Questions organization of internal control economic entities of individual organizational and legal forms are regulated by the following legislative acts of the Russian Federation:

1. Federal Law of December 26, 1995 No. 208-FZ “On Joint-Stock Companies”, paragraph 1 of Art. 85;
2. Federal Law of 02/08/1998 No. 14-FZ “On Limited Liability Companies”, paragraph 1 of Art. 47;
3. Federal Law of 05/08/1996 No. 41-FZ “On Production Cooperatives”, paragraph 1 of Art. 18;
4. Federal Law of December 8, 1995 No. 193-FZ “On Agricultural Cooperation”, paragraph 1 of Art. thirty.

It should be noted that in the texts of these legislative acts the concepts of “internal control” and “audit” are identified. In terms of their content, these concepts are quite close to each other, which is confirmed by clause 18.1 of Information of the Ministry of Finance of Russia No. PZ-11/2013.

Taking into account what was said earlier, we can conclude that it is necessary to regulate and consolidate responsibilities regarding internal control in the administrative information of an economic entity.

Internal control is a process aimed at achieving a sufficient level of confidence that an economic entity ensures: the efficiency and effectiveness of its activities, including the achievement of financial and operational indicators, the safety of assets; reliability and timeliness of accounting (financial) and other reporting; compliance with applicable laws, including when performing business transactions and maintaining accounting records.

Currently, the methodology for conducting internal control, as well as the methodology for assessing the effectiveness of internal control, are not established by law and are the object of research by many scientists and specialists, including R.A. Alborov, V.B. Ivashkevich, N.N. Khorokhordin and V.G. Shirobokov.

Unfortunately, not all economic entities, especially companies from the small business segment, have currently created internal control services. At the same time, in those companies where internal control is organized, an analysis of its effectiveness is often not carried out.

Internal control is one of the main functions of management, in the absence of which it is impossible to effectively manage an economic entity. It is internal control that allows us to develop and implement solutions for the efficient use of resources. The process of managing financial and economic activities can be characterized both as an interconnected, one-time or periodic targeted impact of the totality of its functions on an object, and as a process carried out in a temporal aspect and in a spatial hierarchy.

The management system of any economic entity is inextricably linked with accounting and control systems. The presence of accounting and control in corporate governance is explained by the need to generate information on every fact of economic life, including those related to the use of material, labor and financial resources, which makes it possible to increase the efficiency of the financial and economic activities of an economic entity.

It should be noted that not all user groups have equal access to information generated by internal control and accounting services. As a rule, the administration can have unlimited access to information, and the owners can have partial access. Therefore, internal control must be organized in such a way as to realize the possibility of providing the necessary information for management purposes at different levels of the hierarchy, with different requirements for its completeness, form and content. Internal control in the management system of an economic entity can function effectively only in conjunction with other management functions. The connection between control, accounting and analytical processes allows us to best solve the problem of information support for management.

The interaction of powers of control bodies is implemented through the function of managing an economic entity, which is quite fully disclosed in their work by S.R. Kontsevaya, V.A. Karasev and N.K. Kostenkova. The interrelation of management functions, reflected by these scientists in their work in the form of a diagram (Fig. 1).

Figure 1. Interrelation of management functions of a commercial organization when exercising control

Thus, the mutual influence of management functions is undeniable, which must be indicated when assessing the effectiveness of the organization's internal control.

The purpose of internal control is determined by each economic entity independently. Thus, according to information from the Ministry of Finance of Russia No. PZ-11/2013, internal control contributes to the achievement by an economic entity of the goals of its activities and should ensure the prevention or detection of deviations from established rules and procedures, as well as distortions of accounting data, accounting (financial) and other reporting. The implementation of control actions is impossible without considering its components.

In the specified information, the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation identifies the following as the main elements of internal control of an economic entity:

• control environment;
• risk assessment;
• internal control procedures;
• information and communication;
• assessment of internal control.

Analysis of the above document and the work of individual specialists allows us to generate data to characterize the elements of internal control, including the use of the organization’s resources, which are systematized in Table. 1.

Table 1. Characteristics of internal control system elements

We note that in the elements of internal control, the issue of assessing the effectiveness of internal control, both for management purposes and for the purposes of an independent audit of financial statements. As a result, there is no methodological basis that allows companies to effectively correct errors and influence management decision-making. Therefore, for the purposes of management, it is most important and necessary for economic entities to form a system of indicators and criteria for assessing the effectiveness of internal control over the use of resources, including material, labor and financial ones.

Another problem is the lack of general criteria for assessing efficiency in the Russian Federation, which is explained by the lack of internal control standards or their insufficient development. As noted in his work by R.O. Kostirko, the issue of assessing the quality of the activities of subjects of internal control is complicated by the fact that “in the economic literature, issues of the theory of the effectiveness of control and generalization of the characteristics of its quality are not sufficiently developed.” To assess the effectiveness of internal control, domestic scientists propose to use certain private indicators, and the proposed recommendations aimed at increasing the effectiveness of control are local in nature. Available methods for assessing the effectiveness of internal control are limited to assessing the effectiveness of internal control due to risk reduction.

In recent years, increased attention has been paid to internal control at the international level. The result of work in this area was the development of a number of documents that attempt to define, evaluate, describe and identify areas for improving internal control. A brief description of individual documents is presented in Table. 2.

Table 2. Characteristics of internal control models

Since the listed documents were developed by different bodies for different target groups, there may be some inconsistencies between them. However, each document focuses on internal control and a specific target group. A comparison of the documents shows that each one uses ideas from previous documents.

The comparison of internal control concepts, which is given on the Bankir.ru website, deserves attention (Table 3).

Table 3. Comparative analysis of internal control concepts

Assessing the effectiveness of internal control must begin with its organization, since only a well-organized system can be effective. Quite detailed requirements for organizing internal control are set out in the already mentioned information of the Ministry of Finance of Russia No. PZ-11/2013.

The system of internal control over the use of resources cannot be effective without clearly delineated powers of the control bodies of an economic entity. The division of control powers between divisions is an internal matter of each organization and entirely depends on the interaction of corporate governance, the risk management system and internal control itself. Organizing effective interaction between departments involved in management is another problem when assessing the effectiveness of internal control. The diagram of interaction between divisions of an economic entity during the implementation of control measures is presented in Fig. 2.

Figure 2. Interaction of competencies (authorities) of the control divisions of the organization

When developing a methodology for assessing the effectiveness of internal control, it is necessary to clearly formulate methods for its implementation depending on the goals set by corporate management. Therefore, control measures may vary. At the same time, the lists of procedures for assessing the effectiveness of internal control used within each event will be similar:

• control and approval of documents;
• checking arithmetic records;
• maintaining and checking analytical statements;
• Preparation and approval of reports, as well as communication of reports to management.

