TPL-RE — Review Engagement (ISRE 2400)
Limited-assurance engagement — analytical procedures + management inquiry, no substantive testing or sampling. Used when full audit assurance isn't required (interim FS, smaller-entity statutory needs, internal-use FS).
Audit vs Review — what's different
| Aspect | Audit (TPL-AA) | Review (TPL-RE) |
|---|---|---|
| Assurance level | Reasonable (high) | Limited (moderate) |
| Procedures | Substantive testing + controls + samples | Analytical procedures + inquiry only |
| Hours | 120-500 | 30-80 |
| Conclusion form | "Present fairly… in our opinion" | "Nothing has come to our attention…" (negative form) |
| EQCR | Required (listed) | Not required |
| Materiality | Computed per ISA 320 | Set by reviewer judgement |
Template metadata
| code | TPL-RE |
| requires_workpapers | 0 |
| est_total_hours | 30-80 |
| typical duration | 2-4 weeks |
| deliverables | Review report (ISRE 2400 format) · review file (working papers) |
The 4 task phases
| planning | Engagement letter · understanding entity · risk assessment · scope of inquiries |
| fieldwork | Analytical procedures (year-on-year, ratios) · inquiry of management · trace material balances · representation letter |
| reporting | Review report (negative-form conclusion) · management letter (if findings) |
| review | Manager + partner review · issue |
Step-by-step
Set materiality
Same 4-base computation as audit but typically slightly higher overall (since assurance is limited). Document the rationale.
Run analytical procedures
YoY comparison, ratio analysis (gross margin, working capital, days-receivables), trend analysis. Flag balances with movement > 25%.
Inquire of management
For each flagged balance: ask. Document the response. If response satisfies — move on. If not — escalate or extend procedures.
Trace material balances
Limited tracing (not full substantive). Confirm balance reasonableness against external evidence (e.g. trace cash to bank statement; confirm it's there).
Get representation letter
Standard review-engagement rep letter. Management confirms FS prepared per applicable framework.
Draft + issue
Use the negative-form wording ("nothing has come to our attention") — never the positive audit wording. Issue.
Don't use the audit-report wording on a review engagement. The conclusion form is fundamentally different — using "in our opinion, FS present fairly" on a review is a misrepresentation of the assurance level. The system's TPL-RE template uses the correct ISRE 2400 wording out of the box; don't paste from a TPL-AA audit report.
If during a review you spot indicators of material misstatement that you can't resolve through inquiry + analytical procedures, you must extend procedures (as you would in an audit) or modify the conclusion. Don't let "limited" become "lazy" — your professional liability is the same.