sox-testing

name sox-testing description Generate SOX sample selections, testing workpapers, and control assessments. Use when planning quarterly or annual SOX 404 testing, pulling a sample for a control (revenue, P2P, ITGC, close), building a testing workpaper template, or evaluating and classifying a control deficiency. argument-hint <control area> [period] SOX Compliance Testing If you see unfamiliar placeholders or need to check which tools are connected, see CONNECTORS.md . Important : This command assists with SOX compliance workflows but does not provide audit or legal advice. All testing workpapers and assessments should be reviewed by qualified financial professionals before use in audit documentation. Generate sample selections, create testing workpapers, document control assessments, and provide testing templates for SOX 404 internal controls over financial reporting. Usage /sox <control-area> <period> Arguments control-area — The control area to test: revenue-recognition — Revenue cycle controls (order-to-cash) procure-to-pay or p2p — Procurement and AP controls (purchase-to-pay) payroll — Payroll processing and compensation controls financial-close — Period-end close and reporting controls treasury — Cash management and treasury controls fixed-assets — Capital asset lifecycle controls inventory — Inventory valuation and management controls itgc — IT general controls (access, change management, operations) entity-level — Entity-level and monitoring controls journal-entries — Journal entry processing controls Any specific control ID or name period — The testing period (e.g., 2024-Q4 , 2024 , 2024-H2 ) Workflow 1. Identify Controls to Test Based on the control area, identify the key controls. Present the control matrix: Control # Control Description Type Frequency Key/Non-Key Risk Assertion [ID] [Description] Manual/Automated/IT-Dependent Daily/Weekly/Monthly/Quarterly/Annual Key High/Medium/Low [CEAVOP] Control types: Automated: System-enforced controls with no manual intervention Manual: Controls performed by personnel with judgment IT-dependent manual: Manual controls that rely on system-generated data Assertions (CEAVOP): C ompleteness — All transactions are recorded E xistence/Occurrence — Transactions actually occurred A ccuracy — Amounts are correctly recorded V aluation — Assets/liabilities are properly valued O bligations/Rights — Entity has rights to assets, obligations for liabilities P resentation/Disclosure — Properly classified and disclosed 2. Determine Sample Size Calculate sample sizes based on control frequency and risk: Control Frequency Population Size (approx.) Recommended Sample Annual 1 1 (test the instance) Quarterly 4 2 Monthly 12 2-4 (based on risk) Weekly 52 5-15 (based on risk) Daily ~250 20-40 (based on risk) Per-transaction Varies 25-60 (based on risk and volume) Adjust for: Risk level: Higher risk controls require larger samples Prior year results: Controls with prior deficiencies need larger samples Reliance: Controls relied upon by external auditors may need larger samples 3. Generate Sample Selection Select samples from the population using the appropriate method: Random selection (default for transaction-level controls): Generate random numbers to select specific items from the population Ensure coverage across the full period Systematic selection (for periodic controls): Select items at fixed intervals with a random start point Ensure representation across all sub-periods Targeted selection (supplement to random, for risk-based testing): Select items with specific risk characteristics (high dollar, unusual, period-end) Document rationale for targeted selections Present the sample: SAMPLE SELECTION Control: [Control ID] — [Description] Period: [Testing period] Population: [Count] items, $[Total value] Sample size: [N] items Selection method: [Random/Systematic/Targeted] | Sample # | Transaction Date | Reference/ID | Amount | Selection Basis | |----------|-----------------|--------------|--------|-----------------| | 1 | [Date] | [Ref] | $X,XXX | Random | | 2 | [Date] | [Ref] | $X,XXX | Random | | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | 4. Create Testing Workpaper Generate a testing template for each control: SOX CONTROL TESTING WORKPAPER ============================== Control #: [ID] Control Description: [Full description of the control activity] Control Owner: [Role/title — to be filled by tester] Control Type: [Manual/Automated/IT-Dependent Manual] Frequency: [How often the control operates] Key Control: [Yes/No] Relevant Assertion(s): [CEAVOP] Testing Period: [Period] TEST OBJECTIVE: To determine whether [control description] operated effectively throughout the testing period. TEST PROCEDURES: 1. [Step 1 — What to inspect, examine, or re-perform] 2. [Step 2 — What evidence to obtain] 3. [Step 3 — What to compare or verify] 4. [Step 4 — How to evaluate completeness of performance] 5. [Step 5 — How to assess timeliness of performance] EXPECTED EVIDENCE: - [Document type 1 — e.g., signed approval form] - [Document type 2 — e.g., system screenshot showing review] - [Document type 3 — e.g., reconciliation with preparer sign-off] TEST RESULTS: | Sample # | Ref | Procedure 1 | Procedure 2 | Procedure 3 | Result | Exception? | Notes | |----------|-----|-------------|-------------|-------------|--------|------------|-------| | 1 | | Pass/Fail | Pass/Fail | Pass/Fail | Pass/Fail | Y/N | | | 2 | | Pass/Fail | Pass/Fail | Pass/Fail | Pass/Fail | Y/N | | EXCEPTIONS NOTED: | Sample # | Exception Description | Root Cause | Compensating Control | Impact | |----------|----------------------|------------|---------------------|--------| | | | | | | CONCLUSION: [ ] Effective — Control operated effectively with no exceptions [ ] Effective with exceptions — Control operated effectively; exceptions are isolated [ ] Deficiency — Control did not operate effectively [ ] Significant Deficiency — Deficiency is more than inconsequential [ ] Material Weakness — Reasonable possibility of material misstatement not prevented/detected Tested by: ________________ Date: ________ Reviewed by: _______________ Date: ________ 5. Provide Common Control Templates Based on the control area, provide pre-built test step templates: Revenue Recognition: Verify sales order approval and authorization Confirm delivery/performance evidence Test revenue recognition timing against contract terms Verify pricing accuracy to contract/price list Test credit memo approval and validity Procure to Pay: Verify purchase order approval and authorization limits Confirm three-way match (PO, receipt, invoice) Test vendor master data change controls Verify payment approval and segregation of duties Test duplicate payment prevention controls Financial Close: Verify account reconciliation completeness and timeliness Test journal entry approval and segregation of duties Verify management review of financial statements Test consolidation and elimination entries Verify disclosure checklist completion ITGC: Test user access provisioning and de-provisioning Verify privileged access reviews Test change management approval and testing Verify batch job monitoring and exception handling Test backup and recovery procedures 6. Document Control Assessment Classify any identified deficiencies: Deficiency: A control does not allow management or employees to prevent or detect misstatements on a timely basis. Consider: Likelihood of misstatement Magnitude of potential misstatement Whether compensating controls exist Significant Deficiency: A deficiency (or combination) that is less severe than a material weakness but important enough to merit attention by those responsible for oversight. Material Weakness: A deficiency (or combination) such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis. 7. Output Provide: Control matrix for the selected area Sample selections with methodology documentation Testing workpaper templates with pre-populated test steps Results documentation template Deficiency evaluation framework (if exceptions are identified) Suggested remediation actions for any noted deficiencies