When assessing the effectiveness of internal control, the hierarchical “ladder” of techniques and assessment methods shown in Fig. 3.

Figure 3. Hierarchy of techniques and methods for assessing the effectiveness of internal control

Internal control procedures are actions aimed at minimizing risks that affect the ability to achieve the goals of an economic entity.

A survey of the personnel of an economic entity is carried out in order to assess their knowledge and qualifications, as well as to obtain information about the procedure for carrying out the facts of economic life and the functioning of internal control. Observation of the facts of economic life and the implementation of internal control allows us to confirm the fact of its existence and effectiveness. Analytical techniques are used when it is necessary to identify formalized indicators for assessing internal control.

Verification of evidence of internal control and its results is applied if its results have been documented.

Repeated implementation of the internal control procedure is used if all other methods have failed to provide sufficient evidence of the effectiveness of internal control and its documentation is missing.

The inspector's opinion, which is formed during the assessment of the effectiveness of internal control, serves as the basis for making any decisions based on it.

According to the authors, the results of assessing the effectiveness of internal control should be documented. There are no special requirements for the preparation of the final document based on the results of the internal control assessment. At the same time, it should be noted that the generated document must be sufficient and appropriate and meet such criteria as: simplicity; visibility; understandability; neutrality of information, etc.

It is advisable to assess internal control based on the following requirements for control activities: the proportion of the sample of documents or control objects; validity of identified deviations; considering possible causes of errors; developing recommendations for correcting errors; assessing the impact of errors on management decision-making (risks of ineffective management decisions caused by undetected errors).

Based on these criteria, the benchmarks should be summarized on a special checklist. Internal control is assessed as a percentage. 100% is assigned if all documents have been checked and there are no comments on the control results. Accordingly, zero percent is assigned if no control measures were carried out in any area.

As can be seen from the specified file, in paragraph 1 of the checklist, the assessment result of 80% was obtained in the following way:

• 100% of the available sample (documents) were subject to control actions in terms of internal control regulation;
• during internal control, inspectors provided recommendations for eliminating violations;
• Internal control specialists decided that 80% of the recommendations were feasible and effective.

Total 80% (80% x 100%).

Based on the data set out in the checklist, an assessment of the effectiveness of the organization's internal controls should be made based on the professional judgment of the person performing the effectiveness assessment. As noted in their works by N.V. Generalov and S.N. Karelskaya, one of the most frequently cited definitions of “professional judgment” is presented by L.Z. Shneidman:

Professional judgment is an opinion, a conclusion that is the basis for making a decision under conditions of uncertainty. It is based on the knowledge, experience and qualifications of relevant specialists.

The article notes that “professional judgment can be characterized as a reasoned opinion of a professional accountant, expressed in conditions of uncertainty in the qualification, cost measurement, classification and assessment of the significance of facts of economic life for the purposes of accounting reporting, based on the currently available, complete, reliable and objective information, as well as the peculiarities of the functioning of an economic entity.” According to the authors, from the point of view of assessing internal control, no one can characterize internal control more reliably than a professional accountant or auditor.

If we take into account the requirements for internal control, we can formulate separate approaches to standardizing the quality of assessments to form the professional judgment of the inspector:

• validity of professional judgment (based on documented and verified results);
• consistency (the obtained performance evaluation data does not contradict other relevant information);
• consistency (performance assessment is based on a system of indicators and criteria established by internal documents in the organization);
• observance of the priority of economic content over form (the elevation of economic information over legal information during the assessment of the internal control system);
• objectivity (comprehensive consideration of criteria and indicators for assessing the effectiveness of the internal control system of an economic entity).

It is advisable to establish the procedure for assessing internal control in the local regulatory act of the organization. This can be either an accounting policy or a separate document, for example a regulation on internal control; the most rational is the formation of the second document.

The regulations on internal control of the organization should set out the internal principles of conducting audits of the facts of economic life and other accounting objects, reflected in 402-FZ and other federal accounting standards. The development of internal control standards requires significant labor and financial resources.

In the regulations on internal control of an organization or in another local act of an economic entity, it is necessary to define the indicators that the inspector will use to assess the effectiveness of internal control. Thus, for large organizations it seems preferable to create a separate standard, for small and medium-sized enterprises - to introduce a separate paragraph. In addition, it is very important for the organization’s management to carry out work aimed at improving the quality of internal control. It is advisable to carry out additional activities: surveying employees, analyzing archival data and conducting statistical studies, within the framework of which the percentage of correctly executed documents, the percentage of claims of the Federal Tax Service Inspectorate (IFNS) that were successfully defended in the framework of pre-trial challenges to decisions, etc.

An economic entity needs to carry out work aimed at integrating individual components of internal control into a single environment and a single information field. All functions of controlling units must be clearly defined (enshrined in a local act reflecting their interaction and functions) and complement each other, creating a single protective space. In addition, it seems advisable to create a unified automated system for risk control, including a unified database of risk events of an economic entity. The latter will undoubtedly help prevent risks and increase the efficiency of internal control of an economic entity. To assess the effectiveness of internal control, it is advisable, according to the authors, to use tests developed by Professor R.A. Alborov and used in practical audits by many audit firms.

From the analysis of the presented testing data it follows that in this example the level of organization of internal control over research issues is low and below average. The main disadvantage of on-farm control is the lack of actual control over the receipt, availability and use of materials.

If, during the study and assessment of the effectiveness of the internal control system, individual deficiencies are identified, it is recommended to use the following procedures:

• consideration of the nature and causes of ineffectiveness of internal control;
• Carrying out additional verification or testing of the system (if the inspector considers it necessary);
• identifying directions and formulating recommendations to eliminate identified deficiencies.
• When forming recommendations to eliminate identified deficiencies in internal control, it is necessary to:
• describe the lack of internal control and the associated risk;
• describe the actions that need to be taken to eliminate the deficiency;
• appoint a person responsible for eliminating the deficiency;
• set a deadline for eliminating the deficiency.

It should be noted that internal control should be aimed at identifying and preventing all errors, both significant and non-significant. Internal control is carried out by both the accounting service and the internal control service or audit departments, and if the internal control service can use selective methods during inspections, then the accounting service has a method of complete verification.

The recommended working document generated in the internal control system, containing recommendations for eliminating identified deficiencies in the internal control system using the example of the use of materials, is presented in the following example.

Thus, during the assessment of control procedures, it is very important to minimize the risks associated with accounting, which is achieved by developing recommendations for eliminating identified deficiencies in the internal control system.

