formed by a firm under review or by an approved association of CPA firms. .05 This form should be completed for System Reviews commencing on or after January 1, 2009. PRP §4800.01 Copyright © 2013, American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, Inc. Summary Review Memorandum 00-7 MAR 2013 4803 Firm Number Review Number .06 AICPA Peer Review Program SUMMARY REVIEW MEMORANDUM (for System Reviews commencing on or after January 1, 2009) Reviewed Firm’s Name Peer Review Year End Commencement of Review Exit Conference I. Description of Firm A. Personnel Profile (if the firm has more than one office, consider providing a breakdown by office): Office 1 Office 2 Office 3 Total Partners (or equivalent) Managers (or equivalent) Other Personnel1 Leased or Per Diem* B. Indicate extent of industry specializations, if any: C. Service arrangements, if any, with non-CPA owned entities with which the reviewed firm is closely aligned through common employment, leasing of employees, equipment, facilities, or other similar arrangements. II. Planning and Performing the Review A. Composition of Review Team: 1. 2. 3. Team Captain Firm Areas of Experience2 Position Team Member Firm Areas of Experience2 Position Team Member Firm Areas of Experience2 Position 1 The term personnel refers to all individuals who perform professional services for which the firm is responsible whether or not they are CPAs (previously referred to as professional staff) (Statement on Standards for Quality Control [SQCS] No. 8, A Firm's System of Quality Control [AICPA, Professional Standards, QC sec. 10]). * Leased and per diem staff are those who devote at least 25 percent of their time at the reviewed firm in performing audits, reviews, compilations, or other attest engagements or personnel who have the partner- or manager-level responsibility for the overall supervision or review of such engagements. 2 As it relates to the reviewed firm’s practice. AICPA Peer Review Program Manual PRP §4800.06 System Reviews 4804 00-7 MAR 2013 4. Specialist Position Firm 3 Areas of Experience If a specialist is used for review of SOC 1 or 2 engagements, was the specialist selected from the preapproved list or approved by the administering entity? 5. Specialist Firm Position Areas of Experience3 If a specialist is used for review of SOC 1 or 2 engagements, was the specialist selected from the preapproved list or approved by the administering entity? B. Describe basis for and degree of reliance, if any, on the firm’s inspection program (reliance should not be placed on the firm’s inspection program when one was not performed during the current year). Peer reviewers should refer to guidance on reducing scope included in Interpretations 45-1 and 2, and Supplemental Guidance (sec. 3100). If, after considering that guidance, the peer reviewer plans on significantly reducing the scope of the procedures they will be performing, he/she is required to inform AICPA technical staff during peer review planning. C. Was the firm previously reviewed? Yes No If “Yes,” indicate, based on your evaluation of the actions taken by the firm in response to the deficiencies/significant deficiencies, if any, in the prior report and findings reflected in the FFC form(s), whether such matters required additional emphasis in the current review and how that was done. D. If the firm has undergone a PCAOB inspection(s), the team captain should discuss with appropriate firm personnel the reports issued by the PCAOB, or in the absence of such reports, any findings that may have been communicated orally, and the firm’s corrective action plans. Indicate the effects, if any, the issues discussed could have on the planning and performance of procedures of the review. See Interpretation 40-1 for additional guidance. 3 As it relates to the reviewed firm’s practice. PRP §4800.06 Copyright © 2013, American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, Inc. 00-7 MAR 2013 Summary Review Memorandum 4805 E. Does the firm perform audits of companies with substantially all of their operations in another country (SEC and non-SEC)? Yes No If “Yes,” did the firm use outside firms or personnel to assist in performing the audit? Yes No If “Yes,” discuss how the reviewed firm ensured that the work performed by outside firms or personnel provided a reasonable basis for expressing an opinion on the financial statements. F. Describe any significant deviations from AICPA peer review questionnaires and checklists and explain the reason(s) for the deviations (if documentation of approval was required prior to utilization of materials, note that it was