CPA Canada Assurance: Audit and Assurance

CPA Canada means Chartered Professional Accountants of Canada. Use this page to isolate Audit and Assurance before returning to mixed CPA Canada Assurance practice.

Topic snapshot

Sample questions

These questions are original Finance Prep practice items aligned to this topic area. They are designed for self-assessment and are not official exam questions.

Question 1

Topic: Audit and Assurance

Northline Tools Ltd. is a private ASPE manufacturer with a December 31 year end. During interim audit work, the audit team found that goods received near month-end were not being compared with unmatched supplier invoices before the purchases accrual was prepared. In a sample of 35 receiving reports, 12 items were missing from the accrual listing, with a projected possible understatement of approximately $320,000. Planning materiality is $500,000. The audit manager documented the matter as a significant deficiency because there was no compensating review and Northline is close to a current ratio covenant.

On November 15, management implemented a weekly unmatched receiving report reviewed by the CFO. The auditor observed the new control being performed once and inspected two signed weekly reports showing corrections made. Management asks the auditor to return to the original low-risk audit approach for purchases and payables and to omit the issue from the board communication because it was fixed before the audit report date.

Which interpretation is best?

• A. Communicate the deficiency with the remediation noted, test the new control only for its post-implementation period if reliance is planned, and keep substantive work for the affected earlier period.
• B. Disregard the remediation entirely, because a deficiency found at interim requires control risk to remain high for all related work through year-end.
• C. Apply the original low-risk control strategy for the full year, because the control operated before year-end and two signed reviews were inspected.
• D. Omit the deficiency from governance communication, because the redesigned control existed before the audit report date and management has taken corrective action.

Best answer: A

What this tests: Audit and Assurance

Explanation: Corrective action affects audit planning, but only for the period and assertions supported by sufficient appropriate evidence. A new or redesigned control can support reliance only after it has been designed, implemented, and operated effectively for a sufficient period. Here, the deficiency affected the purchases accrual before November 15, and the covenant sensitivity makes it important to those charged with governance. Observing one performance and inspecting two signed reports may help assess design and implementation, but it does not justify full-year reliance or removal of substantive work for the earlier period. Significant deficiencies identified during the audit should be communicated to those charged with governance; the communication can also describe management’s remedial action so the board understands both the issue and the response.

• Removing the governance communication confuses corrective action with whether a significant deficiency was identified.
• Full-year reliance misreads the timing; a control cannot provide evidence for periods before it was implemented.
• Ignoring the remediation entirely is too rigid because the auditor may test and rely on the new control for the period after implementation if the evidence supports it.

Remediation is relevant to future reliance but does not erase the significant deficiency or provide evidence that the control operated effectively before it existed.

Question 2

Topic: Audit and Assurance

You are planning the CAS audit of Maple Ridge Tools Ltd., a private ASPE manufacturer. The bank requires audited annual financial statements. During risk assessment for the sales and inventory cycle, you noted the following:

• In April, Maple Ridge implemented a new sales and inventory module that automatically posts shipped orders to revenue and cost of sales each night.
• Customer service clerks can create manual credit notes for returns, and warehouse supervisors can edit on-hand quantities. The system logs these changes, but the controller has not reviewed the logs.
• Price overrides greater than 15% require sales manager approval, but returns do not require automated approval.
• The controller compares monthly gross margin to budget, but no evidence of follow-up is retained. Gross margin was 8 to 10 percentage points below budget in November and December, attributed by management to promotions and returns.
• No reconciliation between the inventory subledger and general ledger was performed from May to November. The December reconciliation has an unresolved CAD 180,000 difference. Planning materiality is CAD 250,000.

Which interpretation is most appropriate for audit planning?

• A. Revenue, returns, inventory, and cost of sales have higher misstatement risk; scope should cover access, approval, log-review, and reconciliation controls, with additional substantive work if those controls cannot be relied on.
• B. The only significant risk is revenue completeness from shipments; returns and inventory valuation can remain outside scope because they are processed in the same system.
• C. The gross margin review is sufficient monitoring; the unresolved reconciliation difference is below materiality, so no additional work over inventory or revenue is needed.
• D. The implementation mainly creates an IT project risk; because postings are automated, manual credits and inventory edits do not affect financial reporting reliability.

