Core Viewpoint - The article emphasizes the importance of asset evaluation in ensuring fair and reasonable transactions in the market, highlighting the regulatory efforts to enhance the quality of asset evaluation services and maintain industry order [2][4]. Group 1: Regulatory Oversight - The Ministry of Finance has announced a quality inspection for 15 asset evaluation institutions engaged in securities services in 2024, resulting in administrative penalties for 5 institutions and 14 evaluators [2][3]. - Regulatory authorities are intensifying supervision and inspection of the asset evaluation industry, sending a clear signal of "strict regulation and zero tolerance" towards illegal activities [2][3]. Group 2: Industry Challenges - Despite regulatory efforts, various illegal activities persist in the asset evaluation sector, including falsified reports and improper valuation practices [3][4]. - Specific cases of misconduct include a real estate evaluation company with 347 reports involving forgery and another company with significant inaccuracies in revenue projections [3]. Group 3: Management and Compliance - The shift to a filing management system in 2019 has led to a significant increase in the number of asset evaluation institutions, but strict entry management is still necessary to maintain industry credibility [4][5]. - Regulatory requirements for filing include internal management, quality control, and the establishment of professional risk funds, emphasizing the need for compliance to prevent a decline in industry standards [4][5]. Group 4: Future Directions - The asset evaluation industry plays a crucial role in national asset reform and capital market regulation, with new asset types providing opportunities for growth [5]. - Continuous adherence to principles of independence, objectivity, and fairness is essential for maintaining market order and supporting economic development [5].

文/梧桐小编 近日，北京证监局公布《会计及评估监管工作通讯》2025年第1期（总第59期）。《工作通讯》案例警示部分披露了5个警示案例，包括4个审计案例、1个资产评 估案例。这5个案例是北京证监局根据辖区会计师事务所、资产评估机构被采取行政处罚或行政监管措施情况，归纳其中典型案例而汇总披露，提示各机构予以关 注。 案例1：不恰当利用专家工作 注册会计师对A公司进行年报审计时，公司管理层聘请外部评估专家对某项目在建工程的可回收价值进行评估，外部评估专家出具了相关评估报告。注册会计师在 利用管理层的专家工作时，未分析评估机构采用的评估方法及模型、重要假设、关键参数的恰当性，未结合评估机构的计算过程考虑相关假设以及选取方法的适 当性、合理性。 案例2：函证程序执行不到位 注册会计师对B公司进行年报审计时，对往来款项余额和销售、采购发生额执行函证程序，确定函证样本后由被审计单位提供询证函对象地址、收件人和收件人电 话，注册会计师通过公开信息等核对了被询证对象地址，未发现异常情形，但未交叉比对被询证对象的收件人和电话，未发现不同被询证对象的收件人姓名或电 话相同的异常情形，未对该异常情形保持职业怀疑。 案例3：未保持充 ...