Transcript
Chapter 10 – Audit Strategy and Audit Program
Audit Strategy
Overall audit strategy – the scope, timing, and direction of the audit, which guides the development of the audit plan
Combined audit strategy – a strategy for auditing financial statement assertions in which the auditor evaluates control risk below maximum and obtains the audit evidence required by using tests of controls and substantive tests
Substantive audit strategy – a strategy for auditing financial statement assertions in which the auditor evaluates control risk at maximum and obtains the audit evidence required by using substantive tests
Auditor develops an overall audit strategy as well as a strategy (or approach) for classes of transactions, balances, presentation, disclosures, and the related assertions.
Auditor may use either a combined audit strategy, where the auditor plans to rely upon controls, or a substantive audit strategy, when the auditor does not plan to rely upon controls, for testing the assertions for the various accounts and disclosures.
When developing the overall audit strategy, auditor should:
Identify the characteristics of the engagement that define its scope. Some audit engagements have specific characteristics that increase the scope of the audit. For example, if the client is a multinational company, the scope would be much wider than for our client, Hillsburg Hardware Limited. Other factors to take into consideration are whether the auditor can use the work of the internal auditor, or if there is a need to use an IT specialist.
Determine the reporting requirements. Reporting requirements will vary from audit to audit. For example, there are particular reporting requirements and deadlines for public companies. There may be industry requirements. Other communications, such as liaison with subsidiary or parent auditors (depending upon the auditor’s role) and communications to management and to those charged with governance, need to be considered.
Consider the factors that are significant in directing the audit team’s efforts. The strategy must consider issues to do with quality control, such as how resources are managed, directed, and supervised; when team briefing and debriefing meetings are expected to be held; how engagement partner and manager reviews are expected to take place; and that engagement quality control reviews are needed.
Consider the results of preliminary engagement activities. This refers to the risks identified in the risk assessment stage (including fraud risks and significant events that have occurred since the last audit), and results of previous audits, which includes the evaluation of the operating effectiveness of internal control (including the nature of identified deficiencies and action taken to address them) and prior misstatements. The auditor’s determination of materiality (overall, performance, and specific) is considered .
Determine the nature, timing, and extent of resources necessary to perform the engagement. One of the main objectives of developing the audit strategy is to effectively allocate resources to the audit team, for example, the use of specialists on particular areas (say, an actuary for the pension valuation), or using a team of highly experienced auditors for a potentially high-risk audit engagement. If there is a tight deadline, then more resources will be needed to ensure that all the necessary audit work is completed, and can be reviewed in time to meet the deadline.
Audit Strategy, Audit Plan, and Audit Tests
Overall audit strategy, or the general overview of the audit, provides the basis for the audit plan.
Audit plan is more detailed than the overall audit strategy in that it includes the nature, timing, and extent of audit procedures to be performed by engagement team members.
The audit plan includes the following:
The nature, timing, and extent of the risk assessment procedures
The nature, timing, and extent of further audit procedures at the assertion level
Financial Closing
The period-end financial reporting process includes procedures to:
Enter transactions totals into the general ledger
Select and apply accounting policies
Initiate, authorize, record, and process journal entries into the general ledger
Record recurring and nonrecurring adjustments to the financial statements
Auditor is required to perform the following procedures related to the financial statement closing process:
Agree or reconcile the financial statements with the underlying accounting records
Examine material journal entries and other adjustments made during the course of preparing the financial statements
Management Override
Although the auditor develops audit tests based upon the risk assessment, they are required to presume that the risk of management override is present at all entities and requires the performance of the following procedures:
Test the appropriateness of journal entries recorded in the general ledger and in the preparation of financial statements
Make inquiries to those involved in financial reporting about inappropriate or unusual activity
Select journal entries and other adjustments made at the period close
Review accounting estimates for management biases and, if possible bias exists, consider whether it represents a fraud risk
Review significant transactions outside normal course of business and evaluate whether the business rationale (or lack thereof) suggests the possibility of fraudulent reporting
Types of Tests
Auditors use five types of tests to determine whether financial statements are fairly stated:
Risk assessment procedures
Tests of controls
Substantive tests of transactions
Analytical procedures
Tests of details of balances
Auditors use risk assessment procedures to assess the risk of material misstatement, represented by the combination of inherent risk and control risk.
