Auditor Federal de Controle Externo - 2022
Internal audit’s role in ESG reporting
Conversations and focus on sustainability, typically grouped into environmental, social and governance (ESG) issues, are quickly evolving — from activist investor groups and inquisitive regulators pushing for change to governing bodies and C-suite executives struggling to understand and embrace the concept. At the forefront of this new risk area is pressure for organizations to make public commitments to sustainability and provide routine updates to ESG-related strategies, goals, and metrics that are accurate and relevant. However, ESG reporting is still immature, and there is not a lot of definitive guidance for organizations in this space. For example, there is no single standard for what should be reported.
What is clear is that strong governance over ESG — as with effective governance overall — requires alignment among the principal players as outlined in The Internal Institute of Auditors (IIA) Three Lines Model. As with any risk area, internal audit should be well-positioned to support the governing body and management with objective assurance, insights, and advice on ESG matters.
Embarking on the ESG journey
Efforts to mitigate the accelerating effects of climate change and address perceived historical social inequities are two powerful issues driving change globally. These movements have enhanced awareness of how all organizations impact, influence, and interact with society and the environment.
They also have spurred organizations to better recognize and manage ESG risks (i.e., risks associated with how organizations operate in respect to their impact on the world around them). This broad risk category includes areas that are dynamic and often driven by factors that can be difficult to measure objectively.
Still, there is growing urgency for organizations to understand and manage ESG risks, particularly as investors and regulators focus on organizations producing high-quality reporting on sustainability efforts. What’s more, that pressure is being reflected increasingly in executive performance as more organizations tie incentive compensation metrics to ESG goals.
As ESG reporting becomes increasingly common, it should be treated with the same care as financial reporting. Organizations need to recognize that ESG reporting must be built on a strategically crafted system of internal controls and accurately reflect how an organization’s ESG efforts relate to each other, the organization’s finances, and value creation.
Internal audit can and should play a significant role in an organization’s ESG journey. It can add value in an advisory capacity by helping to identify and establish a functional ESG control environment. It also can offer critical assurance support by providing an independent and objective review of the effectiveness of ESG risk assessments, responses, and controls.
Source: Adapted from https://na.theiia.org/about-ia/PublicDocuments/WhitePaper-Internal-Audits-Role-in-ESG-Reporting.pdf
Based on the information provided by the text, mark the statements below as true (T) or false (F).
( ) One of the hurdles of ESG issues is that they have been restricted to a single group of experts.
( ) There has been such a great demand for publicizing government efforts towards ESG that reports have become accurate and systematized.
( ) Part of the internal auditor’s job is to be knowledgeable enough in the area of ESG so as to be able to provide solid guidance to those in charge of the administration.
The statements are, respectively:
Internal audit’s role in ESG reporting
Conversations and focus on sustainability, typically grouped into environmental, social and governance (ESG) issues, are quickly evolving — from activist investor groups and inquisitive regulators pushing for change to governing bodies and C-suite executives struggling to understand and embrace the concept. At the forefront of this new risk area is pressure for organizations to make public commitments to sustainability and provide routine updates to ESG-related strategies, goals, and metrics that are accurate and relevant. However, ESG reporting is still immature, and there is not a lot of definitive guidance for organizations in this space. For example, there is no single standard for what should be reported.
What is clear is that strong governance over ESG — as with effective governance overall — requires alignment among the principal players as outlined in The Internal Institute of Auditors (IIA) Three Lines Model. As with any risk area, internal audit should be well-positioned to support the governing body and management with objective assurance, insights, and advice on ESG matters.
Embarking on the ESG journey
Efforts to mitigate the accelerating effects of climate change and address perceived historical social inequities are two powerful issues driving change globally. These movements have enhanced awareness of how all organizations impact, influence, and interact with society and the environment.
They also have spurred organizations to better recognize and manage ESG risks (i.e., risks associated with how organizations operate in respect to their impact on the world around them). This broad risk category includes areas that are dynamic and often driven by factors that can be difficult to measure objectively.
