The ICAC Resolution of 16 July 2026<\/a>, published in the Spanish Official State Gazette (BOE) on 7 August, opens the public-information procedure for adapting the IAASB\u2019s ISA 570 (Revised 2024) in Spain and making related amendments to other auditing standards. The file contains the complete draft, illustrative auditor\u2019s reports and notes adapting the international text to the Spanish framework.<\/p>\n Its legal status must be clear: a public consultation allows comments to be submitted before a final text is approved. Publication therefore does not, by itself, create new requirements for 2026 financial statements or automatically change current auditor\u2019s reports. The final version may be amended.<\/p>\n The draft proposes mandatory application to audits of annual accounts or financial statements for periods beginning on or after 1 January 2027 and, in all cases, to audit engagements contracted on or after 1 January 2028. These are proposed dates in the consultation text, not a definitive timetable already in force. The final ICAC resolution will need to be checked.<\/p>\n The going-concern basis assumes that an entity will continue its activities for the foreseeable future. It does not mean that the company will never experience difficulties. The assessment considers whether the entity can realise its assets and settle its liabilities in the normal course of business, or whether events and conditions may cast significant doubt on that ability.<\/p>\n Management and the directors are responsible for preparing the financial statements and making this assessment. The auditor does not design the company\u2019s viability plan or guarantee its survival. The auditor obtains evidence, evaluates the method, assumptions and data used, considers management\u2019s plans, and concludes whether the going-concern basis is appropriate and whether a material uncertainty must be disclosed.<\/p>\n The draft reinforces an important point: even a favourable auditor\u2019s conclusion is based on the evidence available up to the date of the auditor\u2019s report and is not a guarantee that the company will remain a going concern.<\/p>\n The assessment is not limited to the bank balance at year end. The auditor needs to understand how the entity generates cash, whether it depends heavily on particular customers or suppliers, its reliance on external financing, the effect of technological or regulatory change, and the indicators management uses to monitor performance.<\/p>\n Events after the reporting date also matter: the loss of a key customer, debt maturities, litigation, restricted access to credit, covenant breaches, recurring losses, deteriorating margins or a persistent inability to turn revenue into cash.<\/p>\n A forecast is not reliable merely because it is attractively presented. It must explain the basis for expected revenue, costs, receipts, payments, financing and investment. The draft requires the auditor to evaluate whether the method is appropriate, whether significant assumptions are consistent with one another and with other areas of the business, and whether the data are relevant and reliable.<\/p>\n Retrospective review also becomes important. Comparing earlier budgets with actual results helps assess management\u2019s forecasting record. Where assumptions change from one year to the next, the change should be documented and supported by new circumstances or new information.<\/p>\n Under the draft, if management\u2019s assessment covers less than twelve months from the date the financial statements are approved\u2014the Spanish adaptation links this to the date on which the directors formulate the annual accounts\u2014the auditor will request that the period be extended to at least that horizon. The auditor will also ask about events or conditions beyond the period used that could affect the conclusion.<\/p>\n In practice, a monthly cash-flow forecast is often more informative than one annual figure because it shows when taxes, payroll, social contributions, debt service, investment and uncertain receipts are concentrated.<\/p>\n When events or conditions may cast significant doubt, listing possible measures is not enough. The draft says that the auditor will evaluate whether the plans are likely to mitigate the problem, whether they are feasible and whether management has both the intention and the ability to carry them out. If the solution depends on financial support from shareholders, related parties or third parties, evidence of their intention and capacity to provide the funds will be needed.<\/p>\n A capital increase that has not been approved, refinancing without advanced discussions or an asset sale with no demonstrated market does not carry the same weight as a documented, approved measure that can be implemented in time.<\/p>\n The draft itself gives examples of relevant events and conditions. None of them, in isolation, proves that a company is not viable. What matters is their combined effect, magnitude, likelihood and the planned response.<\/p>\n Identifying one of these indicators does not automatically require a different accounting basis. It does require analysis, quantification, documented mitigation plans and disclosure where the uncertainty is material.