Further audit procedures – a combination of tests of controls, substantive tests of transactions, analytical procedures, and tests of details of balances performed in response to risks of material misstatement by the auditor’s risk assessment procedures.
Each audit procedure falls into one, and sometimes more than one, of these five categories.
Tests of controls are performed to support the reduced assessment of control risk, while auditors use analytical procedures and tests of details of balances.
Substantive tests of transactions affect both control risk and planned detection risk, because they test the effectiveness of controls (if used as part of control testing) and the dollar amount of transactions.
Risk Assessment Procedures
Risk assessment procedures – used to assess the likelihood of material misstatement (inherent risk plus control risk) in the financial statements
Procedures performed to obtain an understanding of the entity and its environment, including fraud risk and internal controls, represent the auditor’s risk assessment procedures.
A major part of the auditor’s risk assessment procedures are done to obtain an understanding of internal control.
Procedures to obtain an understanding of internal control – focus on both the design and implementation of internal control and are used to assess control risk for each transaction-related assertion.
Tests of Controls
The auditor’s understanding of internal control is to assess control risk for each transaction-related audit objective.
Examples are assessing the accuracy objective for sales transactions as low and the occurrence objective as moderate.
When control policies and procedures are believed to be effectively designed and where it is efficient to do so, the auditor will choose to assess control risk at a level that reflects that evaluation.
To obtain sufficient appropriate evidence to support that assessment, the auditor performs tests of controls – audit procedures to test the effectiveness of controls in support of a reduced assessed control risk
Tests of controls, either manual or automated, may include the following types of procedures:
Make inquiries of appropriate client personnel
Examine documents, records, and reports
Observe control-related activities
Reperform client procedures
Substantive Tests of Transactions
Substantive test is a procedure designed to test for dollar misstatements (due to either errors or fraud) that directly affect the correctness of financial statement balances.
Auditors rely upon three types of substantive tests:
Substantive tests of transactions
Substantive analytical procedures
Tests of details of balances
Substantive procedures must be performed for:
Each material class of transactions, account balance, and disclosure (regardless of the assessed risk of material misstatement)
Each significant risk at the assertion level. If the auditor is not using tests of controls, then analytical procedures and substantive tests of transactions are not enough, then tests of detail must be used.
Substantive tests of transactions – used to test the five transaction-related assertions: occurrence, completeness, accuracy, cutoff, and classification.
When auditors are confident that all transactions are recorded in the journals and correctly posted; considering all five transaction-related assertions, they are confident that the general ledger totals are correct.
Auditors can perform tests of controls separately from all other tests, but it’s more efficient to do them at the same time as substantive tests of transactions.
Dual-purpose tests – auditing procedures that are both tests of controls and substantive procedures on the same sample of transactions or account balances for efficiency
For example, auditors can usually apply tests of controls involving inspection and reperformance to the same transactions tested for monetary misstatements. (Reperformance simultaneously provides evidence about both controls and monetary correctness)
Analytical Procedures
Analytical procedures – involve comparisons of recorded amounts to expectations developed by the auditor
Auditing standards require that they be done during the planning and completion of the audit.
Analytical procedures may be performed to audit an account balance.
Purposes of analytical procedures in the audit of account balances are to:
Indicate possible misstatements
Provide substantive evidence
If auditors believe that analytical procedures indicate a reasonable possibility of misstatement, they may perform additional analytical procedures or decide to modify substantive tests of details.
The extent to which auditors rely on substantive analytical procedures in support of an account balance depends upon several factors, including the quality of internal controls, the precision of the expectation developed by the auditor, tolerable misstatement, and the risk of material misstatement.
Tests of Details of Balances
Tests of details of balances – audit procedures testing for monetary errors or fraud and other irregularities to determine whether the five balance-related audit objectives have been satisfied for each significant account balance
Tests of details of balances focus on the ending general ledger balances for both balance sheet and income statement accounts, but the primary emphasis is on the balance sheet.
Examples include confirmation of customers’ balances for A/R, physical examination of inventory, and examination of vendors’ statements for accounts payable.
These tests are essential because the evidence is usually obtained from a source independent of the client, which is considered to be highly reliable.
The extent of these tests depends on the results of controls and analytical procedures.
Tests of details of balances help to establish monetary correctness of the accounts they relate to and therefore are substantive tests.
