Final answer:
Management's written representations in an audit serve as a complement to substantive procedures but are insufficient on their own to support the completeness assertion. The auditor must perform additional audit procedures to verify the assertions made in these representations. Hence, the correct answer is optionA.
Step-by-step explanation:
When considering the use of management's written representations as audit evidence about the completeness assertion, an auditor should understand that such representations complement, but do not replace, substantive procedures designed to support the assertion. It is a fundamental auditing principle that while written representations provide valuable information, they are not sufficient on their own.
The auditor must perform additional substantive procedures and review other audit evidence to obtain reasonable assurance that the financial statements are complete and accurate. Management's written representations can sometimes present things in a favorable light, hence relying solely on them would not provide a sound basis for forming an audit opinion.
Verification of facts and figures, internal controls, and corroborative evidence are still necessary to ensure that the assertions made by management in their written declarations are indeed true. The auditor evaluates these written representations in conjunction with other portions of the audit, such as understanding the intent behind the documents, to assess their relevance and reliability in supporting financial statement assertions.