AASOC

The Auditing and Assurance Standards Oversight Council (AASOC) discussed the activities of the Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (AASB) and the Independence Task Force. As part of its monitoring responsibilities, AASOC also received reports on the activities of several domestic and international organizations.

Attendees:

Chair:

Bruce Winter

Members:

Ian Bandeen
Carol Bellringer
Kathryn Bewley
Donna Bovolaneas
Sheila Filion
John Gordon
Cameron McInnis
Kevin Nye
Carol Paradine
Neil Sinclair
John Walker
Bruce West

Attendees:

Ken Charbonneau, AASB Chair
Stephenie Fox, Vice-President, Standards
Ron Salole, Canadian Representative on the IAASB
Michael Tambosso, Independence Task Force Chair
Eric Turner, Director, Auditing and Assurance Standards

Regrets:

Janet Grove
Karen Stothers (non-voting)

Guests:

Jeremy Justin, CPAB
Jacqui Kuypers, AASB (part of the meeting)
Kenneth Leung, OSFI
Ritika Rohailla, CSA (part of the meeting)

Secretary: Birender Gill

Chair’s Opening Comments

Bruce Winter welcomed everyone to the meeting, and thanked Cameron McInnis for hosting the meeting. Mr. Winter informed AASOC that due to Karen Stothers’ absence, Kenneth Leung from the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions (OSFI) is attending the meeting. In addition, Ritika Rohailla from the Canadian Securities Administrators (CSA) will be joining later this afternoon to provide an update on an International Organisation of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) Consultation Report.

Mr. Winter updated the Council on its first new member orientation session that was held the previous night. All three new members, along with four continuing members received an overview of the Council’s roles and responsibilities.

Mr. Winter provided an update on initiatives he attended on AASOC’s behalf since the last meeting, including:

  • serving as an observer at the International Forum of Independent Audit Regulators Conference;
  • attending a seminar hosted by University of Toronto and CPA Canada on the Future of Professionalism; and
  • participating in a roundtable discussion by the World Business Council for Sustainable Development

Approval of Minutes

Bruce Winter asked for comments on the April 5, 2018, and June 18, 2018, meeting minutes. Members identified changes needed to the April minutes. Subject to the changes identified, the minutes of both meetings were approved.

AASB Due Process

AASOC considered the AASB’s decision to approve Assurance and Related Services Guideline (AuG) 49, Reporting on Compliance with Specified Authorities for Transactions Coming to the Auditor’s Notice during the Audit of Financial Statements.

AASB Chair Ken Charbonneau noted that AuG-49 was developed to replace material that is contained in extant Section PS 5300, Auditing for Compliance with Legislative and Related Authorities in the Public Sector. With the issuance of this new guideline, Section PS 5300 is being withdrawn from the CPA Handbook – Assurance. Mr. Charbonneau explained that the Due Process Checklist outlines how the Board followed due process in developing AuG-49. One member asked for clarification on who would use this guideline. Mr. Charbonneau explained that it applies to public sector entities, such as Canada Post, when the legislative auditor has a requirement to report on compliance with specified authorities. Another member asked if there were any divisive issues identified during exposure. Eric Turner, Director, AASB, commented that one issue was identified, and it was addressed through consequential amendments to another standard.

Following this discussion, voting Council members present at the meeting unanimously confirmed that the Board had followed due process with proper regard for the public interest when approving AuG-49.

AASB Annual Reporting

Bruce Winter introduced Jacqui Kuypers, Principal with the AASB, who is attending the meeting for this part of the discussion. Mr. Winter asked Eric Turner to introduce the AASB Performance Report 2017-2018 and AASB Annual Report 2017-2018. Mr. Turner said that the meeting materials summarize the timeline and the process followed in preparing the annual reports. The Performance Review Committee has discussed these reports in detail and its feedback was incorporated into the final versions. Mr. Turner recapped that 2017-2018 was a successful year where the Board exceeded their objectives. The only concern was that there are some International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB) projects that are not progressing as Canadian stakeholders would expect. Mr. Winter asked the Board to consider what course of action, if any, it should take on these projects. Mr. Turner explained that this is an ongoing issue and the Board regularly considers the impact of IAASB projects and whether other guidance is needed if revisions to standards are delayed. Ron Salole shared the IAASB perspective; that for quality standards, it often takes time to resolve all the issues to the satisfaction of all stakeholders. The IAASB is currently experiencing resource challenges, along with criticism from the Monitoring Group. These activities have placed significant strain on the organization. Mr. Winter welcomed the IAASB perspective but agreed that the Board must seek innovative solutions to address this issue. Mr. Charbonneau agreed to provide an update on this matter at a future meeting.