Summary of Types of Tests
By combining the types of audit tests, the auditor obtains a higher level for assurance than the assurance obtained from any one test.
Selecting Which Types of Tests to Perform: The Relationship Between Audit Strategy and Evidence Mix
If controls for the particular class of transactions are working as designed (and are cost-effective to test), then the auditor will conduct more tests of controls and fewer tests of details.
If controls for the particular class of transactions are not functioning or are too expensive to test, then the auditor will conduct more tests of details.
The audit strategy is a dynamic process, if information arises that alters any of the risk assessments, then the audit strategies and plans are changed to reflect the changes in risks.
It’s important to note that substantive or combined strategy is applied at the account and assertion level.
Designing Further Audit Procedures
Auditors consider several factors: types of evidence, relative costs, relationships between tests of controls and substantive tests, analytical procedures and substantive tests, and the trade-off between tests of controls and substantive tests.
Types of Evidence for Further Audit Procedures
Observations based on the table:
More types of evidence are used for tests of details of balances than any other type of test
Only tests of details of balances involve physical examination and confirmation
Inquiries of the client are made for every type of test
Inspection, reperformance, and recalculation are used for every type of test except analytical procedures
Relative Costs
The following types of tests are listed in order of increasing cost:
Analytical procedures
Risk assessment procedures, including procedures to obtain an understanding of internal control
Tests of controls
Substantive tests of transactions
Tests of details of balances
Analytical procedures are least costly because of the relative ease of making calculations and comparisons. Often, considerable information about potential misstatements can be obtained by simply comparing two or three numbers and looking for unusual relationships.
Tests of controls are least costly because the auditor is making inquiries and observations, examining such things as initials on documents and outward indications of other control procedures, and conducting reperformances, recalculations, and tracings. Frequently, tests of controls can be done on a large number of items in a few minutes, especially if computer-based work, such as the use of test data, is included.
Tests of details of balances are most costly because it is costly to send confirmations and to count assets. Because of the high cost, auditors usually try to plan the audit to minimize their use, and using these tests for high-risk and materially large areas.
Cost of each type of evidence varies in different situations.
For example, the cost of an auditor’s test counting of inventory (a substantive test of the details of the inventory balance) frequently depends on the nature and dollar value of the inventory, its location, and the number of different items.
Relationship Between Tests of Controls and Substantive Tests
An exception in a test of control only indicates the likelihood of misstatements affecting the dollar value of the financial statements, whereas an exception in a substantive test of transactions or a test of details of balances is a financial statement misstatement.
Exceptions in tests of controls are called control test deviations.
Auditors are most likely to believe material dollar misstatements exist in the financial statements when control test deviations are considered to be significant deficiencies or material weaknesses.
Auditors should then perform substantive tests of transactions or tests of details of balances to determine whether material dollar misstatements have actually occurred.
Assume that the client’s controls require an independent clerk to verify the quantity, price, and extension of each sales invoice, after which the clerk must initial the duplicate invoice to indicate performance. A test of control audit procedure is to inspect a sample of duplicate sales invoices for the initials of the person who verified the information. If a significant number of documents lack initials, the auditor should consider implications for the audit of internal control over financial reporting and follow up with substantive tests for the financial statement audit. This can be done by extending tests of duplicate sales invoices to include verifying prices, extensions, and footings (substantive tests of transactions), or by increasing the sample size for the confirmation of A/R (substantive test of details of balances). Even though the control is not operating effectively, the invoices may still be correct, especially if the person originally preparing the sales invoices did a careful and competent job.
On the other hand, if no documents or only a few of them are missing initials, the control will be considered effective and the auditor can therefore reduce substantive tests of transactions and tests of details of balances. However, some reperformance and recalculation substantive tests are still necessary to reassure the auditor that the clerk did not initial documents without actually performing the control procedure or did not perform it carelessly.
Because of the need to complete some reperformance and recalculation tests, many auditors perform them as a part of the original tests of controls. Others wait until they know the results of the tests of controls and then determine the total sample size needed.
Relationship Between Analytical Procedures and Substantive Tests
Analytical procedures only indicate the likelihood of misstatements affecting the dollar value of the financial statements.
Unusual fluctuations in the relationships of an account to other accounts, or to nonfinancial information, may indicate an increased likelihood that material misstatements exist without necessarily providing direct evidence of a material misstatement.