Still, there is growing urgency for organizations to understand and manage ESG risks, particularly as investors and regulators focus on organizations producing high-quality reporting on sustainability efforts. What’s more, that pressure is being reflected increasingly in executive performance as more organizations tie incentive compensation metrics to ESG goals.
As ESG reporting becomes increasingly common, it should be treated with the same care as financial reporting. Organizations need to recognize that ESG reporting must be built on a strategically crafted system of internal controls and accurately reflect how an organization’s ESG efforts relate to each other, the organization’s finances, and value creation.
Internal audit can and should play a significant role in an organization’s ESG journey. It can add value in an advisory capacity by helping to identify and establish a functional ESG control environment. It also can offer critical assurance support by providing an independent and objective review of the effectiveness of ESG risk assessments, responses, and controls.
Source: Adapted from https://na.theiia.org/about-ia/PublicDocuments/WhitePaper-Internal-Audits-Role-in-ESG-Reporting.pdf
The sentence that best expresses the idea that parties involved in the administration should follow a similar orientation:
Internal audit’s role in ESG reporting
Conversations and focus on sustainability, typically grouped into environmental, social and governance (ESG) issues, are quickly evolving — from activist investor groups and inquisitive regulators pushing for change to governing bodies and C-suite executives struggling to understand and embrace the concept. At the forefront of this new risk area is pressure for organizations to make public commitments to sustainability and provide routine updates to ESG-related strategies, goals, and metrics that are accurate and relevant. However, ESG reporting is still immature, and there is not a lot of definitive guidance for organizations in this space. For example, there is no single standard for what should be reported.
What is clear is that strong governance over ESG — as with effective governance overall — requires alignment among the principal players as outlined in The Internal Institute of Auditors (IIA) Three Lines Model. As with any risk area, internal audit should be well-positioned to support the governing body and management with objective assurance, insights, and advice on ESG matters.
Embarking on the ESG journey
Efforts to mitigate the accelerating effects of climate change and address perceived historical social inequities are two powerful issues driving change globally. These movements have enhanced awareness of how all organizations impact, influence, and interact with society and the environment.
They also have spurred organizations to better recognize and manage ESG risks (i.e., risks associated with how organizations operate in respect to their impact on the world around them). This broad risk category includes areas that are dynamic and often driven by factors that can be difficult to measure objectively.
Still, there is growing urgency for organizations to understand and manage ESG risks, particularly as investors and regulators focus on organizations producing high-quality reporting on sustainability efforts. What’s more, that pressure is being reflected increasingly in executive performance as more organizations tie incentive compensation metrics to ESG goals.
As ESG reporting becomes increasingly common, it should be treated with the same care as financial reporting. Organizations need to recognize that ESG reporting must be built on a strategically crafted system of internal controls and accurately reflect how an organization’s ESG efforts relate to each other, the organization’s finances, and value creation.
Internal audit can and should play a significant role in an organization’s ESG journey. It can add value in an advisory capacity by helping to identify and establish a functional ESG control environment. It also can offer critical assurance support by providing an independent and objective review of the effectiveness of ESG risk assessments, responses, and controls.
Source: Adapted from https://na.theiia.org/about-ia/PublicDocuments/WhitePaper-Internal-Audits-Role-in-ESG-Reporting.pdf
According to the text, “C-suite executives” (first paragraph), that is, those in top positions within a company, have been:
Internal audit’s role in ESG reporting
Conversations and focus on sustainability, typically grouped into environmental, social and governance (ESG) issues, are quickly evolving — from activist investor groups and inquisitive regulators pushing for change to governing bodies and C-suite executives struggling to understand and embrace the concept. At the forefront of this new risk area is pressure for organizations to make public commitments to sustainability and provide routine updates to ESG-related strategies, goals, and metrics that are accurate and relevant. However, ESG reporting is still immature, and there is not a lot of definitive guidance for organizations in this space. For example, there is no single standard for what should be reported.
