Polish term (edited): za�o�enie kontynuacji dzia�alno�ci

.

Polish term (edited): za�o�enie kontynuacji dzia�alno�ci

oraz ability / inability to continue as a going concern


Prior audit reporting requirements under SAS No. 34 required a "subject to" qualified audit opinion in cases where the company's ability to continue in existence was in doubt. The former professional standards did not require auditors to explicitly evaluate a client company's ability to continue in existence as part of each and every audit. Continued existence was assumed and not specifically substantiated in most audits. The reporting and auditing requirements under SAS No. 58, and particularly SAS No. 59, which addresses the auditor's consideration of an entity's ability to continue as a going concern, require an explicit evaluation of a company's continued viability in every audit. For cases where such viability is in substantial doubt, a modified (but still considered unqualified) report is to be rendered with an additional fourth paragraph describing the uncertainty about the entity's ability to continue in existence for a reasonable period of time. The following is an example of such an explanatory fourth paragraph set out in SAS No. 59:

The accompanying financial statements have been prepared assuming that the company will continue as a going concern. As discussed in Note X to the financial statement, the company has suffered recurring losses from operations and has a net capital deficiency, which raise substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern. Management's plans in regard to these matters are also described in Note X. The financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.

http://www.nysscpa.org/cpajournal/1995/AUG95/Aud0995.htm