obtained): G. Were you requested not to review any engagements or certain aspects of functional areas? Yes No If “Yes,” did the firm submit a scope limitation waiver request to its administering entity, in accordance with Interpretation 55-1? Yes No If “No,” please contact the administering entity. If “Yes,” based on your review of the request, describe the reason for the request and whether you were satisfied as to the reason. Review the scope limitation waiver approval from the administering entity. If the appropriate approvals were not obtained, please contact the administering entity. If the administering entity, instead, determined that scope is limited due to circumstances beyond the firm’s control, describe the effect on the report to be issued. H. Describe the key elements of the system of quality control that reside outside the firm such as, but not limited to, associations, joint ventures, non-CPA owned entities, arrangements with other professionals outside the firm, and other structures and arrangements that affect the firm’s system of quality control for its accounting and auditing practice. AICPA Peer Review Program Manual PRP §4800.06 System Reviews 4806 00-7 MAR 2013 H1. Describe the review team’s consideration of the quality control materials (QCM) review report for each of the firm’s QCM providers that underwent a QCM review. Include the name of and report rating received by each provider and the degree of reliance placed on the results of each review to reduce control risk. Refer to Interpretation 42-2 for further guidance. H2. If the firm uses third-party developed QCM that were not subject to a QCM review, document the review team’s assessment of the design and implementation of the QCM. Refer to Interpretation 42-3 for further guidance. H3. Describe the review team’s assessment of the design and implementation of the firm’s internallydeveloped QCM as well as the firm’s policies and procedures to develop new QCM and maintain existing QCM (for example, make updates and revisions). Refer to Interpretation 42-3 for further guidance. I1. Describe your assessment of the inherent and control risk related to the reviewed firm’s accounting and auditing practice and its system of quality control. The assessment of these risks is qualitative and not quantitative. The assessment must be comprehensive and address the relevant inherent and control risk factors. The assessment should include consideration of the control risk associated with the firm’s quality control materials. Examples of other factors to consider are in interpretation 52-1. The assessment should include how the combined risks impacted detection risk and, therefore, the scope of review procedures. PRP §4800.06 Copyright © 2013, American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, Inc. 00-7 MAR 2013 AICPA Peer Review Program Manual Summary Review Memorandum 4807 PRP §4800.06 System Reviews 4808 00-7 MAR 2013 I2. Based on the preceding assessment, describe how you arrived at the office(s) and engagement(s) selected for review. Include a discussion of how the scope of the peer review covered a reasonable cross-section of the reviewed firm’s accounting and auditing practice, with greater emphasis on those engagements in the practice with a higher assessed level of peer review risk. I3. If the review was performed at a location other than the reviewed firm’s office, what factors were considered when performing the risk assessment? Date approval was granted from the Administering Entity: _____/_____/_____ J. Identify the level of service and industry of the engagement that the review team selected at the commencement of the review that was not provided to the firm in advance. Industry Level of Service Did the review team deviate from this requirement or revise the original engagement selection? Yes No If “Yes,” describe the changes. PRP §4800.06 Copyright © 2013, American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, Inc. 00-7 MAR 2013 III. Summary Review Memorandum 4809 Scope of Work Performed A. Accounting and Auditing Statistics:4 Offices Total Hrs. No. of Engs. Hrs. No. of Engs. Hrs. No. of Engs. Hrs. No. of Engs. Statements on Auditing Standards (SASs): Audits subject to Government Auditing Standards (GAS):5 Single Audit Act (A-133) engagements All others subject to GAS Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) Defined Contribution Plans— Limited and Full Scope (excluding 403(b) plans) Defined Contribution Plans— Limited and Full Scope (403(b) plans only) Defined Benefit Plans—Limited and Full Scope ERISA Health and Welfare Plans Employee Stock Ownership