Figure 4. Scheme of formation of information flows in the process of assessing the effectiveness of the internal control system

In conclusion, it should be noted that due to the lack of a clearly formulated standard for assessing the effectiveness of internal control, economic entities have to independently form an opinion about the compliance of internal control with the goals and objectives of their activities, as well as check the effectiveness of control measures according to their professional judgment.

Bibliography:

1. Alborov R.A. Audit in organizations of industry, trade and agro-industrial complex: Textbook. allowance. M.: Business and Service, 2003. 464 p.
2. Belik V.D., Skakun L.S. Development of methodological approaches to assessing the quality of activities of internal control subjects: application of qualimetric methods // International accounting. 2012. No. 42. pp. 48-57.
3. Generalova N.V., Karelskaya S.N. Application of professional judgment in different periods of development of normative regulation of accounting in Russia // International accounting. 2013. No. 33.
4. Gorodilov M.A. International Auditing Standard No. 610 “Use of the results of the work of internal auditors”: new edition // Auditor. 2013. No. 8. pp. 56-63.
5. Gubaidullina A.R. Accounting principles that determine the use of professional judgment of an accountant in the transition to international financial reporting standards // International accounting. 2012. No. 28.
6. Kontsevaya S.R., Karasev V.A., Kostenkova N.K. Development of internal control in the agricultural production management system // International accounting. 2014. No. 2.
7. Kotlyachkov O.V. Criteria and evaluation indicators in the audit of the efficiency of using investment funds // Bulletin of IPB. 2013. No. 4. pp. 39-48.
8. Ostaev G.Ya., Kontsevaya S.R., Gallyamova T.R. Formation and standardization of internal audit in commercial organizations // International accounting. 2012. No. 45.
9. Shirobokov V.G., Katelikova T.I. Directions for auditing supply and marketing agricultural consumer cooperatives // Accounting in agriculture. 2012. No. 4.
10. Khorokhordin N.N. Internal audit service: stages of creation, goals and objectives // Audit statements. 2007. No. 10.
11. Kostirko R.O. Assessment of the effectiveness of internal control in the management of receipts.

A variety of methods are used in the literature to assess the effectiveness of the internal control system of the audited entity. In table 2.8 provides an overview of the methods proposed in the literature. Basically, they all come down to the development of tests of internal control tools, which allow us to evaluate the structure of the internal control system, the composition of its elements and their ability to detect, correct and prevent significant misstatements; as well as strengthen the performance of the ICS elements during the period under review.

Table 2.8

Review of methods for assessing the SVK proposed in the specialized literature

One of the most common is the methodology for assessing the internal control system, proposed by specialists from the St. Petersburg company Gorislavtsev and K, which is distinguished by its ease of practical application, the presence of not only qualitative, but also quantitative assessments of the effectiveness of the internal control system. This methodology is based on a test, the questions of which have three possible answers: “yes” - characterizes the effectiveness of the internal control system element at a high level; “no” - indicates the low efficiency of the internal control system element; “not typical” - indicates the insignificant role of the element / its uselessness in the activities of the organization. When answering a question, the correct answer option is suggested to be indicated with a “+” sign.

The structure of the SVK assessment test according to the method of the St. Petersburg company “Gorislavtsev and K” is reflected in table. 2.9.

To determine the effectiveness of the ICS, the percentage of positive responses to the total number of tests is used. If this ratio is 40-60%, the effectiveness of the internal control system is usually determined as average; if the ratio is less than 40%, the level of CRS is classified as low; with a ratio of more than 60% - as high.

SVK assessment test (option 1, “Gorislavtsev and K”)

• 1. Initial assessment of the internal control system, which proposes to analyze the organizational structure, division of duties, powers and responsibilities, personnel policies, activities carried out by the internal control service, individual internal control systems tools aimed at ensuring the conditions for the safety of property, accounting registers, and documents.
• 2. Confirmation of the internal control system assessment - is carried out only if at the first stage the level of efficiency of the internal control system is assessed as no lower than average. When confirmed, such essential elements of the internal control system as the accounting system, contractual obligations, and controls in the computer data processing system are subject to assessment.

A different test for assessing the effectiveness of the internal control system is proposed in the textbook by Yu. A. Danilevsky, S. M. Shapiguzov, N. A. Remizov and E. V. Starovoitova “Audit”. The test reflects not only lists of parts and elements of the internal control system, but also records the values ​​of the elements, as well as the characteristics of their effectiveness (Table 2.10).

To assess the level of effectiveness of the internal control system within the framework of the methodology under consideration, one should calculate the weighted average between the responses received, taking the value of a high level of internal control system effectiveness equal to 0.61, low - 0.39, average - 0.5. The sum of the products of the indicated levels of ICS effectiveness by the number of elements assessed by the corresponding criterion is divided by the total number of ICS elements (questions in the test).

As an alternative to the methodology discussed above, in the specialized literature it is proposed to take the value of a high level of ICS efficiency as 3 points, an average level as 2 points, and a low level of ICS efficiency is recommended to be assigned 1 point

(Table 2.11). The final effectiveness of the internal control system in this case is calculated as the quotient of the number of points received by the audited entity divided by the total maximum possible number of points.

Table 2.10

SVK assessment test (option 2, Yu. A. Danilevsky, S. M. Shapiguzov, N. A. Remizov and E. V. Starovoitova)

Table 2.11

SVK assessment test (option 3)

L. G. Makarova, M. A. Stefan and A. K. Kovina in the audit tutorial suggest using the multi-criteria method of hierarchy analysis (MAI), which in the specialized literature is also called the method of pairwise comparisons, when assessing the internal control system. MAI allows several participants to participate in the selection of solutions simultaneously and formulate quantitative parameters characterizing the quality of the ICS, taking into account the priorities of its elements. The use of this technique is associated with the decomposition of the problem, comparative judgments and synthesis of priorities; its results make it possible to select the best alternative when organizing an internal control system and improving its subsystems and elements.

As noted above, the results of the assessment of the internal control system and the formation of the auditor’s opinion on its effectiveness are used in planning and implementing the audit, determining the composition and number of procedures of the audit program, sample size, and determining the type of audit report. The more the auditor intends to rely on certain controls in preparing his opinion, the more carefully he should test their effectiveness.

• Danilevsky Yu. A., Shap Iguzov S. M., Remizov N. A., Starovoitova E. V. Audit: textbook, manual. M.: Publishing House FBK-Press, 2002.
• Letter of the Central Bank of Russia dated March 24, 2005 No. 47-T “On Methodological Recommendations for Inspecting and Evaluating the Organization of Internal Control in Credit Institutions.”
• Makarova L. G., Stefan M. A., Kovina A. K. Fundamentals of auditing. Self-instruction manual.

