 to inquire to the organization to see if that's going to be something they do within their normal policy. We may well have debit balances in the, in the accounts, payable accounts, and then we're just going to reclassify them from debit, you know, negative balances of a liability to asset balances. And then we have separate short-term and long-term payables. We want to make sure that we're separating out the short-term and the long-term payables. Make sure that different types of payables are properly classified. So we have different types of classifications of payables. We want to make sure that they are in those proper classifications. Next, we're going to take a look at the assertion of presentation. There are two disclosure items of primary importance for accounts payable and accrued expenses with regards to presentation. Auditor needs to make sure that all related party purchase transactions have been identified. So remember, whenever we have this related party transactions, we could think of a related party such as a subsidiary or something like that. Then we have a, we have issues because we're not, we're concerned that there's not an arms length transaction. We don't have market forces to help us determine that the transaction is at basically market prices. Therefore, we want to identify those for sure and look into those types of transactions. If material, the related party purchase transactions should be disclosed. So if the related party purchase transactions are material component, we want to disclose those because again, that relationship kind of makes those transactions a bit suspect in terms of whether they're market validity of those types of transactions. The other primary concern is purchase commitments. When the entity has entered into a formal long-term purchase contracts, proper disclosure of the terms of the contract should be provided as a footnote. So when we have long-term basically contracts, we want to make sure that we're clear on what the commitment is in the contract. If we have a very complex contract and we're dealing with something that's going to be material, that's a problem. We want to know exactly where we stand in terms of the long-term obligations of a contract. Now we're going to take a look at accounts payable confirmations. Now when you think of confirmations, you're thinking about a third party verification and normally, if you hear confirmation, the first thing that pops into your mind is probably accounts receivable confirmations. That's where we are most likely to do confirmations. That and the bank, you know, we'll send confirmations to the bank. We'll send confirmations to accounts receivable most of the time. Some of the customers to confirm the balances owed to the entity by customers accounts payable. We can do the same thing, but it's usually not as necessary a process. So we're almost definitely going to do it for the cash, some type of confirmation. We're probably going to do it for accounts payable at least to some degree, depending on the entity we're doing. And then accounts payable, we may do it, but it's a lesser degree of likelihood that we'll do confirmations, meaning we're going to send confirmations out basically to the vendors now that owe the company. I mean that the company owes money to the company that we are auditing owes money to the vendors. So they're going to be used less often than accounts receivable confirmations, partially because auditor is able to examine externally created source documents related to accounts payable. So notice an accounts payable, we have other type of source documents that are not generated from inside the organization as opposed to accounts payable. When we're looking at the things that generated the accounts payable, the source documents are generated by the company. So that's going to be less reliable type of information. If we just look at the invoice, that's going to be less reliable information with regards to accounts payable, we're looking at bills and things that are going to be given from outside of the organization. Therefore, they are more reliable and possibly then we can rely less on things like confirmation. When confirmations are used, they are usually positive in our generally blank confirmations. In other words, notice what we're not doing here. We're not saying, we're not saying, hey, here is the balance and you tell us basically yes or no on it or we're not even saying, here's the balance and don't send it back if you don't agree with it, which would be a negative confirmation. We're having a positive confirmation saying, hey, we would like you to send it back either way and they don't really have the option because we're going to send it blank, meaning we're not going to say, here's the balance and do you agree with it or not? We're going to say, we feel that this company that we are auditing owes you this much money as of this date or owes you money as of this date. Would you confirm the balance? We're not going to give the balance. We're going to give it blank. They're going to show us the balance as of that date. Now notice that even a lot of times when we think about these confirmations from the accounts receivable side of things, notice the person that receives it, if you're talking about receivable confirmations, the person that receives it is owing the company that we're confirming the money. And therefore, they have less incentive to be cooperative there. They might see the thing and not want to deal with it or say that I don't owe the company money at this point in time. However, if you're dealing with a vendor, typically that means that the company that we are auditing owes them money. So if we ask them, do we owe you money, they're more likely to know exactly what that is and maybe have incentive to look it up and check it out and send it back to us. So they're more, they might be more likely and more incentivized to actually to have a higher rate of return of the confirmations. In other words, to accounts payable people because they're the people that the company that we're auditing owe money to and we're asking them how much money the company that we are auditing owe them. And so they might be more likely to take it back. Now also remember all the rules with the confirmations are pretty much, you know, the same here. We, the auditor are doing the confirmation. We're not going to do it on the company letterhead. We're doing it outside of the company. We're going to send them directly to the vendors. And then the vendors going to send them directly back to us, the audit firm, not to the company. So we're keeping the company out of it. The vendor is asked to provide the balance owed by the entity. So then we have the audit findings identified misstatements with will be aggregated. So we're going to take the misstatements, we're going to aggregate them. We're going to have the projected misstatement is then compared to the tolerable misstatement. So the projected misstatement that we get from our findings, we compared to the tolerable misstatement, the level of misstatement that we accept that would be acceptable, that we're going to basically accept. If it's, and then if the projected misstatement is less than the tolerable misstatement, the auditor has evidence that the account is fairly presented. So then we're going to say, okay, if it's less fairly presented, however, if the projected misstatement is greater than the tolerable misstatement, the auditor will conclude that the account is not fairly presented. So if it's greater than the tolerable misstatement, then of course we'd have to conclude it's not fairly stated.