Performance Review Committee Update

Bruce West shared comments from the Performance Review Committee based on its review of the 2017-2018 Performance Report and AASB Annual Report. The Committee was pleased with these reports and all its feedback has been incorporated into the final reports. He highlighted that AASOC is not required to approve these reports, however the AASB seeks input from the Committee and Council.

The only outstanding work for the Committee is to develop its terms of reference. This will be brought to Council at a future meeting. Following this discussion, voting Council members endorsed the Committee’s conclusions that the Board delivered on its annual objectives and met the Board’s mission for serving the public interest.

AASOC Annual Report

Stephenie Fox provided an overview of the AASOC Annual Report 2017-2018. This report will be published on the Council’s website to show how the Council discharged its responsibilities. One member noted that the section on “Why we matter” could be enhanced to highlight how the Council confronts the perception that the profession is too involved in the standard-setting process. The report should acknowledge the relationship with CPA Canada and how the Council ensures full independence. Members agreed with these suggestions and requested that the report include more depth about the Council’s public interest role. The revised report will be sent to the Chair for final approval before posting on the website.

Nominating and Governance Committee’s Nomination Process Review

Donna Bovolaneas reported on the Nominating and Governance Committee’s review of the nomination process for AASOC and AASB members. In conducting this review, the Committee found that a framework of recruitment principles was needed to provide essential context and guidance for the recruitment process design and execution of activities. Members reviewed the proposed Framework and agreed with the key principles. One member asked whether the Committee should consider bringing forward more candidates rather than only one in their final recommendation. Ms. Bovolaneas clarified that the Committee provides full transparency to the Council on all applicants. However, the final recommendation supports why the Committee believes the recommended candidate is the best choice. Another member outlined that in the meeting materials, the process description does not disclose the regular updates AASOC receives at each meeting. Ms. Bovolaneas agreed that this clarification should be added to the key principles. She then walked the Council through the areas for improvement that the Committee identified. One member asked whether the staggering of terms for members will be done in one year or adjusted over time. Ms. Bovolaneas explained that the Committee had not discussed this; it only identified this as an area where changes were needed. Mr. Winter suggested the Committee debate this further and present its ideas to the Council at a future meeting.

The Council also discussed whether the recruitment process should be disclosed to the public, especially considering the Monitoring Group’s proposal. One member felt the Council could show leadership by disclosing the process. Other members were concerned that the Council may need to consider further changes; therefore, it would be premature to disclose the process now. A member suggested the decision be based on what is right for Canada, not based on what is happening internationally. There are many differences between the Canadian process, which would make some of the international concerns irrelevant. The Committee will consider today’s discussion as it looks at this issue further.

The Council considered the process for members to identify conflicts of interest. It agreed that while it is important for members to state whether they have a conflict of interest, they can also share valuable information on candidates that would not be available otherwise. The Council agreed that members with conflict of interest should not be excluded from the discussions. However, each conflict will need to be assessed on an individual basis.  

The Council reviewed the process for reference checks for potential candidates. It agreed that when a candidate is recommended by a current or former Council member, a formal recommendation letter could be used as part of the reference check. In these cases, some external validation of the candidate’s credentials would also be appropriate. When the candidate is new to the Council, a more formal reference check should be required.

Based on the discussion, the Committee will finalize the documents and explore some of the issues debated today. It will move forward with documenting the process.

AASOC Chair Selection

Donna Bovolaneas asked Stephenie Fox to summarize how the current AASOC Chair was selected. Bruce Winter stepped out of the room for this part of the meeting. Ms. Fox shared details about the process and key considerations discussed during the deliberations. Carol Bellringer highlighted that there was considerable debate about how the final candidate was the best choice and how this decision was in the public interest.

Ms. Bovolaneas shared her research on best practices for selecting a board chair. There was general agreement that to find the best candidate, all recruiting avenues should be explored; therefore, a public call should be issued. With a public call, the final selection of the candidate should be planned for the December AASOC meeting to provide the Nominating and Governance Committee with enough time. One member asked whether the assistance of a search firm was ever considered, given the role’s importance. Ms. Fox explained that in the past, a search firm has never been used for volunteer positions. One member noted that based on their experience, a search firm does not guarantee that better candidates are brought forward. Due to the specialized nature of this role, looking within personal networks and the Council may produce the best result. The Council decided it will only consider using a search firm if worthy candidates are not identified through the public call or personal networks.

