What is the conclusion that an assurance provider must reach for review engagements?

In a review engagement, the assurance provider is expected to express limited assurance on the financial statements, which means they provide a conclusion that indicates whether anything has come to their attention that causes them to believe the financial statements are not presented fairly or do not comply with the relevant financial reporting framework.

The correct choice articulates that the conclusion focuses on identifying significant issues that could indicate the financial statements do not represent a true and fair view. The emphasis is on any discrepancies that could materially mislead users of the financial statements rather than on an exhaustive examination of every record.

In this context, concluding that the financial statements are incorrect (the first option) suggests a definitive finding, which is not the goal of a review engagement—a review does not provide a guarantee. Similarly, stating whether the financial statements comply with accounting standards (the third option) suggests a more in-depth evaluation akin to an audit, which is beyond the scope of a review. Lastly, determining whether the financial statements can be audited (the fourth option) is irrelevant to the core purpose of a review engagement, which is a limited investigation to provide assurance, not to assess audit readiness.

Thus, the focus on identifying any significant issues that may indicate misrepresentation in the financial statements makes the second choice