Ellie Enterprises - Deloitte Audit Case
Alternative Investments
Among the five funds, three of the funds, Cloudy Retirement 500 Index, Cloudy High-Yield Hedge Strategies, and Cloudy Real Estate All starts, are alternative investments. Those three funds, as the case states, are not registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940 or under the Securities Act of 1933. Thus, they are not offered to the investing public or are not been required to offer significant information to public. Moreover, the investment product held by Cloudy High-Yield Hedge Strategies is hedge fund. It is not traditional investment, such as stock or bonds, and is difficult to determine the current market value.
Existence of the investments
The confirmation did not provide sufficient competent audit evidences to support the existence of the investments; therefore, the engagement team must perform additional procedures. AU Session 332 states, “Confirmation of the holdings on a security-by-security basis typically would constitute adequate audit evidence with respect to the existence assertion.” The confirmation Union provided, which is on fund-by-fund basis, is not detail enough to typically be considered as adequate audit evidence. Moreover, the audited financial statement of the alternative investment, which could provide significant audit evidence, is not available before the issuance date of the auditors’ report on Ellie’s consolidated financial statements. This fact further proves that the engagement team needs to conduct substantive procedures.
To assess the existence of the investments, following procedures can be performed. First, the engagement team can request transactions involved in each five of funds during the funds’ fiscal years. Actual transactions prove that Ellie’s investments have been held in those five different funds. Second, as the case states, the Committee periodically review plan performance and assets allocation. Therefore, the Committee must kept reports and memos regarding their plan
Among the five funds, three of the funds, Cloudy Retirement 500 Index, Cloudy High-Yield Hedge Strategies, and Cloudy Real Estate All starts, are alternative investments. Those three funds, as the case states, are not registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940 or under the Securities Act of 1933. Thus, they are not offered to the investing public or are not been required to offer significant information to public. Moreover, the investment product held by Cloudy High-Yield Hedge Strategies is hedge fund. It is not traditional investment, such as stock or bonds, and is difficult to determine the current market value.
Existence of the investments
The confirmation did not provide sufficient competent audit evidences to support the existence of the investments; therefore, the engagement team must perform additional procedures. AU Session 332 states, “Confirmation of the holdings on a security-by-security basis typically would constitute adequate audit evidence with respect to the existence assertion.” The confirmation Union provided, which is on fund-by-fund basis, is not detail enough to typically be considered as adequate audit evidence. Moreover, the audited financial statement of the alternative investment, which could provide significant audit evidence, is not available before the issuance date of the auditors’ report on Ellie’s consolidated financial statements. This fact further proves that the engagement team needs to conduct substantive procedures.
To assess the existence of the investments, following procedures can be performed. First, the engagement team can request transactions involved in each five of funds during the funds’ fiscal years. Actual transactions prove that Ellie’s investments have been held in those five different funds. Second, as the case states, the Committee periodically review plan performance and assets allocation. Therefore, the Committee must kept reports and memos regarding their plan