Document ID: chunk:federal_register_of_legislation:F2025L00107:front:0:p84
Version: federal_register_of_legislation:F2025L00107
Segment Type: other
Provision Reference: 
Character Range: 274067–277367

or the matter giving rise to a modified conclusion, in the one-to-many report are considered in the context of the significance to users of the reported information. In considering the exceptions or matters giving rise to a modified conclusion, the practitioner may seek to discuss such matters with that other practitioner, if possible in the circumstances. Such communication is dependent upon the reporting entity contacting the value chain entity, and obtaining that entity's approval for the communication to take place.

 2.       Depending on the nature of the information that is the subject of the one-to-many report, or other relevant assurance report of another practitioner, that report may identify complementary user entity controls that, if relevant to the user entity, may need to be designed and implemented by the user entity to have an appropriate basis for using the information obtained in preparing the sustainability information.

 3.       The practitioner may determine that the one-to-many report does not provide sufficient appropriate evidence (e.g., the description of the procedures performed and results thereof may not provide sufficient evidence for the practitioner's purposes). In such circumstances, the practitioner may consider whether it is practicable to supplement the understanding of another practitioner's procedures and conclusions by communicating with that practitioner. If not practicable in the circumstances, the practitioner may need to perform other procedures to obtain sufficient appropriate evidence about the information from that value chain entity.

Communications with another practitioner (Ref: Para. 53)

 1.       Relevant matters that the engagement team may request another practitioner to communicate include:

           * Whether the other practitioner has complied with ethical requirements that are relevant to the engagement, including independence for an assurance engagement.

           * Information about instances of non-compliance with laws and regulations that could give rise to a material misstatement of the sustainability information.

           * A list of uncorrected misstatements identified by another practitioner during the engagement that are not clearly trivial.

           * Indicators of possible bias in the preparation of relevant information.

           * Description of any deficiencies in internal control identified by the other practitioner during the engagement.

           * Other significant matters that another practitioner has communicated or expects to communicate to the entity, including fraud or suspected fraud.

           * Any other matters that may be relevant to the sustainability information, or that another practitioner wishes to draw to the attention of the engagement team, including exceptions noted in any written representations that another practitioner requested from the component entity.

           * The other practitioner's overall findings, conclusion or opinion.

 1.       If the practitioner determines that another practitioner's communications are not adequate for the practitioner's purposes, the practitioner may consider whether, for example:

           * Further information can be obtained from another practitioner (e.g., through further discussions or