Login
iscover
In a compliance briefing last week the ATO has given insight to its process for auditing SMSF auditors, including what triggers the ATO to review SMSF auditor behaviour.
Newsletter
ATO gives insight to 'audit of auditors' process
20 October 2014
•
7 minute read
document.addEventListener('DOMContentLoaded', function() { var typesArray = { desktop: [882], tablet: [4223], mobile: [1578], }; var zoneArray = [254145]; var zoneDivId = '#momentum-azk257428-zoneunit'; changePlacements(true, zoneDivId, typesArray, zoneArray, ''); });
You’re out of free articles for this month
To continue reading the rest of this article, please log in.
Create free account to get unlimited news articles and more!
The ATO expects to engage with approximately 1,000 SMSF auditors this year to ensure proper, comprehensive audits are being undertaken.
The ATO’s director for SMSF regulatory and income tax products, Nathan Burgess, said if the ATO finds a problem with an SMSF and it did not receive an auditor contravention report (ACR), that raises a red flag.
“So for example, if there was a large withdrawal from the account, which is a personal payment to a trustee, and that didn’t get picked up in the audit, we’d be concerned about that,” he said.
Mr Burgess also stressed that avoiding ACR lodgement will not result in a better outcome for an auditor’s client.
He said depending on the nature of the breach, if two funds commit the same breach, the fund that has an ACR lodged will be in a better position than the one that hasn’t.
“The reason being is that while both caused the breach, the SMSF with the auditor who found the breach is demonstrating to us they have the right people and the right structure around to fix this is up,” Mr Burgess said.
You are not authorised to post comments.
Comments will undergo moderation before they get published.