Best answer: A

What this tests: Audit and Assurance

Explanation: A new integrated sales and inventory system can improve processing, but it also creates financial reporting risks when access, approval, monitoring, and reconciliation controls are weak. Here, manual credit notes and inventory edits directly affect revenue, returns, inventory, and cost of sales. Logs are available but not reviewed, returns lack automated approval, gross margin exceptions were not documented, and the subledger-to-general-ledger reconciliation is missing for much of the year with a significant unresolved year-end difference. Even though CAD 180,000 is below planning materiality, it is close enough and connected to broader control weaknesses to affect risk assessment and audit scope. The audit plan should address the relevant controls and, if they are not suitably designed or operating effectively, expand substantive procedures over the affected accounts and assertions.

• Treating the gross margin review as sufficient overlooks the lack of retained follow-up and the unexplained exceptions near year end.
• Calling the matter only an IT project risk ignores that automated postings, manual credits, and inventory edits directly affect the financial statements.
• Limiting the risk to shipment completeness misses returns, inventory quantities, valuation, cost of sales, and the unresolved reconciliation difference.

The observations show unreviewed system changes, weak returns controls, unexplained margin changes, and an unresolved reconciliation difference affecting multiple financial statement areas.

Question 3

Topic: Audit and Assurance

You are reviewing draft observations from an interim control review over purchases and disbursements for a private company. The engagement objective is to identify control issues that could allow unauthorized or inaccurate payments. Which workpaper result is best interpreted as a control deficiency requiring remediation rather than a minor process observation?

• Recurring utilities PO timing:

  • Three utility invoices had purchase order numbers added after the invoice was received; the annual utility contracts were approved in advance, rates matched the contracts, and the manager approved each invoice before payment.

• Vendor banking changes:

  • The accounts payable clerk enters vendor banking changes and can approve them using a supervisor’s shared login; no independent callback is required, and one sampled change had no support before a payment was released.

• Bank reconciliation initials:

  • Two monthly bank reconciliations were missing wet-ink initials; the system log shows the controller prepared and the CFO reviewed them before month-end close, with no unresolved reconciling items.

• Expense receipt storage:

  • Receipts were stored electronically instead of stapled to paper expense claims; the manager approved each claim, and the images were legible and agreed to the claimed amounts.

• A. Treat the recurring utilities purchase order timing as a control deficiency requiring remediation.

• B. Treat the electronic storage of expense receipts as a control deficiency requiring remediation.

• C. Treat the missing wet-ink initials on bank reconciliations as a control deficiency requiring remediation.

• D. Treat the vendor banking change process as a control deficiency requiring remediation.

Best answer: D

What this tests: Audit and Assurance

Explanation: A control deficiency requiring remediation is more than a formatting issue or isolated administrative preference. It exists when the design or operation of a control could fail to prevent or detect an error, unauthorized transaction, or fraud on a timely basis. Vendor banking changes are high-risk because they determine where cash is paid. Here, the same clerk can enter and approve changes through a shared login, there is no independent callback, and one unsupported change was followed by payment. That points to a real deficiency in authorization, segregation of duties, and accountability. The other observations are minor because the underlying control objective was still achieved through approved contracts, manager approval, system evidence of review, or reliable electronic support.

• Late purchase order numbers for recurring utilities are less concerning because approved contracts, rate matching, and manager approval supported valid payments.
• Missing wet-ink initials do not prove the reconciliation review failed when system logs show timely preparation and CFO review.
• Electronic receipts are acceptable support when they are legible, retained, approved, and agree to the claims.
• Vendor banking changes require stronger controls because weak authorization over payment details can lead directly to misdirected cash.

Incompatible access, shared credentials, no independent verification, and an unsupported bank change create a real risk of unauthorized payments.

Question 4

Topic: Audit and Assurance

Maple Robotics Ltd. is a private company audited under Canadian Auditing Standards and reports under ASPE. The bank requires audited financial statements, and the loan covenant requires EBITDA of at least CAD 3.0 million. Draft EBITDA is CAD 3.05 million, and the CFO receives a bonus if the covenant is met. During year-end revenue testing, the audit senior finds a December 31 invoice for CAD 520,000. The customer confirms the goods were not requested until January 5. A January 10 credit memo reversed the invoice, and the same goods were reinvoiced on January 12. The warehouse log provided by management shows shipment on December 31, but the system export shows the shipment record was created on January 5, with no carrier pickup before January 3. An accounting clerk says the CFO asked staff to “make December look bank-ready.” The controller asks the audit team not to contact the customer again because “it is just a timing issue.” Which interpretation best reflects the implication of these findings?

