Free Essay: Arguments For and Against Insisting That Some Construction Costs Be Expensed

(a) Arguments for Auditors Insisting that some Portion of Construction Costs be Expensed:

The idea that an asset ought not to be conveyed at a value more prominent than its "service potential" is FASB ASC 360-10. This statement requires that the conveying measure of an asset be diminished at whatever the sum of the anticipated future cash flows is not as much as the conveying sum. As MPS editors, we look forward to meeting the PCAOB rule 4006 by providing the access as well as ability to copy audit-related documentation (Curtis, Pany, Pevzner, Robertson, & Zhang, 2013). In addition, we provide a written response that reflects the truth regarding this issue. Also, "Audit Documentation" which is the auditing number 3 requires the preparation and retention of documentation as per PCAOB. Therefore, applicable excerpts in our case will be paragraph 15 and paragraph 16 of the standard.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

It seems that Eagle Mountain, at last, will cost significantly more than MPS can hope to recuperate through operations. Accordingly, a portion of the aggregate cost ought to be viewed as a loss, not as a productive resource. The asset ought to be written down to its reasonable value. The reasonable value is likely best estimated as the present value of the anticipated future cash flows from the plant. In all actuality, the calculation of the loss is to some degree subjective, but it must be done to display the asset.

The Argument Against Insisting that Some Construction Costs be Expensed:

As Metropolitan Power Supply's evaluators, we don't know what the future cash flows from the firm's operations will be. Probably, the "recoverable costs" are whatever the state utilities commission, at last, enables MPS to pass on to its ratepayers. Until the point when this assurance is made, or until the point that MPS relinquishes the project, any speculations with regards to the recoverable cost would be a sheer theory.

Our supposition on section a: We trust that the plant's carrying value ought to be decreased to its speculated reasonable value measured as the marked down anticipated future cash flows from the plant as per FASB ASC 360-10-35. Administration of MPS ought to have the capacity to sensibly appraise the amount of the cost that the utility commission will enable the organization to recuperate in view of their involvement in the industry.

(b) It seems that there is considerably hazard that proceeding with the Eagle Mountain project may eventually make MPS end up ruined. The question, along these lines, is whether this hazard is adequate for the auditors to adjust their report as to MPS' capacity to remain a going concern. Nonetheless, auditors should apply their professional skepticism and acknowledge themselves about the appropriate way to approach the situation. According to PCAOB, all they need to do is to disclose that additional modification are required and should be made, and indicate the date, purpose when the documentation was prepared, considering that they prepared the documentation (Pany & Whittington, 2001). If they disclose this information, they would have complied with the PCAOB rule that requires cooperation with inspectors.

In spite of the fact that the case does not make it out and out clear when the organization would probably wind up ruined, there is no sign that it will within a one-year time frame as demonstrated in AICPA AU-C 570 (PCAOB 341) identifying with going concern questions (Whittington & Pany, 2016). Along these lines, the facts do not propose that auditors should issue a going concern modification only on the grounds that they expect issues in a period not far off.

In the authors' opinion, the customer ought to get the opportunity to be vindicated. An opinion ought not to be changed as for a going concern question unless there is considerable uncertainty that the customer will end up indebted inside one year from the date of the financial record (Imoniana & Perera, 2016). To theorize over longer timeframes involves much speculation to be reliable with the validate function.

Despite the fact that we would not change our assessment as to MPS' capacity to remain a going concern, we would consider including an emphasis-of-matter paragraph depicting the vulnerability encompassing a definitive acknowledgment of the capitalized construction costs. Consequently, we would consider including an emphasis-of-matter paragraph examining the organization's capacity to back the completion of the Eagle Mountain facility and to recuperate the capitalized construction costs.

References

Curtis, M. B., Pany, K. J., Pevzner, M., Robertson, J. C., & Zhang, J. (2013). Comments by the Auditing Standards Committee of the Auditing Section of the American Accounting Association on the IESBA Proposal, Responding to a Suspected Illegal Act. Current Issues in Auditing, 7(1), C21-C29. doi:10.2308/ciia-50389

Imoniana, J. O., & Perera, L. C. (2016). The role of IS Auditing in assurance services. management control, (1), 17-33. doi:10.3280/maco2016-001002

Pany, K. J., & Whittington, O. R. (2001). Research implications of the auditing standard board's current agenda. Accounting Horizons, 15(4), 401-411. doi:10.2308/acch.2001.15.4.401

Whittington, R., & Pany, K. (2016). Principles of auditing & other assurance services. New York: McGraw-Hill Education.