One member suggested that the final recommendation show a thorough analysis of all the candidates and how the Committee reached its final recommendation. This would add transparency to the process and allow the Council to evaluate all options. Ms. Bovolaneas agreed that the Committee will return with this analysis for the final candidates interviewed for this role. It will provide regular updates during Council meetings on how the AASOC Chair selection is progressing.

The Council also reviewed the job description for the Chair role. Members agreed with the responsibilities as described; however, they requested reordering of some items. One member suggested that “networking and relationship building” be added since this is essential to the role. Another member recommended the job description clarify that practitioners are ineligible for this role. Another member asked whether a retired partner from an accounting firm, who did not meet the definition of a practitioner because they had been retired for over three years, would still be seen to have a conflict. The Council generally agreed that each candidate would need to be assessed individually, based on their circumstances, and that personal integrity would be a key factor in the final assessment.

The Committee will move ahead with the Chair-recruitment process based on today’s discussion.

Independence Task Force Update

Michael Tambosso provided an update on the Independence Task Force’s activities. Over the past three years, the Task Force has been responding to comments received on its Consultation Paper, “A Framework for the Canadian Independence Standards,” and general feedback received from Canadian regulators. The revised Framework and Basis for Conclusions were presented by the Task Force to the Public Trust Committee on May 25, 2018. The Committee has agreed in principle with the Framework. However, it has concerns about resourcing required to implement the Framework and the provincial responsibilities for ethics (of which independence is a part). The Council of Chief Executives (CEC) of CPA Canada will review the Framework for consideration and approval of the way forward at its August meeting.

Bruce Winter asked AASOC for comments on the Framework. One member asked if implementation issues have been identified thus far. Mr. Tambosso responded that the key issue will be the process for when a conclusion is reached to not adopt more stringent standards from other jurisdictions.

Mr. Winter asked the Canadian Public Accountability Board (CPAB), the CSA and the OSFI whether they were satisfied with how their comments were addressed in the final Framework. All three representatives indicated they were satisfied and supported the Framework.

Following this discussion, voting Council members present at the meeting unanimously confirmed that the Task Force had followed due process with proper regard for the public interest in developing the Framework for Canadian Independence Standards and the Basis for Conclusions.

Mr. Tambosso concluded that with the Framework’s completion, the Task Force has no other activities underway at this time. Mr. Winter thanked Mr. Tambosso for his leadership throughout this process.

Mr. Winter asked the Council what role it would consider playing related to independence standards in Canada going forward. One member suggested that based on its mission statement, it should be providing similar oversight for the independence standards as it does with auditing standards. Mr. Winter noted that there is an important difference between the AASB and the Task Force. The AASB sets auditing standards in Canada, however the Task Force does not have the same authority. The Provincial CPA Institutes are responsible for professional independence standards in Canada. Members see value in the Council providing oversight related to the whole system and this may require integration of the standard-setting process along with standards for independence and ethics. Mr. Winter remarked that the Council’s Terms of Reference would need to be redefined if its role with respect to oversight of independence standards is to continue. He committed to taking these comments to the Committee for further discussion about the Council’s role.

Auditor Reporting

Ken Charbonneau provided an update on the AASB’s activities as it deals with issues related to auditor reporting standards. Mr. Charbonneau and Eric Turner attended the National Standard Setter’s meeting in June. Here they met Martin Baumann, Chief Auditor at the U.S. Public Company Accountability Oversight Board (PCAOB). He suggested the AASB follow-up with the PCAOB to discuss the issue of dual reports. Mr. Charbonneau and Mr. Turner will be meeting with representatives from PCAOB and the Securities and Exchange Commission in late July. This meeting is to establish relations and determine whether creating a combined report is possible. One AASOC member suggested it is vital the Board outline how a combined report would be a win for both jurisdictions and serve the public interest. Mr. Charbonneau agreed to highlight this in their meeting and that investors would be best served with a combined report.

Mr. Turner highlighted some of the implementation issues that Canadian stakeholders have raised related to Canadian Auditing Standards (CAS) 720, The Auditor’s Responsibilities Relating to Other Information. The Board supports developing non-authoritative guidance to address these issues. The nature of the standard requires further clarification on what is considered within the parameters of other information. Mr. Turner explained that at the National Standard Setters’ meeting, other jurisdictions also identified that they would be creating similar guidance.

