Document ID: chunk:federal_register_of_legislation:F2025L00107:front:0:p199
Version: federal_register_of_legislation:F2025L00107
Segment Type: other
Provision Reference: 
Character Range: 615774–618884

significant personal security threat. Law, regulation or national standards may establish further requirements that are relevant to determining whether the disclosure of the name of the engagement leader may be omitted.

Reference to a Practitioner's Expert in the Assurance Report (Ref: Para. 192)

 1.       In some cases, law or regulation may require a reference to the work of a practitioner's expert in the assurance report, for example, for the purposes of transparency in the public sector. It may also be appropriate in other circumstances, for example, to explain the nature of a modification of the practitioner's conclusion, or when the work of an expert is integral to findings included in a long-form report. In such circumstances, the practitioner may need the permission of the practitioner's expert before making such a reference.

 2.       As the practitioner has sole responsibility for the assurance conclusion expressed, it is important that, if the assurance report refers to a practitioner's expert, the wording of that report does not imply that the practitioner's responsibility for the conclusion expressed is reduced because of the involvement of that expert. For example, in describing the practitioner's approach to an estimate that has been identified as having high estimation uncertainty, the practitioner may wish to highlight that the practitioner employed or engaged a practitioner's expert without identifying that expert. Such a reference to the use of a practitioner's expert does not reduce the practitioner's responsibility for the conclusion on the sustainability information and is therefore not inconsistent with paragraph 192.

 3.       A generic reference in a long-form report to the engagement having been conducted by suitably qualified personnel, including subject matter experts and assurance specialists, is unlikely to be misunderstood as reduced responsibility. The potential for misunderstanding is higher, however, in the case of short-form reports, where minimum contextual information is able to be presented, or when law or regulation require the practitioner's expert to be referred to by name. Therefore, additional wording may be needed in such cases to prevent the assurance report implying that the practitioner's responsibility for the conclusion expressed is reduced.

Other Reporting Responsibilities

Assurance Report Prescribed by Law or Regulation (Ref: Para. 193–194)

 1.       In some jurisdictions, the practitioner may have additional responsibilities to report on other matters that are additional to the practitioner's responsibilities under this ASSA. For example, the practitioner may be required to provide a conclusion on specific matters, such as compliance of the sustainability information with a digital taxonomy. Assurance standards in the specific jurisdiction often provide guidance on the practitioner's responsibilities with respect to specific additional reporting responsibilities in that jurisdiction.

 2.       In some cases, the relevant law or regulation may require or permit the practitioner to report on these