When analytical procedures identify unusual fluctuations, auditors should perform substantive tests of transactions or tests of details of balances to determine whether dollar misstatements have actually occurred.
If the auditor performs substantive analytical procedures and believes that the likelihood of material misstatement is low, other substantive tests can be reduced.
For accounts with small balances and only minimal potential for material misstatements, such as many supplies and prepaid expense accounts, auditors often limit their tests to substantive analytical procedures if they conclude the accounts are reasonably stated.
Trade-Off Between Tests of Controls and Substantive Tests
The auditor makes a decision while planning the control risk assessment: If control risk is assessed as high, the auditor would follow a substantive approach; if control risk is assessed lower, the auditor could follow a combined approach.
Tests of controls must be performed to determine whether the lower assessed control risk is supported; if it is, planned detection risk in the audit risk model is increased and substantive procedures can therefore be reduced.
If the control testing reveals that the controls are not functioning, or it is very costly to test internal controls, the auditor may end up with a substantive approach.
The shaded area is the maximum assurance obtainable from control risk assessment and tests of controls.
For example, at any point to the left of point A, assessed control risk is 1.0 because the auditor evaluates internal control as ineffective. At a large organization such as a bank or technology manufacturer, if controls are not reliable, you may not be able to conduct an effective audit. It will be impossible to do a substantive audit of an organization that processes hundreds of thousands of transactions (or more) daily.
Any point to the right of point B results in no further reduction of control risk because the public accounting firm has established the minimum assessed control risk that it will permit.
After the auditor determines the effectiveness of the client’s internal controls, it is appropriate to select any point within the shaded area (that is, between A and B) consistent with the level of control risk that the auditor determines is appropriate.
Assume that the auditor contends that internal control effectiveness is at point C. Tests of controls at the C1 level would provide the minimum control risk, given internal control. The auditor could choose to perform no tests of controls (point C3), which would support a control risk of 1.0. Any point between the two, such as C2, would be appropriate. If C2 is selected, the audit assurance from tests of controls is C3 – C2 and from substantive tests is C – C2. The auditor will likely select C1, C2, or C3 based upon the relative cost of tests of controls and substantive tests.
Evidence Mix and Audit Strategy
The four types of tests vary in the use of different audits for differing levels of inherent risk and internal control effectiveness, also it can vary from cycle to cycle within a given audit, from account balance to account balance within a particular cycle, and even between assertions for a particular account balance.
Audit evidence mix – the combination of the four types of tests to obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence for a cycle or account balance
Audit evidence mix is based upon the selected audit strategy.
Analysis of Audit 1 – Sophisticated Internal Controls
This company is large with complicated internal controls, using a combined audit approach.
Auditor performs extensive tests of controls and relies heavily on the client’s internal controls to reduce substantive tests.
Extensive analytical procedures are performed to reduce tests of details of balances.
Because of the emphasis on tests of controls and analytical procedures, this audit can be done less expensively than other types of audits.
Analysis of Audit 2 – Medium, Some Controls
This company is medium-sized, with some controls and some inherent risks.
Using a combined audit approach, the auditor has decided to do a medium amount of testing for all types of tests except analytical procedures, which will be done extensively.
Analysis of Audit 3 – Medium, Few Controls
This company is medium-sized but has few effective controls and significant inherent risks.
Management has decided that it is not cost-effective to implement better internal controls; therefore, substantive approach is used: no tests of controls are done because reliance on internal control is inappropriate when controls are insufficient.
The emphasis is on tests of details of balances, but some analytical procedures are done.
The reason for limiting analytical procedures is the auditor’s expectations of misstatements in the account balances.
The cost of the audit is high because of the amount of detailed substantive testing.
Analysis of Audit 4 – Medium, Ineffective Controls
Auditor found extensive control test deviations and significant misstatements using dual-purpose tests and analytical procedures.
Auditor concluded that the internal controls were not effective and used substantive approach.
Extensive tests of details of balances are performed to offset the unacceptable results of the other tests.
The costs of this audit are higher because tests of controls and dual-purpose tests were performed but could not be used to reduce tests of details of balances.
Creating the Audit Programs
An audit program identifies the audit steps that are the auditor’s response to the identified risks.