The Board continues to discuss the staggered implementation of reporting key audit matters in Canada. In the United States, the PCAOB has decided to exempt investment funds from critical audit matter reporting requirements. The Board debated deferring Canadian investment funds from reporting key audit matters. It did not decide on this matter at the June meeting. It has requested more information on how the PCAOB made its decision to exclude investment funds and further research on what other jurisdictions are doing related to this issue. Staff will also discuss the matter with the Chief Accountants of the CSA and the OSFI. One member recommended the Board also discuss this matter with the Alberta and B.C. Securities Commissions. Another member said that as soon as there is a deferral or exemption for one industry, others may also request consideration. Mr. Charbonneau acknowledged that the goal of reporting key audit matters is to create better communication and provide insight into audit quality. It is important for the AASB to be cautious when considering deferrals or exemptions.

The Council will continue to monitor these issues and receive updates on the Board’s activities at the next meeting.

Activities of the AASB Since the Last AASOC Meeting

Ken Charbonneau and Eric Turner presented an overview of the AASB’s activities. Mr. Charbonneau directed the Council to the Board’s Update Report for a complete list of the matters discussed during its conference call on May 3, 2018, and the two-day meeting in June 2018. Mr. Charbonneau highlighted some of Board’s the other activities, including:

  • Assurance on key performance indicators – The Accounting Standards Board (AcSB) released a draft Framework on Performance Measures in June 2018. The CSA is also preparing materials on its rule on non-GAAP reporting, which is somewhat related. The Board will explore this issue further during the auditor roundtables it is holding in the fall so it can provide feedback on the AcSB’s and the CSA’s proposals. The Board is also establishing multi-stakeholder teams to help develop guidance on key performance indicators and identify the implications for assurance standards.
  • Emerging technologies – AASB staff and Chair met with stakeholders to discuss issues related to auditing cryptocurrency. Practitioners request assistance on how to audit these balances when they are material or transactions related to cryptocurrency. Regulators are concerned that there is a lack of knowledge across the process (from financial statement preparers to auditors to users). CPA Canada has established an advisory group to help develop guidance on this topic. Its first publication will focus on the audit risks and challenges presented by cryptocurrency.

One member requested that the Council also receive education on cryptocurrency, which has assurance implications. Mr. Winter agreed that a session would be highly beneficial and suggested the topic be brought forward when a strong presenter, who understands the assurance implications, is identified.

Mr. Charbonneau also highlighted that the Board unanimously approved an exposure draft of Canadian Standard on Related Services (CSRS) 4200, Compilation Engagements, at the June meeting. The exposure draft is expected to be issued in early September 2018 and will have a response deadline in late November 2018. Mr. Charbonneau explained that the Board expects many responses to this exposure draft since compilations is the key service offering of many practitioners across Canada. The standard introduces new concepts, requires documentation of certain matters and contains increased disclosure requirements.

One member asked what steps the Board had taken to understand key issues during the exposure draft’s development. Mr. Turner explained that the Task Force working on this project first developed a statement of principles, which was used to conduct consultations across Canada. The consultations showed there were many diverging views on this topic. While developing the draft standard, the Board conducted an online survey and received more than 800 responses. The draft standard takes this feedback into consideration. The only challenge is receiving feedback from users of compilation reports. One member stressed that banks are key users of these reports and, in the past, the costs associated with this service was not a concern. However, with the proposed changes, increased costs may require clarification of what type of report the banks need. Mr. Winter recognized that the Board spends significant time dealing with standards related to audit services, and that compilation engagements are on the opposite end of the assurance spectrum. There are different issues related to this service and the Board will engage different stakeholders in the process. The Board expects significant interest in this standard. The Council will continue to watch the public interest issues related to this topic.

International Projects

Eric Turner provided an update on the IAASB projects on International Standards on Audit (ISA) 315 (Revised), Identifying and Assessing Risks of Material Misstatement. The IAASB approved the exposure draft of this standard at their June meeting and the AASB is expected to approve the Canadian exposure draft in late July. This standard is long and the Board is encountering some translation challenges to meet the IAASB’s response deadline of November 2, 2018. It is discussing how to deal with these challenges in preparing its response to the Exposure Draft.

Comments from AASOC Observers

AASOC reviewed written reports from Ian Bandeen and Kevin Nye, who observed the AASB’s May 2018 and June 2018 meetings, respectively. Both observers were pleased with how the meetings were conducted, and the quality of discussions and meeting materials. No significant issues were noted regarding due process and the consideration of the public interest.

