[The following paragraph is effective for fiscal years beginning on or after December 15, 2024. See PCAOB Release No. 2024-004. The paragraph effective for fiscal years beginning before December 15, 2024 can be found here.]

.31       In an engagement to examine compliance with specified requirements, the practitioner seeks to obtain reasonable assurance that the entity complied, in all material respects, based on the specified criteria. This includes designing the examination to detect both intentional and unintentional material noncompliance. Absolute assurance is not attainable because of factors such as the need for judgment,fn 8A the use of sampling, and the inherent limitations of internal control over compliance and because much of the evidence available to the practitioner is persuasive rather than conclusive in nature. Also, procedures that are effective for detecting noncompliance that is unintentional may be ineffective for detecting noncompliance that is intentional and concealed through collusion between personnel of the entity and a third party or among management or employees of the entity. Therefore, the subsequent discovery that material noncompliance exists does not, in and of itself, evidence inadequate planning, performance, or judgment on the part of the practitioner.

fn 8A      Reference to the judgment of the practitioner throughout this standard has the same meaning as “professional judgment” as described in AS 1000, General Responsibilities of the Auditor in Conducting an Audit.