The audit program is designed in three parts: tests of controls and substantive tests of transactions (if no reliance on controls then it is only substantive tests of transactions, analytical procedures, and tests of details of balances).
There is a separate set of audit programs for each transaction cycle.
Tests of Controls
The tests of controls includes a descriptive section documenting the understanding obtained about internal control, linking relevant key controls to risks that the auditor has identified in the planning meeting, by assertion.
The audit file will contain the procedures (those necessary to obtain an understanding of internal control and to determine the design effectiveness of those internal controls) performed in order to assess control risk.
Auditor will assess the significance of the risks and determine the risk of material misstatements at the assertion level.
Auditor will design tests of controls for those tests that are considered cost-effective to address risks at the assertion level.
When controls are effective and planned control risk is low (i.e., the auditor chooses to rely on internal controls), a combined audit approach will be used and there will be tests of controls. Some dual-purpose tests may be included.
If control risk is assessed at maximum, the auditor will use a substantive audit approach (i.e., only substantive procedures will be used).
For each transaction-related audit assertion where the auditor determines that reliance will be placed on controls, the auditor will select one or more audit procedures.
The audit program will describe sample size, the items to select, and timing.
Analytical Procedures
Many auditors perform extensive analytical procedures on all audits because they are relatively inexpensive.
Analytical procedures are performed at three different stages of the audit:
In the planning stage to help the auditor decide the other evidence needed to satisfy audit risk
During the audit in conjunction with tests of details of balances as part of substantive procedures
Near the end of the audit as a final test of reasonableness
Tests of Details of Balances
The method for designing tests of details of balances is linked to the balance-related audit objectives.
In planning tests of details of balances to satisfy those objectives, many auditors follow a methodology.
Designing such procedures is subjective and requires considerable professional judgment.
Set Materiality and Audit Risk and Assess Inherent and Fraud Risk for A/R
The auditor could set a lower (specific) materiality than performance materiality for A/R.
A lower materiality would result in more testing of details.
Audit risk is set for the audit as a whole, rather than by cycle.
However, audit standards require the auditor to consider audit risk at the account level.
There may be situations when the auditor believes that a misstatement of a specific account, such as A/R, would negatively affect users more than the same size misstatement of any other account.
For example, if A/R are pledged to a bank as security on a loan, audit risk may be set lower for sales and collections than for other cycles.
Inherent risk and fraud risk are assessed for the financial statements as a whole at the account and assertion level.
Factors that affect inherent risk for A/R would include account-specific factors such as the form of A/R, as well as the nature of the client’s business and sales trends.
Inherent risk can be extended to individual assertions.
For example, because of adverse economic conditions in the client’s industry, the auditor may conclude that there is a high risk of uncollectable A/R (valuation objective).
Fraud risk would be assessed by considering management’s motivations and biases as well as performing preliminary analytical review procedures.
Assess Control Risk
Would be applied to both sales and collection in the audit of A/R.
Effective controls reduce control risk and therefore the extent of evidence required for substantive procedures; inadequate controls increase the substantive evidence needed.
Identify High-Risk (Relevant) Assertions
Assertions can be high risk for several reasons.
Auditor may have identified the assertion as having a significant risk of fraud or material misstatement.
For example, if there is an economic downturn and the client has customers with high credit limits, the auditor may want to spend additional time testing the valuation assertion, as the uncollectability of a single large account could have a significant effect.
For some assertions, substantive testing alone is not enough, due to extensive reliance on automated systems.
For example with automated credit checks
Auditor may decide that testing of internal controls could be effective, especially where general controls over program changes and information systems access are of high quality.
Design Tests of Controls and Substantive Tests of Transactions
Design Analytical Procedures and Predict Results
The tests are designed with the expectation that certain results will be obtained.
These predicted results affect the design of tests of details of balances.
If control risk is low, the auditor may use more substantive analytical procedures than tests of details.
Design Tests of Details of Balances to Satisfy Balance-Related Audit Objectives
The planned tests of details of balances include audit procedures, sample size, items to select, and timing.
Procedures must be selected and designed for each account and each balance-related audit objective within each account.
Auditors faces difficulty when predicting the outcome of the tests of controls and analytical procedures before they are performed.
This is necessary because the auditor should design tests of details of balances during the planning phase, but the appropriate design depends on the outcome of the other tests.
