Final answer:
1.Confirming accounts receivable after year-end is less appropriate for identifying subsequent events affecting financial statements than reading board minutes, inquiring with management, or obtaining a lawyer's letter.
Step-by-step explanation:
When preparing an audit program for the purpose of identifying subsequent events that may require adjustment or disclosure in financial statements, the least appropriate procedure among those listed would be confirming accounts receivable that have increased significantly from the year-end date. This is mostly because confirming accounts receivable is typically done to verify the existence and accuracy of reported amounts as of the balance sheet date, not to identify subsequent events. Instead, reading the minutes of the board of directors, inquiring of management concerning subsequent events, and obtaining a lawyer’s letter are all more directed toward identifying events that may have occurred after the close of the fiscal year and might have a material impact on the financial statements.
Of the given options, the procedure that would be least appropriate for ascertaining the occurrence of subsequent events in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles is Option 2: Read the minutes of the board of directors. While reading the board minutes may provide some information about events that occurred during the period, it may not capture all relevant subsequent events. Other options, such as confirming accounts receivable (Option 1), inquiring with management (Option 3), and obtaining a lawyer's letter (Option 4) are more commonly used in audit procedures to ensure that subsequent events are properly accounted for.