The issues of organizing the construction of an internal control system are becoming more and more relevant every year; apparently, this is also realized at the state level, which is explained by the content of Art. 19 of Federal Law No. 402-FZ “On Accounting”, which provides for all entities covered by the above law the obligation to organize and carry out internal control of the facts of economic life. Moreover, for business entities subject to mandatory audit, the object of control should be not only accounting and preparation of financial statements, but also the very facts of the economic life of the economic entity. The exception is cases where the head of the organization has assumed accounting responsibilities.

Despite all this, the implementation internal control systems in most cases, economic entities either ignore it or implement it formally.

Apparently, realizing the novelty and significance of the topic for Russian business practice, the lack of proper practical experience, the Ministry of Finance of Russia prepared a generalization of the practice of legislation in the field of internal control in Information No. PZ-11/2013 “Organization and implementation by an economic entity of internal control of the facts of economic life, accounting accounting and preparation of accounting (financial) statements.” This document conveys a general model of internal control accepted in international practice, in comparison with which companies and organizations can evaluate their own management systems based on risk analysis in the organization’s business processes and the integration of controls into the business process depending on the chosen risk management method.

Analysis of Information No. PZ-11/2013 allows us to conclude that it is overly theorized and presents previously known issues discussed, for example, in FPSAD No. 8 “Understanding the activities of the audited entity, the environment in which it is carried out, and assessing the risks of material misstatement of the audited financial ( accounting) statements". However, the question of implementing the requirements of Art. 19 of Law No. 402-FZ on the organization of internal control in practice still remains open. Therefore, studying the practice of organizing internal control, as well as exploring its necessity and relevance for any enterprise, is possible only by relying on the experience of foreign companies.

Analysis of the reasons for ignoring legal requirements and best practices in terms of building an internal control system allowed us to establish that the current situation is due to the following:

• Many Russian entrepreneurs remain unaware of the need and relevance of internal control, and there is an opinion that the manager is able to single-handedly control the entire course of organizing business processes;
• the accounting law does not establish any restrictions regarding the order, methods, procedures for implementing internal control;
• not all specialists know how to organize an internal control system in practice;
• the essence of internal control is distorted - it is transferred from the management function to the next control unit of the organization, for example, the audit service, focused on procedures for subsequent control in relation to the facts of economic life recorded by the accounting system;
• the concentration of any control activities in the organization on subsequent control procedures and measures taken based on the results of identified deviations, and not on preliminary and current control procedures, which allows not only to increase the likelihood of identifying errors (deviations) in the early stages, but also to increase the efficiency of the work itself internal control systems;
• the focus of management systems more on the process than on the result, the lack of reasonable indicators for assessing the efficiency and effectiveness of activities; imperfection or complete absence of management accounting, which allows for, or rather, to ensure control over the achievement of results.

Without considering the issues of the structural organization of internal control, since these issues are currently quite widely researched and disclosed, we will focus on the availability of criteria for assessing the effectiveness and efficiency of the internal control system.

How to evaluate the effectiveness of the internal control system adopted by an organization in conditions where:

• on the one hand, much attention is paid both in modern and foreign literature to the issues of organizing internal control, but not to assessing the effectiveness of the internal control system;
• on the other hand, the difference in models for organizing the internal control system, depending on the nature and scale of the organization’s activities, leads to the emergence of different ways of assessing their effectiveness;
• there is no certainty in the content of the concept of “efficiency”, which is different for each system and depends on many factors, including economic conditions and the management mechanism?

Efficiency is usually understood as the relative effect, effectiveness of a process, operation, project, defined as the ratio of the effect, result to the costs, expenses that determined and ensured its receipt.

But in relation to the internal control system, it is advisable to point not so much at effectiveness (the number of identified deviations) as at productivity (the activity of the subjects of control, the sufficiency of control procedures, the systematic nature of the control exercised).

Therefore, an internal control system will be considered effective if it not only demonstrates the ability to identify errors and deviations, but also changes in order to reduce the likelihood of such errors and deviations occurring in the future.

Currently, only two areas of activity are involved in assessing the effectiveness of the internal control system by force of law - auditors and bank employees. However, to date, proper methods for assessing the effectiveness of the internal control system that reduce the subjectivity of the approach have not been developed in practice.

In current practice, several approaches that have both similarities and differences are used and proposed for use in assessment. The content of the approaches, their advantages and disadvantages are discussed in detail in the table.

As can be seen from the table above, there is no universal approach to assessing the effectiveness of the internal control system; in each approach, along with disadvantages, advantages can also be identified, but, as the analysis shows, all these methods are aimed at obtaining confidence that the systems internal control is effective, i.e. meets the following criteria:

1. the presence of regulations that formalize the internal control system in the organization, their effectiveness and timely revision;
2. the structural organization of internal control is based on the principles and practice of building a risk-oriented system;
3. there is an infrastructure that ensures the reality and effectiveness of control;
4. the applied control procedures are adequate to the risks, sufficient and effective;
5. the presence of appropriate information flows that ensure proper security of their transmission channels;
6. availability and operation of a system for monitoring the effectiveness of the internal control system.

To summarize, we can say that all internal control methods:

• are aimed at forming any assessments to a greater extent of the structural organization of the internal control system;
• represent more of a method of subsequent control than current;
• do not contribute to the development of the internal control system’s ability to improve itself.

The main reason for this situation is the perception of the internal control system as an “imposed” system.

Therefore, we propose to transfer discussions about performance assessment criteria from the framework of monitoring and evaluation of quantitative indicators (control procedures, number of control activities carried out, etc.) into the framework of considering the internal control system through the prism of a functionally interacting subsystem of the overall management system. Consequently, assessment of this interaction through qualitative characteristics (timeliness of risk assessment, control procedures, identity of built-in controls with identified risks), i.e. shift the emphasis in assessing the effectiveness of the internal control system from effectiveness to efficiency.

How? To do this, it is necessary to remember that control is a function of the management system, i.e. is a subsystem of a single system (see figure). Consequently, the effectiveness of the subsystem and its immediate development will depend on a combination of external and internal factors that influence the system (control) as a whole.

In further research, we proceeded from the fact that each system has a goal, which is further disaggregated into tasks, then into functions, and lastly into operations and actions exerted on an element of the system.