What is clear is that strong governance over ESG — as with effective governance overall — requires alignment among the principal players as outlined in The Internal Institute of Auditors (IIA) Three Lines Model. As with any risk area, internal audit should be well-positioned to support the governing body and management with objective assurance, insights, and advice on ESG matters.
Embarking on the ESG journey
Efforts to mitigate the accelerating effects of climate change and address perceived historical social inequities are two powerful issues driving change globally. These movements have enhanced awareness of how all organizations impact, influence, and interact with society and the environment.
They also have spurred organizations to better recognize and manage ESG risks (i.e., risks associated with how organizations operate in respect to their impact on the world around them). This broad risk category includes areas that are dynamic and often driven by factors that can be difficult to measure objectively.
Still, there is growing urgency for organizations to understand and manage ESG risks, particularly as investors and regulators focus on organizations producing high-quality reporting on sustainability efforts. What’s more, that pressure is being reflected increasingly in executive performance as more organizations tie incentive compensation metrics to ESG goals.
As ESG reporting becomes increasingly common, it should be treated with the same care as financial reporting. Organizations need to recognize that ESG reporting must be built on a strategically crafted system of internal controls and accurately reflect how an organization’s ESG efforts relate to each other, the organization’s finances, and value creation.
Internal audit can and should play a significant role in an organization’s ESG journey. It can add value in an advisory capacity by helping to identify and establish a functional ESG control environment. It also can offer critical assurance support by providing an independent and objective review of the effectiveness of ESG risk assessments, responses, and controls.
Source: Adapted from https://na.theiia.org/about-ia/PublicDocuments/WhitePaper-Internal-Audits-Role-in-ESG-Reporting.pdf
The excerpt “Efforts to mitigate the accelerating effects of climate change” (third paragraph) indicates that, if effective, the speed of climate change will be:
Internal audit’s role in ESG reporting
Conversations and focus on sustainability, typically grouped into environmental, social and governance (ESG) issues, are quickly evolving — from activist investor groups and inquisitive regulators pushing for change to governing bodies and C-suite executives struggling to understand and embrace the concept. At the forefront of this new risk area is pressure for organizations to make public commitments to sustainability and provide routine updates to ESG-related strategies, goals, and metrics that are accurate and relevant. However, ESG reporting is still immature, and there is not a lot of definitive guidance for organizations in this space. For example, there is no single standard for what should be reported.
What is clear is that strong governance over ESG — as with effective governance overall — requires alignment among the principal players as outlined in The Internal Institute of Auditors (IIA) Three Lines Model. As with any risk area, internal audit should be well-positioned to support the governing body and management with objective assurance, insights, and advice on ESG matters.
Embarking on the ESG journey
Efforts to mitigate the accelerating effects of climate change and address perceived historical social inequities are two powerful issues driving change globally. These movements have enhanced awareness of how all organizations impact, influence, and interact with society and the environment.
They also have spurred organizations to better recognize and manage ESG risks (i.e., risks associated with how organizations operate in respect to their impact on the world around them). This broad risk category includes areas that are dynamic and often driven by factors that can be difficult to measure objectively.
Still, there is growing urgency for organizations to understand and manage ESG risks, particularly as investors and regulators focus on organizations producing high-quality reporting on sustainability efforts. What’s more, that pressure is being reflected increasingly in executive performance as more organizations tie incentive compensation metrics to ESG goals.
As ESG reporting becomes increasingly common, it should be treated with the same care as financial reporting. Organizations need to recognize that ESG reporting must be built on a strategically crafted system of internal controls and accurately reflect how an organization’s ESG efforts relate to each other, the organization’s finances, and value creation.