• A. Treat the findings as indicators of possible fraudulent financial reporting, reassess fraud risk and management integrity, perform further revenue procedures, and communicate promptly with those charged with governance.
• B. Conclude that fraud has been proven, stop additional revenue testing, and issue a modified audit report immediately for management fraud.
• C. Treat the invoice as a routine cutoff error because it reverses in January, record an unadjusted misstatement, and limit communication to a management letter point.
• D. Rely on the CFO’s explanation because the customer was later reinvoiced, complete the planned audit program, and defer any communication until the final audit meeting.

Best answer: A

What this tests: Audit and Assurance

Explanation: Fraud indicators do not require the auditor to prove fraud, but they do require a risk-responsive change in the engagement approach. Revenue was recognized in the period needed to meet a bank covenant and bonus target, external evidence conflicts with management’s records, and the CFO appears involved in influencing December results. These facts indicate possible fraudulent financial reporting and management override. The audit team should reassess fraud risk and management integrity, extend procedures beyond the single transaction as needed, evaluate whether the financial statements are materially misstated if revenue is not adjusted, and communicate suspected management-involved fraud to those charged with governance at an appropriate level.

• Treating the item as a routine cutoff error ignores management pressure, conflicting source evidence, and possible CFO involvement.
• Immediate report modification overstates the evidence; suspected fraud requires further work before forming a reporting conclusion.
• Relying on the CFO or deferring communication is inappropriate when management may be involved in the irregularity.

The conflicting evidence, covenant pressure, and CFO involvement indicate possible management fraud, requiring expanded audit work and governance-level communication.

Question 5

Topic: Audit and Assurance

A CPA firm is considering whether to accept the audit of Lakeview Components Ltd., a private company reporting under ASPE. Lakeview’s controller says the current auditor will not be reappointed because “they asked too many questions about year-end inventory” and the bank wants an audited statement package within six weeks. The partner has confirmed that the firm has industry experience and appears independent, but no engagement letter has been signed.

What should the partner do before accepting the engagement?

• A. Decline the engagement automatically because a disagreement about inventory means the predecessor auditor identified fraud.
• B. Accept the engagement if management provides written representations explaining why the predecessor auditor was replaced.
• C. Request Lakeview’s permission to communicate with the predecessor auditor and consider the predecessor auditor’s response before deciding whether to accept.
• D. Accept the engagement now and contact the predecessor auditor only if opening balances cannot be verified during fieldwork.

Best answer: C

What this tests: Audit and Assurance

Explanation: Before accepting an external audit engagement where another auditor is being replaced, the proposed auditor should obtain the prospective client’s permission to communicate with the predecessor auditor. The purpose is to identify matters that may affect acceptance, such as disputes with management, scope limitations, unpaid fees that impair cooperation, integrity concerns, or unresolved accounting issues. The suspicious comment about inventory makes this communication especially important, but the need arises because the firm is replacing the prior external auditor. If the client refuses permission, that refusal itself is a significant acceptance concern and would normally lead to declining the engagement.

• Waiting until fieldwork is too late because predecessor communication informs the acceptance decision, not just audit planning.
• Management’s explanation is not an adequate substitute for direct predecessor communication because it may be biased or incomplete.
• A disagreement about inventory is a warning sign, but it does not automatically prove fraud; it should be investigated through predecessor communication and other acceptance procedures.

Because the firm is being asked to replace an external auditor, predecessor communication is needed before acceptance to identify any matters affecting the acceptance decision.

Question 6

Topic: Audit and Assurance

Birch Lake Components Inc. is a Canadian private company audited under CAS for its December 31 year end. Revenue and inventory are material. In the prior year, the audit team selected sales samples from an internally produced invoice register, agreed each invoice to a signed warehouse shipping log, and attended the physical inventory count at Birch Lake’s own warehouse.