In planning tests of details of balances, the auditor usually predicts that there will be few or no exceptions in tests of controls and analytical procedures, unless there are reasons to believe otherwise.
If the results of the tests of controls and analytical procedures are not consistent with the predictions, the tests of details of balances will need to be increased as the audit progresses.
Timing of Audit Tests
Audit tests can be conducted throughout the year, or, for a small audit, may be conducted in a concentrated period of time.
Tests of details of balances are normally done last.
On some audits, all tests are done after the balance sheet date.
When clients want to issue statements soon after the balance sheet date, but, the more time-consuming tests of details of balances will be done at interim audit dates prior to year-end with additional work being done to roll forward the audited interim-date balances to year-end.
Roll forward – substantive work on journal entries and transactions from a date prior to the balance sheet date to the year-end
Substantive tests of balances performed before year-end provide less assurance and are not normally done unless internal controls are effective.
Illustrative Audit Program
Most audit procedures satisfy more than one objective and more than one audit procedure is used for each objective.
Most large public accounting firms develop their own standard audit programs, organized by industry, often linked by audit objective to databases including lists of expected controls and likely audit tests.
Smaller firms purchase similar audit programs from outside organizations.
Standard audit programs are normally computerized and can easily be modified to meet the circumstances of individual audit engagements.
An example of a standard audit program available for purchase is CPA Canada’s Professional Engagement Manual (PEM).
Standard audit programs, whether developed internally or purchased from an outside organization, can dramatically increase audit efficiency if they are used properly, but they should not be used as a substitute for an auditor’s professional judgment.
If standard audit programs are used incorrectly, auditors may fall into judgment traps.
Because no two audits are alike, it is usually necessary to add, modify, or delete steps within a standard audit program in order to accumulate sufficient and appropriate audit evidence.
Relationship Between Transaction Assertions to Balance and Presentation and Disclosure Assertions
Tests of details of balances must be designed to satisfy balance-related audit objectives for each account, and the extent of these tests can be reduced when transaction-related objectives have been satisfied by tests of controls or substantive tests of transactions.
There is a direct relationship between the transaction and balance assertions (except valuation and rights and obligations)
For instance, occurrence of sales transactions increases A/R, and occurrence of collections (or cash receipts) decreases A/R. This means that tests of controls and substantive tests of transactions related to those assertions provide evidence for the balance-related assertions.
Few internal controls from either of these classes of transactions are related to the valuation assertion (the credit approval process affects the extent of the tests). The same applies to rights and obligations. In both cases, separate tests of controls, analytical procedures, and tests of details are necessary.
First four objectives for presentation and disclosure are similar to the transaction-related and balance-related audit objectives and can be audited in the same manner.
Final audit objective, understandability, requires the auditor to examine the statements and notes from the perspective of a knowledgeable financial statement user to assess whether information has been clearly presented.
Events That Change Audit Strategy
Events may occur that require the audit strategy to be adjusted, including changes in accounting framework or changes in the IT system.
Changes in Accounting Framework
Public companies are required to apply IFRS in their financial reporting, whereas private companies have a choice of either ASPE or IFRS.
As companies’ circumstances change, such as they decide to go public, they may be required to change their accounting framework.
When obtaining an understanding of internal control and assessing control risk, the auditor should consider the following:
The competence of management, the board of directors, and the audit committee regarding the new accounting framework
Knowledge and training of employees with financial reporting responsibilities
The source and quality of data for new and expanded financial statement disclosures
Segregation of duties and approvals during the conversion process, such as of initial review and approval of accounting policy decisions
Changes in the IT System
When an organization changes an entire IT system or set of systems, the auditor will need to ensure that the new system’s internal controls are documented and evaluated and an audit of the data conversion is performed.
In the case of the data conversion, in order to determine the audit procedures, the auditor will perform a risk assessment.
Conversion audit – the audit procedures required when an organization changes its system to a different information system
The emphasis is on the accurate and authorized establishment of new master files, the completeness and existence of data in those files, and cut-off transactions in the appropriate system.
The following tests are performed in the conversion audit:
Tests comparing details from the new system with those of the old system to verify that only accurate, authorized information has been established.
Tests comparing details from the old system to those of the new system to ensure accuracy and that no transactions are omitted.
Cutoff testing to ensure that transactions are included in the proper system and have not been omitted.
