.png?sfvrsn=dd675fd5_2)
.jpg?sfvrsn=d4038e84_0)
-(1).png?sfvrsn=db949de5_0)
-(5).png?sfvrsn=3162fbc9_0)
/business-management-global-connection/istock-1167579720-c.jpg?sfvrsn=ff93f9a5_2)
/audit-assurance/istock-1169206203-c.jpg?sfvrsn=1d6f9b25_2)
/professionals/istock-845530100-c.jpg?sfvrsn=46efdedd_2)
/ethics-and-professionalism/istock-1141115724-c.jpg?sfvrsn=4e54d691_2)
/business-management-global-connection/istock-1079974636-c.jpg?sfvrsn=e9fea23b_2)
.png?sfvrsn=905ee1bd_0)
/legal-secretarial/istock-866706340-c.jpg?sfvrsn=d7f57b8c_2)
ISCA supports the proposed revisions to the Code which were developed in close coordination with the IAASB to be consistent and interoperable with the auditing and quality management standards. However, we urge IESBA to reconsider the proposal for a non-network component auditor (CA) firm of a component audit client which is a public interest entity (PIE), to apply the non-PIE independence rules for purposes of the group audit when the group audit client is not a PIE. We are uncertain of the value in providing such a “concession” when the non-network CA firm would already be subject to PIE rules in those situations.
Read more