Plans (ESOP) Other employee benefit plans Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act (FDICIA)6 Entities subject to Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Independence Rules7 Carrying Broker-Dealers Non-Carrying Broker-Dealers Other Other SAS engagements Statements on Standards for Accounting and Review Services (SSARSs): Reviews Compilations with disclosures Compilations omit disclosures (continued) 4 The number of engagements should include each monthly, quarterly, and annual report issued separately. Includes only audits of entities subject to Government Auditing Standards (the Yellow Book), including audits subject to the Office of Management and Budget Circular A-133, “Audits of States, Local Governments, and Nonprofit Organizations”. 6 This only includes audits of federally insured depository institutions having total assets of $500 million or greater at the beginning of its fiscal year under Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991 (regulation 12 CFR Part 363.3 (a), in contrast to the $1 billion threshold referred to in regulation 12 CFR Part 363.3 (b)). 7 This only includes engagements that do not fall within the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board’s definition of a Securities and Exchange Commission issuer, including non-issuer brokers, dealers, and investment advisors. 5 AICPA Peer Review Program Manual PRP §4800.06 System Reviews 4810 00-7 MAR 2013 Offices Total Hrs. No. of Engs. Hrs. No. of Engs. Hrs. No. of Engs. Hrs. No. of Engs. Statements on Standards for Attestation Engagements (SSAEs): Financial Forecast and Projection—Examination Financial Forecast and Projection—Other Examinations of Service Organization Control (SOC) Reports SOC 1 Reports SOC 2 Reports SOC 3 Reports Examinations of Written Assertions Reviews of Written Assertions Agreed-upon procedures Other TOTAL PRP §4800.06 Copyright © 2013, American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, Inc. 00-7 MAR 2013 Summary Review Memorandum 4811 B. Engagements Reviewed:8 Offices Total No. of Hrs.9 Engs. Hrs. No. of Engs. Hrs. No. of Engs. Hrs. No. of Engs. Statements on Auditing Standards (SASs): Audits subject to Government Auditing Standards (GAS):10 Single Audit Act (A-133) engagements All others subject to GAS Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) Defined Contribution Plans— Limited and Full Scope (excluding 403(b) plans) Defined Contribution Plans— Limited and Full Scope (403(b) plans only) Defined Benefit Plans—Limited and Full Scope ERISA Health and Welfare Plans Employee Stock Ownership Plans (ESOP) Other employee benefit plans Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act (FDICIA)11 Entities subject to Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Independence Rules12 Carrying Broker-Dealers Non-Carrying Broker-Dealers Other Other SAS engagements Statements on Standards for Accounting and Review Services (SSARSs): Reviews Compilations with disclosures Compilations omit disclosures (continued) 8 See footnote 4. For engagements on which not all of the significant audit areas were reviewed, include the engagement hours that relate to the portion of the engagement that was reviewed and note the fact in the comment section. 9 10 11 12 See footnote 5. See footnote 6. See footnote 7. AICPA Peer Review Program Manual PRP §4800.06 4812 System Reviews 00-7 MAR 2013 Offices Total No. of Hrs.9 Engs. Hrs. No. of Engs. Hrs. No. of Engs. Hrs. No. of Engs. Statements on Standards for Attestation Engagements (SSAEs): Financial Forecast and Projection— Examination Financial Forecast and Projection— Other Examinations of Service Organization Control (SOC) Reports SOC 1 Reports SOC 2 Reports SOC 3 Reports Examinations of Written Assertions Reviews of Written Assertions Agreed-upon procedures Other TOTAL Percentage of Auditing and Accounting Practice Reviewed Comments: PRP §4800.06 Copyright © 2013, American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, Inc. Summary Review Memorandum 00-7 MAR 2013 IV. 4813 Overall Findings and Conclusions: A. Do you conclude that the firm’s system of quality control was suitably designed and complied with to provide the firm with reasonable assurance of performing and reporting in conformity with applicable professional standards in all material respects, with respect to the following elements of quality control? If the conclusion is “No” with respect to any element of quality control, complete the related “Reporting Implications” section. Conclusion Yes Reporting Implications Significant Deficiency13 Deficiency14 No14 1. Leadership responsibilities for quality within the firm (the “Tone at the Top”) 2. Relevant ethical requirements 3. Acceptance and continuance of client relationships and specific engagements 4. Human Resources 5. Engagement performance 6. Monitoring B. Did you consider issuing a different type of report other than the report that was issued? Yes No If “Yes,” describe such situation fully, including the basis for the conclusion. (See PRP § 4900 Team Captain Checklist, II question 16 about when to consult with the administering entity). 