Overall, I think that the revamped auditing format makes the auditing report more readable and more understandable to the readers. Years before, I had an internship in an auditing firm and I had a chance to see numerous auditing reports. All the reports, as we know, have basically the same format. They are very brief. They give a pithy summary of the audit and a few other details. I found the brevity of the traditional style surprising because companies pay out large sum of money for audits, the audits are important, and the auditing report summarizes the final opinion of the audit.

The proposed edition is helpful since it elaborates the auditor’s opinion and findings. Briefly, the proposed revamped version does the following, not done in the typically current style. As outlined by Wall Street Journal:

• It places the most crucial part, the auditor’s opinion, in the introduction.
• It clarifies the auditor’s terminology, such as the meaning of “ reasonable assurance” and “material misstatement”.
• It details who is responsible—in the case of a multinational firm, which auditing department – for which aspects of the audit.
• It summarize the scope of the audit in more details, providing a more comprehensive accounts of which aspects of the company in question was subject to the audit.
• It includes an emphasis paragraph that details the auditor’s review of the most significant aspects of the company’s financial profile.
• It highlights potentially risky aspects of the company’s financial practices.
• It adds a section containing the auditor’s concerning other financial aspects such as the management’s judgment, the company’s accounting policies, etc.
• It identifies the individual, who is primarily responsible for the audit in case of any legal proceedings.

These changes would clarify for investors and other interested persons, the