Definition
AT-C section 105 sets out concepts common to all attestation engagements. A practitioner evaluates or measures subject matter against criteria and reports the result, either on the subject matter itself or on an assertion made by the responsible party. The three engagement types are examination (reasonable assurance, opinion), review (limited assurance, conclusion) and agreed-upon procedures (findings only, no assurance). The standards are the AICPA's Statements on Standards for Attestation Engagements, codified in the AT-C sections.
Why it matters in an audit or review
Many requests that do not involve financial statements are attestation work: SOC reports, compliance attestations, sustainability data and key performance metrics. Identifying the right engagement type and criteria at the start controls the report, the assurance level and the independence requirements.
Example
Illustrative: a franchisor wants confirmation of reported unit counts. The practitioner could examine the count against defined criteria for an opinion or perform agreed-upon procedures that report findings. The franchisor picks the examination because the report goes to lenders.
Common mistakes
- Using an audit or review of financial statements standard for subject matter that is not financial statements.
- Accepting an engagement without suitable criteria.
Sources
- AICPA, AT-C Section 105, Concepts Common to All Attestation Engagements
- AICPA, AT-C Sections 205, 210 and 215
Definitions paraphrase AICPA and FASB guidance; read the standard itself before relying on a requirement. Example figures are illustrative. This page is guidance, not professional advice. Report an error