13 “Deficiencies” and “Significant Deficiencies” should be supported by Matters for Further Consideration forms, which are summarized on the Disposition of Matters for Further Consideration form. 14 Only a “No” answer requires responses regarding “Reporting Implications,” which should be further classified as either a “Deficiency” (resulting in a report type of pass with deficiencies) or a “Significant Deficiency” (resulting in a report type of fail). AICPA Peer Review Program Manual PRP §4800.06 System Reviews 4814 00-7 MAR 2013 C. Was the firm previously reviewed? Yes No If “Yes,” were any issues noted on the previous review repeated in the report or FFC forms on the current review? Yes No If “Yes,” please describe what the firm has done or plans to do (including timing) to prevent a recurrence of the issue(s) and whether you concur with the actions taken or planned. D. Were the issues noted in the firm’s internal monitoring procedures compared to the issues noted in the peer review? Yes No If “Yes,” please list any significant differences and the reasons therefore. If “No,” why not? PRP §4800.06 Copyright © 2013, American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, Inc. 00-7 MAR 2013 Summary Review Memorandum 4815 E. Does the reviewed firm have more than one office? Yes No If “Yes,” did the review team conclude that the degree of noncompliance at one or more offices was of such significance that a condition was created in which there was more than a remote possibility that the office(s) would not conform with professional standards on accounting and auditing engagements? Yes No If “Yes,” briefly describe the nature and extent of the deficiencies noted in the office(s). F. Describe the nature and extent of each issue to be discussed at the exit conference or communicated to senior management of the reviewed firm that was not deemed of sufficient significance to include on an MFC form, FFC form, or in the report, or other materials included elsewhere in the peer review working papers. AICPA Peer Review Program Manual PRP §4800.06 System Reviews 4816 00-7 MAR 2013 G. Did the review disclose any situations that led the reviewers to conclude that the financial statements did not conform in all material respects with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) (or, if applicable, a comprehensive basis of accounting other than GAAP) and the auditor’s or accountant’s report was not appropriately modified? [AU-C 560; ET 203] Yes No 15 If “Yes,” 1. Describe such situations fully. 2. Indicate whether the firm considered the situation. 3. Describe the actions the firm has taken or plans to take (including timing). 4. If the firm has taken the necessary actions, indicate whether you have reviewed documentation of such actions (for example, reissued report and financial statements or letter recalling previously issued reports) and whether the actions are appropriate. 5. If the firm has not taken the necessary actions, indicate whether you concur with its planned actions (including timing). 6. Provide specific details on the procedures performed to expand scope and the results of the procedures. 15 These situations should be reflected on the “System Review Engagement Statistics Data Sheet” in attachment 1, if applicable. Also, when there is a disagreement with the reviewed firm about these situations, the reviewers should consult with the administering entity or its designee. PRP §4800.06 Copyright © 2013, American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, Inc. Summary Review Memorandum 00-7 MAR 2013 7. 4817 Did this situation require the issuance of a report with a grade of pass with deficiency or fail, or result in an FFC form? Yes No If “No,” why not? H. Did the review disclose any situations that led the reviewers to conclude that the firm did not perform or report on an engagement in all material respects in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards and other applicable standards including, where applicable, Government Auditing Standards? [AU-C 585; ET 202] Yes No 16 If “Yes,” 16 1. Describe such situations fully. 