Given this sequence, it can be assumed that achieving the goal of the internal control system is directly dependent on the operations and actions performed by personnel, i.e. It is proposed to implement internal control through the control function implemented by each employee within the framework of their functional responsibilities. Therefore, in order for the internal control system to become operational and prone to self-improvement, it is necessary to establish a relationship between the effectiveness of the control function and staff motivation. To do this, a number of conditions must be met:

1. create conditions for the implementation of the control function that will ensure the achievement of results;
2. minimize the influence of the subjective factor in assessing the result of the control function performed by the personnel, and therefore, the expected results from the personnel must be measurable;
3. determine the extent of personnel responsibility if the specified parameters and established requirements are not achieved;
4. The areas of responsibility of each employee are determined by the ability of “control points”, to prevent and reduce the likelihood of errors (deviations). A control point is understood as a control procedure (action) established in that part of the business process where the probability of deviation of the expected result from the specified parameters can be very high due to the influence of a large number of different factors, with the aim of possibly leveling the results of the influence of these factors.

From our point of view, the use of a system of key performance indicators (KPI) will ensure the fulfillment of these conditions.

The implementation of this model in practice involves performing a number of successive stages:

I. Identification of processes in the activities of society

The activities of an economic entity are segmented into processes (business processes) using the mechanisms of a process approach to managing the activities of organizations.

When modeling processes, it is necessary to adhere to the rule of process sequence, i.e. building a chain of interconnected processes in which the output of one process will be the input for another process or influence the input for a subsequent process.

Each dedicated process must contain a business process owner and a group of employees involved in this business process. Moreover, if the rule for the sequence of business processes is fulfilled, then the owner of one of them is automatically a participant in the previous business process, due to which it is possible to build a process-by-process “chain of control” and promptly identify “risk zones” in achieving the goals of the organization.

II. Identification of key performance indicators

For each identified process, a set of key performance indicators is developed, which are both qualitative and quantitative. The most important thing in this situation is that the results of the performance of control functions by personnel, and, consequently, performance indicators must be measurable and not assessed subjectively.

III. Creating a value matrix for each process

Creating a value matrix is ​​divided into 2 successive stages.

1. Distribution of the company’s total bonus wage fund among processes.

This stage is an important step for building the final remuneration model, since the correct (rational) distribution of the bonus fund for specific processes will be a stimulating factor for productivity growth both in key processes and in the entire organization as a whole. To carry out this stage, it is recommended to use an adapted BCG analysis.

After conducting this analysis, management will receive an answer to the main question, namely: what processes currently need stimulation?

The most important thing in this situation is the distribution of the total wage fund, which should not be completely fixed, but is given by a mathematical (economically sound) formula. The variables in this formula (model) will be the formalized (reduced to a single denominator) results of each process and the coefficient (weight) of each process, set on the basis of BCG analysis.

2. Distribution of the process wage fund for specific KPIs.

Since it is assumed that the owner of the process has a complete understanding of the process, he compiles a “KPI Weight Matrix”, which is a set of “vector of weights” for each position (employee) involved in this process. “Vector of weights” is a set of weights for each key indicator, set based on the overall value of this indicator in the activity of the process.

From the stated formulation it follows that when distributing weights, the following rule must be satisfied: the sum of all weights for one process is equal to 1 (or 100, depending on the accepted calculation system).

The proposed distribution scheme is not ideal, and the organization can use another method of distributing the process wage fund within the process. But the result of this method should be a well-founded “Matrix of Values”, otherwise an internal conflict may arise with the staff, as a result of which the motivation of one of the groups of employees involved in a particular process may decrease rather than increase.

IV. Creation of a mathematical model of personnel bonuses for a specific process

It is worth noting that when forming the model, we proceed from the statement that the bonus fund is not subject to redistribution among processes if in any process the process bonus fund has not been completely distributed.

Formulation of the problem: the organization’s employees divided the company’s activities into interrelated business processes (BP). To independently build an internal control system, it was decided to use, among other things, a methodology based on monetary motivation of employees. To build a motivation system, key performance indicators (KPIs) are used.

In order to build and analyze the internal control system, the company identified functions in the business process, identified possible risks and defined control procedures.

At the same time, the following is determined for each business process: the number of employees involved in the business process; total number of KPIs in BP; KPIs were differentiated by importance in BP; KPIs are defined for each employee; the contribution of employees in meeting KPIs is assessed (differentiation by position, skills, etc.); the bonus wage fund for BP has been determined.

Formalization. Let us determine that: m is the number of employees involved in the business process; n - total number of KPIs in BP; k is the total bonus wage fund at the BP. Let us determine that: A is the matrix of employee participation in the business process.

Modeling. In our opinion, in this case, modeling should be done using probability theory, statistics and random processes. Building a model and reasoning in this axiomatics will allow you to apply elements of decision-making theory built on probabilistic models and the concept of uncertainty.

Since the motivational component of wages is aimed at strengthening the internal control system, KPIs are selected based on identified risks and (or) control procedures in such a way that with sufficient confidence it is possible to identify a certain set of KPIs with a risk and (or) control procedure. Based on this, it is fair to say that for the purpose of describing the internal control system, it is possible to select a certain set of KPIs, which is a characteristic that defines a function in the business process.

The execution of a particular task by employees at a certain point in time t is a random variable taking the value “yes” / “no” (1 or 0), with a certain probability of completion. Let us denote the probability of achieving the i-th KPI as pi.

It is assumed that the probability of achieving a particular KPI indicator depends on the number of distributed POs per procedure (and as a consequence, per specific set of KPIs). In other words:

Then Z(t, vi) = ATRV is a random function or random process, where t is time, A, R, V are defined during formalization.

Let's analyze the described process:

1. The process is stationary. This conclusion is an assumption of the fact that the implementation of a certain KPI does not depend on the moment of time t, all other things being equal.
2. The KPI V fulfillment vector is a vector consisting of random variables, the execution of a particular set of tasks at a fixed point in time t. Since the elements of the vector V take on the values ​​"yes"/"no" with probability pi and 1-pi respectively, it is fair to say that the vector V (like its elements) has a Bernoulli distribution.

Consequently, the magnitude of the occurrence of events obeys the Poisson distribution with the probability function:

where x is the frequency of events, λ is some fixed number.

Thus, the task is to compose the matrix R in such a way that x, the frequency of events in the constructed random process, is maximum.

The effectiveness of the constructed control procedures can be determined by comparing the frequency of events (or the probability of a positive result) with the achieved result of the BP activity. The fact that the frequency of the event is quite high (or the probability of a positive result tends to 1), and the performance results of the business unit are not improved, may indicate an incorrect choice of KPI indicators and, as a consequence, an incorrect definition of control procedures (since, according to the terms of the task, KPIs are characteristics procedures).