Internal audit can and should play a significant role in an organization’s ESG journey. It can add value in an advisory capacity by helping to identify and establish a functional ESG control environment. It also can offer critical assurance support by providing an independent and objective review of the effectiveness of ESG risk assessments, responses, and controls.
Source: Adapted from https://na.theiia.org/about-ia/PublicDocuments/WhitePaper-Internal-Audits-Role-in-ESG-Reporting.pdf
The function of the extract “i.e., risks associated with how organizations operate in respect to their impact on the world around them” (fourth paragraph) is to:
Um empréstimo será amortizado em um ano com pagamentos mensais à taxa de juros compostos de 48% ao ano capitalizados mensalmente. Descontadas as tarifas bancárias, que são efetivadas no momento da contratação do empréstimo, no valor de 5%, o tomador do empréstimo receberá líquidos R$ 10.450,00. Sabe-se que as parcelas mensais aumentam 2,7% ao mês e que o primeiro pagamento será realizado um mês após efetuada a operação. O valor aproximado da menor parcela, em reais, é de:
Utilize a aproximação: (1,027)12=1,4 e (1,04)12=1,6
Um montante de R$ 50.400,00 é financiado, em 5 anos, à taxa de juros compostos de 10% ao ano. Durante todo o período do financiamento, o devedor arca apenas com o pagamento dos juros anuais do capital emprestado, ou seja, o tomador do empréstimo paga somente o valor dos juros que incidem sobre o valor original da dívida. Ao final do período de 5 anos, a dívida é amortizada de uma só vez, com a quitação integral do débito.
Em contrapartida, o credor exige que o devedor efetue depósitos anuais de parcelas iguais, constituindo, assim, um fundo de reserva cujo montante amortizará o principal ao final do período de 5 anos. Esse fundo rende à taxa de juros compostos de 5% ao ano, e os depósitos são efetuados concomitantemente aos pagamentos dos juros anuais do capital emprestado. Desse modo, tanto o pagamento dos juros quanto os depósitos do fundo de reserva são postecipados.
Diante do exposto, é possível concluir que a taxa anual de juros efetivamente paga pelo devedor (i) está no intervalo:
Utilize os dados aproximados a seguir.
(1,05)5 =1,28
Resultados de (1 – (1 + i)-n) / i
[4c16468154071734712fb9979fd8022442646c63ba6f87e25b5b6ed5d05224aa-17-0.jpg]
Um crédito é ofertado em 36 prestações mensais antecipadas de R$ 3.000,00 à taxa de juros compostos de 3% ao mês. Indiferentemente, como alternativa, o mesmo crédito pode ser quitado com:
i. entrada de R$ 10.000,00;
ii. 3 parcelas anuais antecipadas de R$ 5.000,00, com pagamento da primeira concomitantemente com a entrada, à taxa de juros compostos de 3% ao mês;
iii. o restante financiado em 36 prestações mensais, à taxa de juros compostos de 3% ao mês.
Se o tomador do empréstimo optar pela opção alternativa, o valor aproximado do montante a ser financiado mensalmente, em reais, é de:
Utilize a aproximação: (1,03)-12=0,7
Uma sociedade empresária possui duas alternativas de investimento, mutuamente excludentes (não podem ocorrer simultaneamente), X e Y, ambas com a mesma duração e com valor presente líquido positivo. A taxa interna de retorno (TIR) para o projeto X é de 15%; para o projeto Y, de 13%; e para o projeto diferencial Y-X, de 11%. O projeto X é preferível ao Y somente para taxas mínimas de atratividade da empresa:
Um empréstimo de uma unidade monetária é concedido nas seguintes condições:
i. juros compostos de 5% ao mês;
ii. taxa de abertura de crédito de 5% sobre o valor financiado, sendo o pagamento no ato;
iii. amortizações mensais constantes;
iv. prazo total de 2 meses.
A taxa positiva que representa o custo efetivo total mensal desse empréstimo é, aproximadamente, de: Utilize a aproximação: (2,2975)0,5=1,52