Q: 6
Verify supporting documentation on outstanding checks written for a material amount is a test used to conduct for:
Options
Discussion
Probably D since cut-off statements often help confirm outstanding checks near period-end, but I'm not 100 percent on that.
Option C is the way I saw on practice exams-bank confirmations ask banks to verify info about outstanding checks, including large ones. D is more for cut-off timing, not just documentation. Open to correction if I missed a twist.
I don't think it's C. D fits better since cut-off statements are specifically used to confirm outstanding checks for material amounts at a certain date, which lines up with verifying supporting docs. Bank confirmations sometimes miss check-level details, so I'm leaning D here. If I'm off base, let me know.
I'd go C. D is tempting because cut-off statements focus on timing, but for verifying documentation tied to outstanding checks, C (bank confirmation) matches standard audit steps. Trap for those thinking about period-end only.
C tbh, D is more a timing test trap here.
C/D? Not fully convinced on either since both could fit, but probably C for standard procedures.
Isn't D mostly about timing, not just verifying supporting docs? Why not stick with C for standard bank confirmation checks?
I see why people go with C, but I'm leaning toward D. Cut-off statements are often used to verify outstanding checks at a specific point in time, especially for material amounts. The trap here is thinking bank confirmation always gets you detailed check info, but sometimes banks only confirm balances. Not 100% sure, maybe missing something basic?
B, not D. But if the question said "most direct evidence" for verifying check timing around period end, I'd probably lean D since cut-off statements help there. Is the focus on fraud detection or just routine audit?
Be respectful. No spam.