During current-year planning, the senior documented the following:

• On July 1, Birch Lake replaced its legacy accounting system with a cloud ERP.
• Sales invoices are now created automatically only when a shipment confirmation file is received from a new third-party logistics provider.
• Birch Lake closed its warehouse; inventory is now held by the third-party logistics provider, which performs cycle counts.
• The controller reconciled opening inventory and customer balances on conversion, but the audit team has not tested the reconciliation.
• A data extract labelled all invoices omitted July to September shipments with manual address overrides; management says the interface was fixed in October.
• No report on the third-party logistics provider’s controls has been obtained.

Management says the accounting policies are unchanged and suggests rolling forward the prior-year procedures with a larger sales sample. Which interpretation is best?

• A. The main response should be to increase the sales sample from the current ERP invoice extract because the issue is limited to sampling risk.
• B. The team can rely on the third-party logistics provider’s inventory files as independent external evidence and avoid changing inventory procedures.
• C. The audit approach should be revised to address the ERP conversion, outsourced warehousing, interface completeness, and evidence over the third-party logistics provider.
• D. The prior-year procedures remain appropriate because the financial reporting framework and revenue recognition policy did not change.

Best answer: C

What this tests: Audit and Assurance

Explanation: When operations and IT infrastructure change, rolling forward prior procedures may no longer provide sufficient appropriate audit evidence. Here, sales and inventory moved from client-controlled manual processes to an ERP integrated with a third-party logistics provider. The team also identified untested data migration and a known interface omission in the invoice population. These facts affect completeness of populations, reliability of system reports used for sampling, relevant controls, and the evidence available over inventory existence and rights. The team should update its understanding, reassess risks, validate report completeness before sampling, test migration and interface controls or perform responsive substantive procedures, and obtain appropriate evidence over the third-party logistics provider’s custody and count information.

• Unchanged accounting policies do not mean unchanged audit risks; the process, systems, controls, and evidence sources changed.
• A larger sample from an incomplete or unvalidated ERP extract does not address population completeness or data conversion risk.
• Inventory files from a service provider may be useful, but their reliability and completeness need supporting audit evidence.

The operational and IT changes affect the relevant audit trail, report reliability, populations, controls, and sources of inventory evidence.

Question 7

Topic: Audit and Assurance

You are reviewing process documentation prepared during planning for the audit of Northshore Components Ltd. The workpaper must document what the audit team observed in the walkthrough, not what management says should happen.

Walkthrough notes for the order-to-cash cycle:

• Customer purchase orders are received by email and entered into the ERP by a sales coordinator.
• The ERP flags orders when inventory is insufficient or the customer is over its credit limit.
• During busy periods, the sales coordinator can override the flag using reason code rush; no separate approval is obtained at the time of override.
• Each morning, the warehouse supervisor prints pick lists for orders showing as released and gives them to shipping staff.
• Shipping staff scan goods when shipped, which creates a shipment record in the ERP.
• The billing clerk runs a daily shipped-not-invoiced report and creates invoices from that report.
• The accounting supervisor reviews a weekly unmatched-shipment report and initials it if there are no unresolved items.

Which process narrative best documents the actual operational process observed?

• A. Customer orders are entered by sales, the warehouse ships released orders, the billing clerk invoices shipped orders daily, and cash receipts are applied by accounting with monthly review of aged receivables.
• B. Customer orders are entered into the ERP, the system prevents over-limit and insufficient-inventory orders from being released, shipping scans goods when orders are dispatched, and the weekly unmatched-shipment report confirms invoice completeness.
• C. Customer orders are entered by sales, ERP exception flags may be overridden by the sales coordinator without separate approval, released orders are picked and shipped, shipments generate ERP records, invoices are created from the daily shipped-not-invoiced report, and unmatched shipments are reviewed weekly by the accounting supervisor.
• D. Customer orders are entered by sales, all ERP exception flags are cleared by the credit manager before release, the warehouse ships only approved orders, and accounting invoices after verifying that each shipment has an approved credit release.

Best answer: C

What this tests: Audit and Assurance

Explanation: Process documentation from a walkthrough should record the process as it actually operates, including manual steps, system-generated steps, overrides, handoffs, and monitoring activities observed. It should not replace observed practice with the policy manual or assume approvals and controls that were not performed. Here, the key operational fact is that ERP exception flags can be overridden by the sales coordinator without separate approval during busy periods. The narrative should also preserve the sequence from order entry to release, picking, shipment record creation, invoicing from the shipped-not-invoiced report, and weekly review of unmatched shipments. That documentation gives the audit team a reliable basis for identifying relevant risks and controls in the order-to-cash cycle.