It is worth noting that in practice, KPIs can be chosen in such a way that the value of the vector V will not be “yes” or “no” (for example, differentiated in the interval), then the random variables of the vector V will have a different distribution and meet different criteria, either otherwise satisfying the current needs of the organization.

Conclusion

The inclusion of control functions in the functional responsibilities of personnel and, ultimately, their connection with the remuneration received for work through a motivational policy will allow:

• ensure achievement of the goal of the internal control system and transfer it from the category of “added” systems to the category of “built-in”;
• help overcome the main limitation of any control - the human factor. It is the human factor in most cases that limits not only the effectiveness of the internal control system, but also its full functioning, through inaction or the formal implementation of control procedures in most cases, since any control is unnatural to the nature of any person.

Despite the existence of practical experience in testing this model, directions for further research, from our point of view, could be:

• approaches to measurability of the results of performing the control function of personnel with a predominance of quantitative and qualitative assessments that are not subject to subjective factors;
• research of approaches to mathematical modeling of the process in order to establish the adequacy of the target value set for the key indicator, as well as its weight in the overall set of key indicators, in the personnel motivation system, to the established control action at “critical points” in business processes.

1. Raizberg B.A., Lozovsky L.Sh., Starodubtseva E.B. Modern economic dictionary. 6th ed., revised. and additional M.: INFRA-M, 2011.
2. Elin A.I., Kobozev I.K. Some approaches to assessing the effectiveness of control measures in credit institutions / Controlling. 2005. No. 3.
3. Serebryakova T.Yu. On the issue of assessing the effectiveness of internal control of the consumer society // Modern problems of science and education. 2013. No. 5.

Economics and mathematics

modeling

USE OF MATHEMATICAL MODELS IN ASSESSING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE INTERNAL CONTROL SYSTEM

IN AND. THROAT,

Candidate of Economic Sciences, Associate Professor Bryansk State Agricultural Academy

The internal control system as a branched organizational structure is a set of units staffed with personnel of appropriate qualifications and authority, carrying out information interaction in the form of direct and feedback links, having appropriate logistics and information support and reporting to the relevant executive body.

The main task of internal control at an enterprise is to reduce financial losses arising for various reasons. The more developed and structured the control system, the higher the result of its action, expressed in a reduction in losses.

Efficiency assessment allows us to consider the qualitative and quantitative certainty of individual elements of the internal control system and establish their differences. Assessing the effectiveness of the internal control system is a summary of indicators of its effectiveness and efficiency. A measure of quantitative assessment of the result of the effectiveness of the internal control system can be the indicator of the average mathematical expected value of an event or result. Such assessments are usually based on expert opinions and are subjective.

In absolute terms, the result of the control system at the enterprise, according to the author, is the amount of loss savings that arose in connection with the functioning of the control system:

where R is the result of the functioning of the control system;

T0 - losses (losses) in the absence of control;

T1 - losses (damages) under the current control system.

However, establishing and maintaining an internal control system requires certain costs. Without taking into account investments in creating a control system, an enterprise’s savings from implementing a control system is the difference between the result of the system’s functioning and the cost of maintaining it: E = ^C,

where E is loss savings (efficiency); C is the cost of the control system. It is obvious that the use of an internal control system will bring benefits to the enterprise only if the result of its operation exceeds the cost of its maintenance:

E > 0 or R > C. The degree of complexity of the control system is directly related to the cost of using specific controls and potential losses in the event of their absence. When costs exceed outputs, it is obviously unprofitable, and if the sum of the costs of maintaining the internal control system (in years 1 to 2) exceeds outputs, those controls should not be used. To monitor system efficiency

it is necessary to evaluate and compare the potential losses of the enterprise, the expected result of the system and the costs of its maintenance. Thus, the effectiveness of the internal control system is the difference between the predicted losses before and after the predicted impact of the internal control system.

We propose further development of this approach. Let us determine the effectiveness of the internal control system using the example of the internal control system operating at Krasnogorsk Cheese Factory OJSC from 2001 to 2005.

The effectiveness of the internal control system is determined by saving losses arising in connection with the functioning of the control system. A formula is proposed for assessing the result of the control system as the amount of savings in losses from the operation of the control system.

Let's present the formula in the following form.

Let x be the organizational level of maintaining the internal control system. We understand that our approach is controversial, but many different approaches are possible here.

L1(x) - system losses at the appropriate level of the internal control system. It is easier to measure this indicator as a percentage of some base, for example from b0, and, therefore, b0 = 100%. The complexity of the problem lies in the measurement of indicators, which are more qualitative than quantitative. To clarify this problem, it is necessary to conduct special studies, and this does not fit into the scope of our study. In our consideration, this problem is not the main one, since we are trying to build a general mathematical model, with the help of which we should obtain the basic properties of the behavior of the internal control system.

C (x) - costs of maintaining the internal control system. Here it is also very difficult to isolate this part from the total cost, but a rough estimate of the costs of maintaining an internal control system is possible.

R (x) - the effectiveness of the system from the implementation of the internal control system, expressed in the amount of reduction in losses from maintaining the internal control system. It is logical to believe that this indicator should increase to a certain value x, then decrease, since we postulated this behavior (exactly the opposite) for L1(x) - the loss function, then

R(x) = ^(x). (2)

Let us show that bx(x) - as x increases, it decreases to a certain Xm, further growth of x leads to an increase in b1(x). The simplest form of the relationship can be a parabola or an exponential. It is easier to take a parabola as a model loss function L1(x), since if empirical data are available, it is possible to determine the parameters of the equation using the least squares method.

As a result of the study, the effectiveness of the internal control system can be represented as the following formula:

R (x) = b - (ax2+bx+c). (3)

From here the optimum efficiency point is easily determined:

R(x) = - 2ax - b = 0;

When constructing a specific parabola based on the data of points and losses of the system at the appropriate level of the internal control system, the optimum point is determined, i.e., the value of the quality of the internal control system at which the best efficiency of the control system is achieved.

The proposed indicators allow us to assess the effectiveness of the internal control system at enterprises and determine the optimal values ​​for the level of the internal control system and possible losses corresponding to a given level of organization of the accounting and internal control system (see table).

As a result of the calculations, the following model for determining the value of losses (regression equation) was obtained:

y = 164.73 - 27.4x + 1.23x2.

In this case, the optimal value of the level of the internal control system will be:

^optim= 11.04.

This value x (the level of organization of the internal control system) corresponds to the optimal value of losses:

U Hoptim.) = 14.92.

The efficiency will be 85.08%.

