AGA CGFM Exam - Topic 4 Question 76 Discussion

Actual exam question for AGA's CGFM exam

Question #: 76
Topic #: 4

Auditors may limit their public reporting in attestation engagements when the

Aauditors detect material fraud.

Baudit report would compromise ongoing legal proceedings.

Cauditor detects non-compliance with provisions of law.

Dentity management fails to satisfy legal requirements.
Limiting Public Reporting in Attestation Engagements:
Government auditing standards allow auditors to limit public reporting in rare cases, such as when disclosing certain information could compromise sensitive or ongoing legal proceedings.
The goal is to protect the integrity of investigations or legal actions while maintaining transparency where possible.
Explanation of Answer Choices:
A . Auditors detect material fraud: Auditors are required to report material fraud to appropriate authorities, not limit reporting unless legal proceedings are affected.
B . Audit report would compromise ongoing legal proceedings: Correct. This is a valid reason to limit public reporting under auditing standards.
C . Auditor detects non-compliance with provisions of law: Non-compliance must be disclosed unless legal considerations warrant confidentiality.
D . Entity management fails to satisfy legal requirements: This would typically be reported, not withheld.

Show Suggested Answer

Suggested Answer: B

GAO, Government Auditing Standards (Yellow Book).

AICPA, Attestation Standards and Public Reporting Guidance.

by Marva at Oct 13, 2025, 08:15 PM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium CGFM Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

Submit Cancel

Lili

2 months ago

I feel B is the safest option. We must respect legal boundaries.

upvoted 0 times

...

Audrie

3 months ago

D should be reported, not limited. It’s about accountability.

upvoted 0 times

...

Carman

3 months ago

B definitely stands out. Transparency is key, but not at the cost of justice.

upvoted 0 times

...

Sonia

3 months ago

A and C seem important too, but they don’t justify limiting reports.

upvoted 0 times

...

Sheron

4 months ago

Agreed! Protecting ongoing cases is crucial.

upvoted 0 times

...

Hillary

4 months ago

Totally agree with B, protecting legal proceedings is crucial.

upvoted 0 times

...

Pearly

4 months ago

C should always be reported, right? Can't hide that stuff!

upvoted 0 times

...

Lewis

4 months ago

Wait, so they can just limit reporting? That seems sketchy.

upvoted 0 times

...

Jina

4 months ago

I thought A was a valid reason too, but I guess not!

upvoted 0 times

...

Tandra

4 months ago

Wait, are we supposed to be auditing the auditors now? This exam is getting a bit meta!

upvoted 0 times

...

Mabel

5 months ago

Hmm, I'm not sure about this one. Maybe C is the answer since non-compliance is a big deal.

upvoted 0 times

...

Glory

5 months ago

Auditors should always report fraud, no matter what! A is the right choice.

upvoted 0 times

...

Yuriko

5 months ago

B is the correct answer. Protecting the integrity of legal proceedings is a valid reason to limit public reporting.

upvoted 0 times

...

Marisha

5 months ago

B is definitely the right choice here.

upvoted 0 times

...

Stephaine

5 months ago

I think B is the right choice. Legal proceedings are sensitive.

upvoted 0 times

...

Ula

6 months ago

Limiting reporting? Sounds like a way for companies to hide their dirty laundry. I'll go with D.

upvoted 0 times

...

Theron

6 months ago

This is a good question to practice, since limiting public reporting is an important ethical consideration for auditors. I feel pretty confident I can identify the right answer, but I'll make sure to review the explanations carefully just to be sure.

upvoted 0 times

...

Melda

6 months ago

Okay, let me think this through step-by-step. The question is asking about when auditors can limit their public reporting in attestation engagements. The correct answer seems to be B, since that's the only one that specifically mentions compromising ongoing legal proceedings, which is a valid reason according to the explanation.

upvoted 0 times

...

Erasmo

7 months ago

I'm a little confused by the wording here. Are we supposed to just identify the correct answer, or do we need to explain our reasoning too? I want to make sure I understand the full requirements before I start writing my response.

upvoted 0 times

...

Heike

7 months ago

This seems like a pretty straightforward question about when auditors can limit their public reporting. I think the key is to focus on the "rare cases" where legal proceedings could be compromised.

upvoted 0 times

Serina

2 months ago

Yes, the integrity of investigations must come first.

upvoted 0 times

...

Cornell

2 months ago

Exactly! Protecting legal proceedings is crucial.

upvoted 0 times

...

Kanisha

5 months ago

I agree, it really is about those rare cases.

upvoted 0 times

...

Shanice

6 months ago

So, B is definitely the right choice here.

upvoted 0 times

...

Domonique

7 months ago

I thought non-compliance was always reported, so C seems off. But I’m a bit confused about how legal issues play into it.

upvoted 0 times

...

Vernell

7 months ago

I feel like we practiced a similar question where the focus was on legal implications. B definitely stands out as the most appropriate reason to limit reporting.

upvoted 0 times

...

Phung

7 months ago

I'm not entirely sure, but I think A might be tricky since auditors usually have to report fraud, right?

upvoted 0 times

...

Stevie

8 months ago

I remember discussing how legal proceedings can impact the auditor's ability to report findings. It seems like B is the right choice here.

upvoted 0 times

...