Mary, a CPA who practices forensic accounting as a sole proprietor, was engaged to perform investigative services for an attorney pursuant to impending litigation. Mary was very busy with other engagements, so she hired a private investigator (PI) who recently became licensed and was relatively inexperienced to perform the financial investigation required for the engagement. When the PI completed his report, the PI apprised Mary that he had made several judgments as to what to include in the report. Mary scanned it quickly and reproduced it, unchanged, on her letterhead.

Required

1. What section(s) of the code did Mary most likely violate?

Kevin is preparing to perform a valuation engagement for ABS Inc., a commercial business that provides a service to the state of Virginia. The valuation engagement involves valuing a plot of land near ABS for the purpose of determining a value to use in negotiations to purchase the land from its present owner. Because Kevin knows the management of ABS well (he performs monthly compilation services for ABS), he decides not to issue an engagement letter. As part of its contractual arrangement with Virginia, ABS is required to use a valuation approach specified by the state. This valuation approach is not addressed in VS section 100, Valuation of a Business, Business Ownership Interest, Security, or Intangible Asset, in AICPA Professional Standards). Kevin dutifully follows the guidance contained in VS section 100 (except for using the valuation approach specified by Virginia) applicable to a valuation engagement and issues a calculation report.

Required

1. Has Kevin complied with the provisions of the code? Explain.