Taking into account some conditionality of the initial data, it can, however, be argued that the best level for the organization is the level of organization of the internal control system of 10-12 points of the test survey. In this case, losses amount to 15% compared to the situation when

Determining the effectiveness of the internal control system at OJSC Krasnogorsk Cheese Factory

Year X X2 Y Y cal. I)

2001 6,00 36,00 24,00 46,15 53,85

2002 9,50 90,25 19,00 17,84 82,16

2003 11,00 121,00 10,00 14,92 85,08

2004 12,15 147,62 21.00 16,43 83,57

2005 15,70 246,49 29.00 41,58 58,42

Optimum point 11.04 121.91 14.92

The following notations are used in the table:

x - score of the level of organization of the internal control system at OJSC Krasnogorsk Cheese Factory (from 2001 to 2005); y - losses from the level of organization of the internal control system (the figures were obtained as a result of processing an expert survey, or otherwise - expert assessments); R (x) - effectiveness of the internal control system.

the enterprise does not have an internal control system or when control is weak.

Schematically, the graph of the loss functions and the effectiveness of the internal control system can be presented as follows (Fig. 1).

In turn, on the other hand, the costs of maintaining the internal control system increase with the increase in the quality of maintaining the internal control system.

C (x) = kx, which implies x = -

As a result, the formula for the effectiveness of the internal control system based on the costs of its operation will look like this:

The optimal cost value is determined by the formula:

C = - b x k/2a

This follows from the formula: R (x) = 0,

ICS level Efficiency loss

R"(x) = - 2a/K2 C(x) - bD = 0.

This condition is a necessary condition for the presence of an optimum (minimum or maximum of a function). The calculation of parameters a, b, c and k, as well as data preparation problems, is an independent and thorough study.

On the other hand, starting from considering the internal control system as a “black box” (costs at the input - results at the output), it is obvious that costs are the input parameters of the system, and losses are the output parameters of the system. Therefore, we can assume that losses are a function of costs.

We believe that it is plausible to say that the effectiveness of the internal control system increases with increasing costs up to a certain optimal value, after which, with the continued growth of costs for the internal control system, the effectiveness of the internal control system decreases.

This statement can be described by the following function:

R(^ = a0 - C^-C + C0. (5)

Thus, approaching the characterization of the effectiveness of the internal control system in two different ways, we obtained, in general, the same dependence of effectiveness on the implementation of the internal control system.

To implement the previously described approaches, three parameters are assessed:

The quality of maintaining the internal control system;

Costs of maintaining an internal control system;

Losses from maintaining the internal control system.

If it is possible to collect appropriate statistical material, then in principle it is possible

evaluate the parameters of specific dependencies described earlier. As x, it is quite possible to take the score of the internal control system that we proposed when testing accounting.

A simpler approach to solving this problem can be presented as follows. As mentioned earlier, the effectiveness of the internal control system is determined by saving losses arising in connection with the functioning of the control system. A formula was proposed for assessing the result of the control system as the amount of savings in losses from the operation of the control system.

On the graph we can present the function in the following form (Fig. 2):

When there is no control system, i.e. b0 = 0, then R (0) = L0, i.e. losses (damages) with the current control system are equal to zero, then the result of the functioning of the control system will be equal to losses (damages) in the absence of control. In the case of maximum efficiency, i.e. when R (b) = 0, bk should be equal to b0, i.e. the losses from the implementation of an internal control system are the same as in the absence of an internal control system.

This conclusion is illogical, since losses from the implementation of an internal control system cannot be the same as in the absence of an internal control system.

By modernizing the efficiency formula (1), introducing the efficiency coefficients of different structures of the control system, we obtain the following formula for determining efficiency:

R (1K) = b - kbk (6),

where k is the efficiency coefficient;

R (b) = 0 at 1K = b 0/k.

On the graph, the function will look like this (see figure).

The system is effective if L1 is as small as possible. And this is possible if k > 1.

The system is less efficient if k< 1.

The practical implementation of this approach is fraught with many difficulties, in particular the inability to determine losses in different cases.

Creating and maintaining an internal control system requires certain costs. Without taking into account investments in the creation of an internal control system, the enterprise's savings from the implementation of an internal control system take the form of the following formula:

E = R - C, where C is the cost of the control system.

If we assume that L1 is an internal control system and a variable value, then: E b) = R (bv) - C (b)

Naturally, if we assume that the more perfect the internal control system, the greater the costs, i.e.:

Efficiency is determined by the inequality E > 0 or R > C:

b0 - kk bk > K bc.

The degree of complexity of a control system is directly related to the cost of using specific controls and the potential losses if they are absent.

We consider the formulation of this problem in a theoretical aspect. When the formula R (b1) = b0 - b1 was proposed, where b1 is the loss from the

establishing the internal control system, it was clear that D should be considered as a variable value. Only this assumption made it possible to proceed to theoretical analysis and generalizations. Next, it was proposed to introduce an abstract, difficult-to-define value for the quality of the internal control system, which was also presented in quantitative form. Finally, when the dependence of the effectiveness of the internal control system on the costs of its operation was modeled, it was believed that costs were not literally calculated expenses for individual items, but more complex, not entirely observable expenses.

Literature

Thus, the construction of models characterizes the assessment of the effectiveness of the implementation of the internal control system, taking into account the characteristics of losses as a constant, given by the stipulated costs of its maintenance or changing according to a linear law.

The expanded use of mathematical methods and models is an objective trend associated with the level of development of specific industries. The use of mathematics in auditing is justified because it allows us to conduct extensive reasoning of the nature described. An audit takes place with quantitative relationships, which in turn inevitably requires the use of mathematical approaches.

1. On-farm audit in enterprises of the agro-industrial complex of the Russian Federation: Coll. normative and methodological materials on internal audit/ Comp. D. N. Pismennaya and others - M.: RAM i A, 1994. - 52 p.

2. Gubanov A. G., Vasilenko A. A., Stefanova S. N. Features of accounting, control and economic analysis at processing enterprises of the agro-industrial complex: Textbook. allowance. - Rostov-on-Don, 1997. - 71 p.

3. Karamayki D. R., Benis M. Standards and norms of auditing. - M.: Audit, UNITY, 1995. - 527 p.

4. Organization of audit activities in the agro-industrial complex: Sat. normative and methodological materials on audit / Comp. D. N. Pismennaya and others - M.: RAM i A, 1994. - 48 p.

5. Rules (standards) of auditing activities / Comp. and the author of the introduction N.A. Remizov. - Mu: Publishing House FBK-PRESS, 2000. - 384 p.

6. Encyclopedia of general auditing. Legislative and regulatory framework, practice, recommendations and implementation methodology. - T. 2. - M.: "DIS", 1999. - 569 p.