2. Indicate whether the firm considered the situation. 3. Describe the actions the firm has taken or plans to take (including timing). 4. If the firm has performed the additional procedures necessary to support the previously issued opinion, indicate whether you have reviewed the documentation of the additional procedures and whether the conclusions reached are appropriate. 5. If the firm has not performed the necessary procedures, indicate whether you concur with the planned actions (including timing). See footnote 15. AICPA Peer Review Program Manual PRP §4800.06 System Reviews 4818 I. 17 00-7 MAR 2013 6. Provide specific details on the procedures performed to expand scope and the results of the procedures. 7. Did this situation require the issuance of a report with a grade of pass with deficiency or fail, or result in an FFC form? Yes No If “No,” why not? Did the review disclose any situations that led the reviewers to conclude that the firm did not perform or report on an engagement in all material respects in accordance with standards for accounting and review services? [ET 202] Yes No 17 If “Yes,” 1. Describe such situations fully. 2. Indicate whether the firm considered the situation. 3. Describe the actions the firm has taken or plans to take (including timing). 4. If the firm has completed the necessary actions, indicate whether you have reviewed documentation of such actions. See footnote 15. PRP §4800.06 Copyright © 2013, American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, Inc. Summary Review Memorandum 00-7 MAR 2013 J. 18 4819 5. If the firm has not yet taken the necessary actions, indicate whether you concur with the planned actions (including timing). 6. Provide specific details on the procedures performed to expand scope and the results of the procedures. 7. Did this situation require the issuance of a report with a grade of pass with deficiency or fail, or result in an FFC form? Yes No If “No,” why not? Did the review disclose any situations that led the reviewers to conclude that the firm did not perform or report on an engagement in all material respects in accordance with the standards for attestation No 18 engagements or any other standards not encompassed in items G, H, and I of this section? Yes If “Yes,” 1. Describe such situations fully. 2. Indicate whether the firm considered the situation. 3. Describe the actions the firm has taken or plans to take (including timing). See footnote 15. AICPA Peer Review Program Manual PRP §4800.06 System Reviews 4820 00-7 MAR 2013 4. If the firm has completed the necessary actions, indicate whether you have reviewed documentation of such actions. 5. If the firm has not taken the necessary actions, indicate whether you concur with its planned actions (including timing). 6. Provide specific details on the procedures performed to expand scope and the results of the procedures. 7. Did this situation require the issuance of a report with a grade of pass with deficiency or fail, or result in an FFC form? Yes No If “No,” why not? K. If any of the bolded questions in PRP Section 20,700 or 20,700A Employee Benefit Plan Audit Engagement Checklist, were answered “no,” but you were able to conclude that the firm performed or reported on that engagement in conformity with applicable professional standards in all material respects, please explain why. PRP §4800.06 Copyright © 2013, American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, Inc. 00-7 MAR 2013 Summary Review Memorandum 4821 L. If the firm conducted internal inspection procedures for the current year, did the reviewed firm’s inspection program identify any engagements on which the firm must consider taking action pursuant to the standards cited in items G, H, I, and J of this section? Yes No N/A If “Yes,” describe such instances fully, describe the actions the firm has taken or plans to take (including timing), and indicate whether you concur with that action.19 L1. Based on the findings, if any, documented on FFC form(s), do you believe the firm’s response is comprehensive, genuine, and feasible? Does the response describe how the firm intends to implement the reviewer’s recommendation (or alternative plan if the firm does not agree with the recommendation), the person(s) responsible for implementation, the timing of the implementation and, if applicable, additional procedures to ensure the finding is not repeated in the future. Yes No N/A L2. Based on the findings, if any, documented on FFC form(s), do you believe an implementation plan should be No N/A required of the firm by the report acceptance body? Yes 19 See footnote 