This scenario considers the role of a person, usually a partner, who performs the engagement quality control review. Canadian Standards on Quality Control (CSQC) 1, Paragraph C12, (e) provides this definition: "Engagement quality control reviewer - A partner, other person in the firm, suitably qualified external person, or a team made up of such individuals, none of whom is part of the engagement team, with sufficient and appropriate experience and authority to objectively evaluate the significant judgments the engagement team made and the conclusions it reached in formulating the report." CSQC (1 )Paragraph 37 states that an accounting firm's engagement quality control review should include the following:

Discussion of significant matters with the engagement partner;

Review of the financial statements or other subject matter information and the proposed report;

Review of selected engagement documentation relating to significant judgments the engagement team made and the conclusions it reached; and

Evaluation of the conclusions reached in formulating the report and consideration of whether the proposed report is appropriate.

The scenario involves the audit of inventory of the soybean oil tank farm of a company in the vegetable oil refining business. The company was engaged in a high level of fraud and was able to deceive the auditors who were checking the levels of oil in the tanks as part of the audit as to the quantity of soybean oil in the tanks. As a result of the fraud, the auditors accepted as accurate the company's existence assertion as to the soybean oil inventory. In fact, the company claimed to have more soybean oil in its tanks than the total inventories of soybean oil in the entire United States as reported by the Department of Agriculture.

Required:

What, if anything, should the engagement quality control reviewer have done to exhibit professional skepticism and uncover the material misstatement in the company's financial statements?