IIA Updated IIA-CIA-Part3 Exam Questions and Answers by melisa

Under International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS 10 – Consolidated Financial Statements), an entity is required to consolidate its financial statements based on the control principle rather than ownership percentage alone.

Why Option B (Control ownership) is Correct:

According to IFRS 10, consolidation is required when an entity has control over another entity.

Control is defined as having power over the investee, exposure to variable returns, and the ability to influence those returns.

Even if an entity owns less than 50% of voting rights, it may still have control through contractual arrangements, rights over key decisions, or majority board influence.

Why Other Options Are Incorrect:

Option A (Variable entity approach):

This is a concept used in U.S. GAAP (ASC 810 – Variable Interest Entities) rather than IFRS. IFRS focuses on the broader control model.

Option C (Risk and reward):

IFRS previously considered risk and reward under IAS 27/SIC-12, but IFRS 10 replaced this with the control model.

Option D (Voting interest):

Voting rights alone do not determine consolidation under IFRS. Control can exist even without majority voting rights through contractual arrangements or potential voting rights.

IFRS 10 – Consolidated Financial Statements: Defines the principle of control for consolidation.

IIA GTAG – "Auditing Financial Reporting Risks": Discusses the impact of IFRS consolidation principles.

COSO ERM Framework: Emphasizes risk assessment in financial reporting, including consolidation decisions.

IIA References:Thus, the correct answer is B. Control ownership.

A highly centralized organization is one where decision-making authority is concentrated at the top management level, with lower levels having minimal autonomy. This change means that most critical decisions are made at the corporate level, and lower-level managers have limited decision-making power.

(A) Incorrect – Top management does little monitoring of the decisions made at lower levels.

In a centralized organization, top management monitors and controls most decisions.

This statement applies more to decentralized structures where decision-making is distributed.

(B) Incorrect – The decisions made at the lower levels of management are considered very important.

In a centralized structure, decisions made at lower levels hold less significance since authority is concentrated at the top.

(C) Correct – Decisions made at lower levels in the organizational structure are few.

Centralized structures limit decision-making power at lower levels, keeping control with top executives.

Lower-level managers mostly follow directives from upper management rather than making independent decisions.

(D) Incorrect – Reliance is placed on top management decision-making by few of the organization’s departments.

In a centralized system, most (not just a few) departments rely on top management for decision-making.

IIA’s Global Internal Audit Standards – Organizational Governance and Decision-Making

Explains centralized vs. decentralized structures and their impact on risk management.

COSO’s ERM Framework – Governance and Decision Authority

Discusses the implications of centralization on strategic decision-making.

IIA’s Guide on Corporate Governance and Internal Control Frameworks

Highlights the effect of centralization on accountability, oversight, and risk management.

Analysis of Answer Choices:IIA References and Internal Auditing Standards:

The CAE must communicate the results of the QAIP, including both ongoing monitoring and periodic assessments, to the board and senior management. Specifically, results of ongoing monitoring must be reported annually, ensuring the board remains informed about the internal audit activity’s quality and conformance.

Options B and C are incorrect because results are reported after completion, not before. Option D is useful for external assessors but not a reporting requirement.

Audit observations should include condition, criteria, cause, and effect. In this case, the condition (delay risk), criteria (schedule), and effect (penalties) are already presented. What is missing is the cause—the underlying reason for the project delay. Identifying the cause ensures recommendations address the root of the problem.