The Council accepted the observer reports as presented.

Activities of the IAASB Since the Last AASOC Meeting

Ron Salole provided an update of the IAASB’s June 2018 meeting. Projects discussed at this meeting included:

  • Auditing Accounting Estimates;
  • Audit Evidence;
  • Data Analytics;
  • Emerging forms of External Reporting;
  • Identifying and Assessing Risks of Material Misstatement; and
  • Quality Control.

Mr. Salole said that the IAASB approved the final standard for ISA 540 (Revised), Auditing Accounting Estimates and Related Disclosures, and the Exposure Draft for ISA 315 The IAASB is waiting for the Public Interest Oversight Board (PIOB) to approve ISA 540. The PIOB has instructed the IAASB not to wait for this approval but to post the final standard so it is available to practitioners as soon as possible since the effective date for this standard is December 15, 2019.[1]

Mr. Salole noted that related to ISA 315, a concern was identified associated to the tight timeline for the exposure draft. Due to translation requirements in Canada, the Canadian exposure draft will only be exposed for 103 days rather than the normal 120 days. Due to the small difference, Mr. Salole felt comfortable voting in favour of the exposure draft.

The IAASB’s project on emerging forms of external reporting is progressing well due to the staff secondment from Ernst & Young. This project focuses on developing guidance for conducting assurance engagements using International Standard on Assurance Engagements (ISAE) 3000 (Revised), Assurance Engagements Other than Audits or Reviews of Historical Financial Information, to emerging forms of external reporting. The IAASB is aiming to complete this project in 24 months, which is aggressive.


Activities of AcSOC, CPAB, CSA, IFAC, IOSFI, and OSFI

Accounting Standards Oversight Council (AcSOC)

Stephenie Fox provided the following updates:

  • AcSOC has formed an ad hoc subcommittee to undertake a risk assessment for the Council. AASOC may be able to use this work since there are many similarities between the two Councils.
  • The AcSB drafted a framework for Reporting Performance Measures. This has received significant media attention, with 212 media outlets picking up the story.
  • AcSOC received a presentation from Bonnie Lysyk, Auditor General of Ontario, on accounting issues noted by her office. Recently, there has been significant debate about the accounting for hydro plans.

Canadian Public Accountability Board (CPAB)

Jeremy Justin provided the following updates:

  • CPAB is currently conducting its inspections of the big four accounting firms. One of the themes noted thus far is fair-value work related to business combinations and impairments.
  • CPAB notes several more entities with cryptocurrency on their balance sheets. It is concerned that auditors do not have the knowledge to audit these balances. It is prioritizing this issue for further investigation.
  • CPAB is working with the CSA to access auditor working papers in foreign jurisdictions. CSA National Instrument 52-108 Auditor Oversight proposal will come out later in 2018.
  • CPAB is preparing its three-year strategic plan. It is obtaining input from internal and external stakeholders and welcomes feedback from this Council.
  • CPAB is progressing on its project related to audit quality indicators. The goal is to share information that can improve the quality of audits. CPAB will release a report of its findings later in 2018.

Carol Paradine shared additional comments on some of the emerging issues in the profession. Due to recent international audit scandals, mainly in the United Kingdom and South Africa, there has been discussion about whether audit services should be split off from other services accounting firms offer. There is also an investigative report underway in Canada looking at audit failures over the past 15 years. There is concern about how this report may present the profession. Ms. Paradine will keep AASOC informed as more information becomes available.

Canadian Securities Administrators (CSA)

Ritika Rohailla, Senior Accountant with the CSA, provided the following updates:

  • In early September, the CSA will be publishing proposed National Instrument (NI) 52-112, Non-GAAP and Other Financial Measures Disclosure, which will establish disclosure requirements for issuers that disclose non-GAAP and other financial measures. The CSA has noted that these measures often lack standardized meanings, resulting in potentially misleading or confusing disclosures. There will be a 90-day consultation period from date of publication.
  • Based on feedback received related to its Consultation Paper 52-403, “Auditor Oversight Issues in Foreign Jurisdictions,” the CSA is working on changes to NI 52-108, Auditor Oversight, to require certain audit firms involved in the audit of a reporting issuer’s financial statements to register as a participating audit firm. These changes were requested to assist CPAB access audit working papers in most foreign jurisdictions.
  • As CPAB mentioned, the CSA has also noted a steady increase in entities with cryptocurrency holdings. It is looking at the accounting and auditing issues this new commodity presents.

