The going concern assumption is the foundation of every set of financial statements prepared under accrual accounting. Assets are valued at their carrying amount (not liquidation value). Liabilities are classified by their contractual maturity (not their forced-repayment priority). Revenue is recognised over the period earned (not as cash received). Expenses are matched to the revenue they generate (not recorded when paid).
All of this assumes the company will continue to operate for at least 12 months from the balance sheet date. If the company will not continue, the basis of preparation is wrong, every valuation in the financial statements is wrong and the financial statements are misleading.
The Going Concern Stress Test is the auditor’s assessment of whether the going concern assumption is appropriate. The test is not optional. SA 570 requires every auditor, on every audit, to evaluate whether the going concern basis of accounting is appropriate.
Indicators that the assumption may be inappropriate
SA 570 identifies three categories of indicators.
Financial indicators. Net liability position (liabilities exceed assets). Net current liability position (current liabilities exceed current assets, meaning the company cannot pay its near-term obligations from its near-term assets). Negative operating cash flow for consecutive periods (the business does not generate cash from its operations). Default on loan covenants (the lender may demand repayment). Inability to pay creditors on normal terms (suppliers are being stretched beyond their credit terms). Inability to finance essential capital expenditure (the business cannot maintain its operating capacity). Overdue statutory obligations (GST, TDS, PF, ESI are unpaid because cash is insufficient).
No single indicator is conclusive. A company with a net current liability position may have committed credit facilities that provide sufficient liquidity. A company with negative operating cash flow may have a parent company providing financial support. The auditor assesses each indicator in context.
Operating indicators. Loss of a major customer (if one customer represents 40% of revenue and that customer has terminated its contract, 40% of the revenue base has evaporated). Loss of a key supplier (if the company depends on a sole-source supplier that has ceased operations, the supply chain is broken). Loss of a critical licence, franchise or patent (the legal right to operate has been lost or is at risk). Labour difficulties (strikes, mass resignations, regulatory actions that prevent the workforce from operating). Shortage of critical inputs (raw material unavailability, technology failure, infrastructure disruption).
Governance and external indicators. Non-compliance with regulatory capital requirements (the company’s regulatory licence is at risk). Pending legal proceedings that could result in claims the company cannot meet (a lawsuit whose adverse outcome would exceed the company’s net worth). Changes in legislation or government policy that adversely affect the company’s business model. The company’s key management has departed without replacement. The company’s bankers have indicated that they will not renew credit facilities.
The auditor’s evaluation process
Step 1: Identify indicators. The auditor reviews the financial statements, the management accounts, the board minutes, the correspondence with lenders and regulators, the legal reports and the industry outlook for any indicators from the three categories above.
Step 2: Assess management’s evaluation. SA 570 requires management to assess the entity’s ability to continue as a going concern. The auditor reviews management’s assessment: what period does it cover (it should cover at least 12 months from the balance sheet date)? What assumptions does it make (revenue projections, cash flow forecasts, credit facility availability)? Are the assumptions supportable (do they align with historical performance and current market conditions)?
If management has not performed its own assessment, the auditor should request it. The absence of an assessment is itself an indicator: a management that has not evaluated whether its business can survive the next 12 months is either confident (which may be unjustified) or avoidant (which is concerning).
Step 3: Challenge the assumptions. The auditor independently evaluates the key assumptions in management’s going concern assessment:
Revenue projections: are they consistent with the order book, the customer pipeline and the market conditions? A company projecting 15% revenue growth in a market that is contracting 5% has an unsupported assumption.
Cash flow forecasts: do they include all known commitments (debt repayments, capital expenditure, statutory obligations, rent, salaries)? Are the timing assumptions realistic (customers paying in 60 days when the historical average is 90 days)? Is there a buffer for the unexpected?
Credit facility availability: has the lender confirmed that the facilities will be available for the forecast period? A cash flow forecast that assumes Rs 10 crore of working capital facility is reliable only if the lender has confirmed the facility’s continuation. If the facility is due for renewal in 6 months and the lender has not confirmed renewal, the assumption is unsupported.
Step 4: Conclude and report. The auditor’s conclusion determines the reporting:
If the going concern basis is appropriate and there is no material uncertainty: unmodified opinion, no additional reporting required.
If the going concern basis is appropriate but a material uncertainty exists (the company can probably survive but there is a significant doubt): the auditor checks whether management has adequately disclosed the material uncertainty. If disclosed: unmodified opinion with a “Material Uncertainty Related to Going Concern” section in the audit report (this is not a modification but it is a prominent alert to users). If not disclosed: modified opinion (qualified or adverse, depending on the pervasiveness of the omission).
If the going concern basis is inappropriate (the company will not survive the next 12 months and the financial statements are prepared on a going concern basis): adverse opinion, because the basis of preparation is wrong.
Why this matters for lenders, investors and regulators
A going concern emphasis in the audit report is the most serious non-modification signal available. It tells every reader: the auditor has identified a material uncertainty about this company’s ability to survive. The financial statements are prepared on the assumption that the company will continue, but that assumption is in doubt.
For lenders, the going concern emphasis triggers: enhanced monitoring, covenant review, collateral re-assessment and consideration of whether additional security is required. For investors, it triggers: re-evaluation of the investment thesis and consideration of exit. For regulators, it triggers: enhanced scrutiny and possible intervention.
The going concern assessment is not a formality. It is the most consequential judgment in the audit.
Northrop Management advises companies, audit committees and lenders on going concern assessment, financial restructuring and the governance processes that address going concern indicators before they become going concern conclusions.
[email protected] | +91 92899 25657