15. AICPA Peer Review Program Manual PRP §4800.06 System Reviews 4822 00-7 MAR 2013 L3. Based on the deficiencies and significant deficiencies, if any, noted on the peer review and documented in the report, do you believe a corrective or monitoring action should be required of the firm by the report acceptance body? Yes No N/A If “Yes,” for either, or both items, please describe the plan you would recommend being requested, including timing, and how it integrates with the firm’s own planned actions (including timing). M. Did the team captain physically attend the exit conference? Yes No If “No,” please explain: N. Was the majority of time in the conduct of the review spent at the reviewed firm’s office? Yes If no, please explain: No Team Captain Date PRP §4800.06 Copyright © 2013, American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, Inc. Summary Review Memorandum 00-7 MAR 2013 Firm Number .07 I. 4823 Review Number ATTACHMENT 1 † SYSTEM REVIEW ENGAGEMENT STATISTICS DATA SHEET Engagement Statistics Total No. Reviewed Statements on Auditing Standards (SASs): Audits subject to Government Auditing Standards (GAS): Single Audit Act (A-133) engagements All others subject to GAS Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) Defined Contribution Plans – Limited and Full Scope (excluding 403(b) plans) Defined Contribution Plans – Limited and Full Scope (403(b) plans only) Defined Benefit Plans – Limited and Full Scope ERISA Health and Welfare Plans Employee Stock Ownership Plans (ESOP) Other employee benefit plans Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act (FDICIA) Entities subject to Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Independence Rules Carrying Broker-Dealers Non-Carrying Broker-Dealers Other Other SAS engagements Statements on Standards for Accounting and Review Services (SSARS): Reviews Compilations with disclosures Compilations omit disclosures Statements on Standards for Attestation Engagements (SSAEs): Financial Forecast and Projection— Examination Financial Forecast and Projection—Other Total No. Not Performed and/or Reported in Conformity w/ Appl. Prof. Standards in All Material Respects REASON CODES for engagements not performed and/or reported in conformity with applicable professional standards: GAA Non-GAAS and Non-GAAP GAP Non-GAAP GAS Non-GAAS SAR Non-SSARS ATT Non-SSAE ACTION CODES for engagements not performed and/or reported in conformity with applicable professional standards: 1. Report or financial statement recalled, revised and reissued. 2. Financial statements corrected or to be corrected in subsequent year (issuance of financial statement on subsequent period is imminent). 3. Omitted auditing procedure(s) performed or to be performed in subsequent engagement (performance of subsequent engagement is imminent). 4. Cause of independence impairment eliminated. 5. Unable to apply omitted procedures. 6. Notified parties that no reliance should be placed on the report issued. 7. Engagement letter to be prepared on subsequent engagements where a compilation report is not issued. 8. Engagement letter on subsequent engagements to include the required descriptions or statements, or additional matters, when applicable, where a compilation report is not issued. (continued) † The information reflected on this sheet should agree with the information reflected in items III.B and IV (G–J) of the Summary Review Memorandum. AICPA Peer Review Program Manual PRP §4800.07 System Reviews 4824 Total No. Reviewed 00-7 MAR 2013 Total No. Not Performed and/or Reported in Conformity w/ Appl. Prof. Standards in All Material Respects Examinations of Service Organization Control (SOC) Reports SOC 1 Reports SOC 2 Reports SOC 3 Reports Examinations of Written Assertions Reviews of Written Assertions Agreed-upon procedures Other TOTAL II. Reasons for engagements not performed and/or reported on in conformity with applicable professional standards in all material respects Type of engagement reviewed III. Comments Actions to be taken on engagements which are not performed and/or reported on in conformity with applicable professional standards in all material respects Type of engagement reviewed IV. Reason code Engagements excluded from review‡ Type of engagement reviewed Action code Comments Excluded reason code Comments EXCLUDED ENGAGEMENT REASON CODES 1. 2. 3. 4. Subject of litigation Subject of investigation by government agency Client imposed restrictions Other [The next page is 4851.] ‡ Attach scope limitation waiver, if applicable. PRP §4800.07 Copyright © 2013, American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, Inc.