7. Mazur I.I. Quality management: Textbook. allowance. - M.: Higher School, 2003. - 307 p.

The publishing house "Finance and Credit" provides services for the publication of books, brochures, monographs, textbooks, educational and methodological and fiction literature. The publication is carried out at the expense of the author. The production time for monographs of 10 printed sheets in paperback is 40 days.

In accordance with FPSAD No. 8 “Understanding the activities of the audited entity, the environment in which it is carried out and assessing the risks of material misstatement of the audited financial (accounting) statements”, the internal control system is a set of organizational measures, methods and procedures used by the management of the audited entity as means for the orderly and efficient conduct of financial and economic activities, ensuring the safety of assets, identifying, correcting and preventing errors and distortion of information, as well as the timely preparation of reliable accounting financial statements.

The basis of internal control of an economic entity includes five elements (Fig. 2.2).

Rice. 2.2 – Elements of the internal control system.

The control environment refers to the awareness and actions of management of the audited entity aimed at establishing and maintaining an internal control system, as well as an understanding of the importance of such a system. The auditor's knowledge and understanding of the specific environment allows him to determine whether the control conditions are sufficient to ensure an effective internal control system, and whether it helps to minimize misstatements in financial statements.

The control environment includes the following components:

The style and basic principles of management of this audited entity;

Organizational structure of the audited entity;

Distribution of responsibilities and powers;

Implemented personnel policy;

The procedure for preparing financial (accounting) statements for external users;

The procedure for carrying out internal management accounting and preparing reports for internal purposes;

Ensuring compliance of the audited entity’s business activities with legal requirements;

The presence and features of the organization of work of the audit commission and the internal audit service as part of the management body of the audited entity.

During the study of the control environment of KP Sibirsky Gurman LLC, it was revealed that the internal control system in the organization is based on compliance with the following principles:

1. Timely and proper documentation of transactions;

2. Actual control over property and documentation;

3. Availability of effective procedures for authorizing transactions;

4. Carrying out independent checks.

The executive body exercises control over the conduct of the company's economic activities by issuing relevant orders and instructions.

The chief accountant exercises control over ensuring compliance of ongoing business transactions with the legislation of the Russian Federation, control over the movement of property and the fulfillment of obligations.

The second component of the ICS is the assessment of business risk by the audited entity as a process of identifying risks, their possible consequences and responding to them. The auditor must understand how the entity identifies and addresses business risks that are relevant to the financial reporting objectives and what results this produces.

Risks related to the financial (accounting) statements of KP Sibirsky Gurman LLC are associated with both external and internal events and circumstances. When identifying possible risks, management considers their importance, the likelihood of their occurrence and how to manage them. Management makes plans, programs, and implements appropriate actions to eliminate these risks or decides to ignore risks due to the high cost of possible controls in relation to these risks or for other reasons. Risks may arise or change due to a number of circumstances, for example, macroeconomic changes, new personnel (new employees may have a different point of view on the internal control system or different priorities); the introduction of new or changes to existing information systems, new technologies, new types of goods, works, services, reorganization of the audited entity may be accompanied by a reduction in the number of personnel and changes in the distribution of responsibilities, as well as control functions performed by employees, which may also affect the risk associated with internal control system.

The third component of the ICS is an information system related to the preparation of financial statements and consisting of procedures and records. The auditor must understand how the organization communicates the roles and responsibilities of specific employees and significant matters relevant to the financial statements. The accounting department must clearly outline who does what and who is responsible for what. The auditor should check how well the job instructions are prepared and how conscientiously they are followed.

At KP Sibirsky Gurman LLC, the functioning of information systems related to the preparation of financial (accounting) statements is ensured by:

a) technical means;

b) software;

c) personnel;

d) relevant procedures;

e) databases.

An integral part of information systems is a personnel information system, which ensures that employees understand the duties and responsibilities associated with the organization and application of the internal control system in relation to financial (accounting) reporting.

The personnel information system can take such forms as internal regulations, guidelines for the preparation of financial (accounting) statements, instructions and guidelines. Information can be brought to the attention of employees using electronic communications, orally, and through instructions from management.

The fourth component of the internal control system is control actions. They refer to the policies and procedures that help ensure that management's orders are followed. These include procedures and activities carried out by the audited entity and beyond the scope of direct accounting and reporting. Examples of such specific control actions are: authorization by the management of the audited entity of control actions; checking the implementation of control actions; processing information obtained as a result of control actions; checking the presence and condition of the objects of the audited entity; division of responsibilities between employees of the audited entity during control actions and others.

The fifth component of the ICS is monitoring of controls. It refers to the process of assessing the quality of functioning of the internal control system. It is carried out through ongoing monitoring, individual assessments of the reliability of controls and ensures that controls are functioning effectively.

Controls must achieve the following objectives:

1) sufficient separation of duties;

3) correct documentation of transactions and their accounting;

4) ensuring the safety of assets and accounting records;

5) independent audits of activities.

In order to evaluate the internal control system, audit tests are carried out in areas of internal control.

The first stage of the audit was familiarization with the internal control system of the accounting organization.

Responsibility for the organization and state of internal control lies with the head of Sibirsky Gurman Semi-Finished Products Plant LLC. The accounting policies are drawn up in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation and the Tax Code of the Russian Federation. An organization's accounting policy is an important means of forming the values ​​of the organization's main performance indicators, tax planning, and pricing policy. It must provide complete and timely information about all facts of economic activity. An assessment of the completeness of the content and compliance of the accounting policies with the requirements of regulatory documents is presented in the Appendix

The accounting department of Siberian Gourmet Semi-Finished Products Plant LLC operates as a structural unit headed by a chief accountant. The accounting department includes

· material group responsible for accounting for the acquisition of material assets, their receipt and expenditure. In the same group, as a rule, they keep records of fixed assets;

· the wage accounting group, which records the labor costs of workers, calculates wages to employees, controls the use of the wage fund, records all settlements with employees of enterprises, and the budget. Social Insurance Fund and other departments related to wages;

· production and costing, which keeps track of production costs and calculates the cost of production;

· a general group, whose employees keep records of other transactions and the General Ledger, prepare a balance sheet and other forms of financial reporting.

When conducting an audit, at the first stage, a test is drawn up to assess the internal control of product sales (Table 2.1), which reflects the main issues of auditing the financial results of the enterprise.

In this case, the test can be compiled for individual components of the formation of financial results: accounting for revenue from sales of products and services; accounting for the cost of manufactured products and services, etc.

Table 2.1 Test for assessing internal control over product sales