• Assuming credit manager approval fails because the walkthrough found no separate approval when exception flags were overridden.
• Adding cash receipts and aged receivables review fails because those steps were not part of the walkthrough notes provided.
• Describing the ERP as preventing release fails because the system flag can be manually overridden by the sales coordinator.
• Treating the weekly unmatched-shipment report as proof of invoice completeness overstates what was observed; it is a monitoring activity that requires follow-up on unresolved items.

This narrative follows the observed sequence and distinguishes actual override practice from the policy expectation.

Question 8

Topic: Audit and Assurance

Parkview Components Ltd. is a private company reporting under ASPE. During the December 31 audit, revenue cut-off was assessed as a significant risk because management bonuses and a bank covenant are based on EBITDA. Overall materiality is CAD 750,000 and performance materiality is CAD 300,000.

The engagement team prepared this evidence summary:

• Sales tested:
  • 45 invoices dated December 27 to January 5, selected from the sales journal and the manual-override report
• Exceptions:
  • 6 invoices totaling CAD 420,000 were dated and recorded on December 30 or 31
• Sales terms:
  • The contracts for all 6 exceptions state FOB shipping point; no bill-and-hold terms were documented
• Shipping evidence:
  • Warehouse logs and carrier records show the goods left Parkview between January 3 and January 6
• Control observation:
  • The system normally blocks invoicing before shipment confirmation; all 6 invoices were released by the same sales manager using an override code
• Other evidence:
  • Customers paid the invoices in January or February; the sales manager stated that cash collection proves the sales were valid

Which interpretation and next step are best supported by the findings?

• A. The subsequent cash receipts provide reliable evidence that revenue was valid in the current year; document occurrence and perform no further cut-off work.
• B. The CAD 420,000 total is below overall materiality, so pass the difference without expanding testing or evaluating the pattern.
• C. The issue is only a control deficiency because all customers paid; report it to management but do not propose a financial statement adjustment.
• D. The six invoices indicate a likely revenue cut-off misstatement and possible override pattern; propose an adjustment and extend testing for similar year-end manual billings.

Best answer: D

What this tests: Audit and Assurance

Explanation: Subsequent cash receipts can support occurrence and collectability, but they do not resolve the cut-off assertion. With FOB shipping point terms and no bill-and-hold arrangement, shipment after year-end indicates the sales should not have been recorded before December 31. The known exceptions total CAD 420,000, which exceeds performance materiality, and all exceptions involve the same manual override by a sales manager. That pattern is not consistent with an isolated clerical error and may indicate management bias or override. The appropriate response is to propose an adjustment for the identified misstatement and expand procedures over similar year-end manual billings, while considering the control and fraud-risk implications.

• Relying on later cash receipts confuses occurrence with cut-off; payment does not establish that revenue belonged in the audited year.
• Treating the matter only as a control deficiency ignores direct evidence that revenue was recorded in the wrong period.
• Passing the difference solely because it is below overall materiality ignores performance materiality, the significant risk, and the repeated override pattern.

The shipping evidence and FOB shipping point terms contradict current-year recognition, and the clustered overrides require risk-responsive follow-up.

Question 9

Topic: Audit and Assurance

Northgate Fabricators Ltd. is a private company reporting under ASPE. You are reviewing the completion summary for the year-end audit. Overall materiality was set at $240,000, performance materiality at $180,000, and amounts below $12,000 were considered clearly trivial. The audit file requires accumulated uncorrected factual and likely projected misstatements to be evaluated in aggregate; if the aggregate uncorrected amount exceeds performance materiality, the team must request correction and consider whether further procedures are needed before concluding.

Management has declined to record the following entries because each item is individually below overall materiality.

• Revenue recognized in December for goods shipped in January:
  • Overstatement of $86,000
• Inventory test count errors projected to the population:
  • Overstatement of $66,000
• Warranty accrual based on approved claims not recorded:
  • Overstatement of $50,000
• Depreciation posted twice on one asset class:
  • Understatement of $18,000

The controller says the statements are still fairly presented because the net overstatement is below overall materiality. What is the best interpretation of the completion summary?