International Federation of Accountants (IFAC)

Carol Bellringer provided the following updates from the June IFAC meeting:

  • This meeting revolved around transforming the profession and discussing the issues noted in the Monitoring Group paper. The Group is planning another consultation on the Consultation Paper for November 9, 2018. IFAC had an external analysis done of all the responses the Group received. IFAC is proactively doing whatever it can to improve the process. Budget constraints affect what changes can be made.
  • Kevin Dancey has started as CEO of IFAC and will be developing the new strategic plan as his first deliverable.
  • IFAC works with organizations to provide financial advice, such as advising the G20 on business. In the past, this was informal; however, IFAC has become a network partner and it sits at the table helping to draft material. This is part of IFAC’s push to highlight the importance of financial reporting models. A large forum is being held in Argentina in July on this topic.
  • After serving two terms, Ms. Bellringer’s last meeting with IFAC will be in September. Joy Thomas, CEO and Tashia Batstone, Senior Vice-President, External Relations and Business Development at CPA Canada also represent Canada on IFAC. A new Canadian board member will be appointed by the fall.

International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO)

Ritikia Rohailla directed the Council to a press release by International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) asking for feedback on their Consultation Report on Good Practices for Audit Committees in Supporting Audit Quality, which was released in late April. The report discusses topics affecting audit quality. It stresses the audit committees’ role in supporting audit quality, including good practices. The consultation period closes July 24, 2018. An analysis of the feedback is expected in the fall.

Bruce Winter asked about the project deliverable. Ms. Rohailla replied that it will be a publication about good practices. Mr. Winter shared his positive impression from reading the report and asked other members for any observations. One member asked about the audit committee reporting, which seems to be beyond what is done in Canada. Ms. Rohailla agreed and highlighted that it is being proposed as good practice. Jeremy Justin noted that some larger companies in Canada are providing some reporting on audit committees. Donna Bovolaneas suggested that this will help to support the “third leg of the stool,” by encouraging more engagement and accountability by the audit committee for audit quality.

Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions (OSFI)

Kenneth Leung provided the following update:

  • At the end of June, the OSFI issued a letter to the big six banks to enhance transparency on the capital buffer for domestic systemic vulnerabilities. The domestic stability buffer is currently set at 1.5 per cent of total risk weighted assets but can range from 0 per cent to 2.5 per cent. This was done in consultation with federal government partners.

Monitoring Group

Bruce Winter initiated a general discussion related to the Monitoring Group’s Consultation Paper, “Strengthening the Governance and Oversight of the International Audit-related Standard-setting Boards in the Public Interest.” To date, two analyses of the 179 responses have been compiled. IFAC engaged a third party, the law firm Gibson Dunn, to prepare a detailed analysis of all responses. The second analysis was prepared by the Monitoring Group.  These analyses have differing views. Mr. Winter asked AASOC for general observations. Donna Bovolaneas revealed that she did her own analysis and agreed with the Gibson Dunn’s more than the Monitoring Group’s. She found there were a few areas where respondents agreed; however, there was significant disagreement on issues and the path forward. The Monitoring Group expects to release a white paper on November 9, 2018, outlining further details of their proposal. They have referred to opportunities for further engagement at roundtables, but no dates have been released at this time. Mr. Winter asked the Council to start thinking about what actions it should take once the white paper is released. There was unanimous support when the Council decided to respond to the initial Consultation Paper. Mr. Winter suggested members contemplate what actions may be appropriate in the future but defer the final decision until the paper is released.

Other Administrative Matters

Feedback on Meeting Materials

Birender Gill updated AASOC on changes made to the July Council meeting materials based on feedback. She asked the Council for any comments regarding these changes. Bruce West expressed his approval of the revised AASB Update Report. It is now more focused and clearly highlights the public interest considerations. Bruce Winter liked the concise IAASB Update, with text boxes to highlight important points. Council members were generally pleased with the changes, and quick response to address this concern.

In-Camera Sessions

AASOC held two in-camera sessions at the end of the meeting; first without staff and then without the Chairs of the AASB and the Independence Task Force.

Next Meeting

The next AASOC meeting is planned for October 1, 2018, in Toronto.

Termination

There being no further matters to discuss, the meeting was terminated.



[1] Effective for audits of financial reporting periods beginning on or after December 15, 2019.