Tuesday, February 26, 2013

Events or Conditions That May Cast Doubt about GOING CONCERN Assumption

ISA 570 regarding Going Concern deals with the auditor’s responsibilities in the audit of financial statements relating to management’s use of the going concern assumption in the preparation of the financial statements.

As stated in paragraph 2 of ISA 570, under the going concern assumption, an entity is viewed as continuing in business for the foreseeable future. General purpose financial statements are prepared on a going concern basis, unless management either intends to liquidate the entity or to cease operations, or has no realistic alternative but to do so. Special purpose financial statements may or may not be prepared in accordance with a financial reporting framework for which the going concern basis is relevant. When the use of the going concern assumption is appropriate, assets and liabilities are recorded on the basis that the entity will be able to realize its assets and discharge its liabilities in the normal course of business.

Auditor is required by ISA 570 to obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence about the appropriateness of management’s use of the going concern assumption in the preparation of the financial statements and to conclude whether there is a material uncertainty about the entity’s ability to continue as a going concern.

Therefore, it is necessary for the auditor to be able to identify events or conditions which may cast doubt about client’s ability to continue as a going concern.

Paragraph A2 of ISA 570 details several examples of events or conditions that, individually or collectively, may cast significant doubt about the going concern assumptions. Such listing is not all-inclusive nor does the existence of one ore more of the items always signify that a material uncertainty exists.


  • Net liability or net current liability position
  • Fixed-term borrowings approaching maturity without realistic prospects of renewal or repayment, or excessive reliance on short-term borrowings to finance long-term assets
  • Indications of withdrawal of financial support by creditors
  • Negative operating cash flows indicated by historical or prospective financial statements
  • Adverse key financial ratios
  • Substantial operating losses or significant deterioration in the value of asses used to generate cash flows
  • Arrears or discontinuance of dividends
  • Inability to pay creditors on due dates
  • Inability to comply with the terms of loan agreements
  • Change from credit to cash-on-delivery transactions with suppliers
  • Inability to obtain financing for essential new product development or other essential investments


  • Management intentions to liquidate the entity or to cease operations
  • Loss of key management without replacement
  • Loss of  a major market, key customer(s), franchise, license, or principal supplier(s)
  • Labor difficulties
  • Shortages of important supplies
  • Emergence of a highly successful competitor


  • Non-compliance with capital or other statutory requirements
  • Pending legal or regulatory proceedings against the entity that may, if successful, result in claims that the entity is unlikely to be able to satisfy
  • Changes in law or regulation or government policy expected to adversely affect the entity
  • Uninsured or underinsured catastrophes when they occur

The significance of such events or conditions often can be mitigated by other factors. For example, the effect of an entity being unable to make its normal debt repayments may be counter-balanced by management’s plans to maintain adequate cash flows by alternative means, such as by disposing of assets, rescheduling loan repayments, or obtaining additional capital. Similarly, the loss of a principal supplier may be mitigated by the availability of a suitable alternative source of supply (HRD).