• A. Modify the audit opinion immediately, because total gross misstatements are close to overall materiality even though net misstatement is lower.
• B. Accept the uncorrected items, because each item is below overall materiality and the net income overstatement is below overall materiality.
• C. Request correction and perform completion follow-up, because the $184,000 net income overstatement exceeds performance materiality and the pattern may indicate management bias.
• D. Pass only the projected inventory amount, because projected sample misstatements are not factual misstatements and should not be accumulated.

Best answer: C

What this tests: Audit and Assurance

Explanation: Uncorrected misstatements are accumulated unless clearly trivial and then evaluated both individually and in aggregate. Here, the net income overstatement is $86,000 + $66,000 + $50,000 - $18,000 = $184,000. That is below overall materiality of $240,000, but it exceeds performance materiality of $180,000 and triggers the file’s completion guideline. The concentration of income-increasing errors also raises a qualitative concern about possible management bias. The audit team should request that management correct the misstatements and determine whether additional procedures are needed before accepting the statements as fairly presented. A reporting effect would be considered only after management’s response and the final evaluation of uncorrected misstatements.

• Looking only at individual amounts ignores the required aggregate evaluation of uncorrected misstatements.
• Projected sample misstatements are likely misstatements and remain in the completion evaluation unless further work shows the projection is not representative.
• A modified opinion is not automatic when a completion guideline is exceeded; the auditor first seeks correction and evaluates whether further evidence or a reporting effect is needed.

The accumulated uncorrected misstatements exceed the stated completion guideline and mostly increase income, so correction and further evaluation are needed before concluding.

Question 10

Topic: Audit and Assurance

Jaya, CPA, is reviewing a revenue cutoff working paper for the audit of Northgate Parts Ltd., a private company reporting under ASPE. Northgate is a parts distributor with a December 31 year end. Overall materiality is $90,000; performance materiality is $60,000. Before the item below, uncorrected misstatements overstate income by $25,000.

The audit file includes the following evidence for one large invoice recorded on December 31:

• Invoice amount:
  • Revenue $420,000; cost of goods sold $315,000
• Sales terms:
  • FOB destination; customer acceptance required on delivery
• Shipment:
  • Carrier picked up goods late on December 31
• Delivery and acceptance:
  • Proof of delivery dated January 3; customer acceptance signed January 4
• Collection:
  • Customer paid the invoice on January 18

The audit assistant concluded: “No adjustment is required because the invoice was issued before year end and was collected after year end.”

Which conclusion should Jaya make?

• A. No adjustment is needed unless similar errors are found in the rest of the cutoff sample, because this is only one transaction and should be projected to the population first.
• B. The sale should remain recorded, but Jaya should disclose a scope limitation because the customer did not respond directly to a confirmation request.
• C. The working-paper conclusion is reasonable because subsequent cash collection provides strong evidence that the December 31 receivable existed and was collectible.
• D. The working-paper conclusion is not reasonable; propose an adjustment to reverse the December 31 revenue and related cost of goods sold, and evaluate the report effect if management refuses.

Best answer: D

What this tests: Audit and Assurance

Explanation: A conclusion on cutoff must be tied to the period in which the revenue recognition criteria were met, not merely to invoice date or later collection. Here, the sales terms make delivery and customer acceptance decisive. Both occurred after December 31, so the revenue and receivable were recorded too early. The related cost of goods sold should also be reversed because the sale did not occur in the audit period. The net income overstatement from this transaction is $105,000, and combined with the existing $25,000 overstatement, uncorrected misstatements would exceed overall materiality. Jaya should therefore require correction or assess the effect on the auditor’s report if management refuses.

• Subsequent cash collection supports collectability, but it does not establish that revenue belonged in the year under audit.
• A missing confirmation response may require alternative procedures, but the delivery and acceptance evidence already identifies a cutoff misstatement.
• Treating the item only as a projected sample error ignores that the specific transaction is a known misstatement with a clear period error.

Delivery and acceptance occurred after year end, so the recorded sale is a known cutoff misstatement that is material when combined with existing uncorrected misstatements.

Continue with full practice

Use the CPA Canada Assurance Practice Test page for the full Finance Prep practice bank, mixed-topic practice, timed mock exams, and explanations.

Related focused pages

• Free CPA Canada Assurance Full-Length Practice Exam
• CPA Canada Assurance: Financial Reporting
• CPA Canada Assurance: Strategy and Governance
• CPA Canada Assurance: Finance

Free review resource

Use the full Finance Prep practice page above for the latest review links and practice page.