<\/p>\n A useful continuity file should allow another person to reconstruct the reasoning without relying on oral explanations. As a minimum, it should contain:<\/p>\n Disconnected spreadsheets should not be handed to the auditor. The cash-flow forecast, budget, contracts, tax position and accounting records must agree. If a scenario assumes refinancing, the debt schedule and discussions with the bank should support that assumption.<\/p>\n The base case should represent management\u2019s best reasonable estimate, not the outcome it would like to achieve. The downside case tests what happens if revenue is delayed, margins fall, a key cost rises or a credit facility is not renewed when expected.<\/p>\n For every critical variable, it is useful to identify the point at which cash becomes insufficient and the specific measure that would then be activated. A simple, consistent and explainable sensitivity analysis is often more valuable than a complex model that nobody can defend.<\/p>\n Mitigation plans must avoid double counting. A company cannot assume both the sale of an asset and the future income that the same asset would generate. Nor should a shareholder contribution be treated as available without considering the shareholder\u2019s financial capacity.<\/p>\n The proposal is intended to make audit work on going concern more visible. It includes a specific going-concern section and develops how the auditor\u2019s conclusion is communicated, both where no material uncertainty is identified and where one exists and has been adequately disclosed.<\/p>\n If the going-concern basis is appropriate but a material uncertainty exists, the annual accounts must clearly describe the main events or conditions, management\u2019s plans and the possibility that the entity may be unable to realise its assets and discharge its liabilities in the normal course of business. Inadequate disclosure may affect the audit opinion. The precise outcome always depends on the facts, the applicable financial-reporting framework and the evidence obtained.<\/p>\n Integrated business consulting in Spain<\/a> can help coordinate financial, corporate and operational information. An online tax advisory service in Spain<\/a> can also help align the tax position with forecasts and year-end data; companies operating in the Canary Islands can use Advixy\u2019s business advisory service in Tenerife<\/a>.<\/p>\n The consultation on the revised NIA-ES 570 is neither an alarm nor an advance obligation. It is a clear sign that going-concern assessments will become more structured, documented and visible. Companies that connect cash flow, financing, scenarios, board decisions and financial-statement disclosures will approach year end from a stronger position.<\/p>\n If you need to organise the file and turn scattered information into a coherent financial plan, you can contact Advixy<\/a> to review the situation in advance.<\/p>\n Scope note: this article summarises a draft submitted to public consultation and official sources reviewed on 9 August 2026. It is not a substitute for accounting, company-law or audit advice on a particular entity. Before making decisions, check the final ICAC resolution and coordinate the treatment with your auditor and advisers.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Frequently asked questions about the revised NIA-ES 570<\/strong><\/p>\n No. The ICAC Resolution published on 7 August 2026 opens a public consultation on a draft. The standard will become mandatory only after final approval and publication with the corresponding application rules.<\/p>\n No, not by itself. Publication of the consultation does not automatically change the rules currently in force. Preparing reliable forecasts and going-concern evidence is nevertheless prudent and consistent with management\u2019s responsibility for the accounts.<\/p>\n The draft provides that, if management covers less than twelve months from the date the annual accounts are formulated or approved in the sense stated by the Spanish adaptation, the auditor will request an extension to at least that horizon. The final wording must still be checked.<\/p>\n No. Its magnitude, likelihood and duration, the mitigation plans and the disclosures in the financial statements must be assessed. The form of the auditor\u2019s report depends on the evidence and on whether the accounting basis and disclosures are appropriate.<\/p>\n No. Management prepares the assessment and its plans. The auditor evaluates the evidence and reports a conclusion within the audit engagement.<\/p>\n A monthly cash-flow forecast linked to the budget, debt profile and tax obligations. It provides the foundation for scenarios, milestones and the evidence supporting each action.<\/p>\nWhat does \u201cgoing concern\u201d mean?<\/h3>\n
What will the auditor examine more systematically?<\/h3>\n
The business model and real risks<\/h3>\n
The method, assumptions and data<\/h3>\n
The assessment period<\/h3>\n
Management\u2019s future actions<\/h3>\n
Warning signs that require a robust explanation<\/h3>\n
\n
A practical going-concern file: what to prepare<\/h3>\n
\n
How to build credible scenarios<\/h3>\n
What may change in the auditor\u2019s report?<\/h3>\n
What should SMEs and directors do now?<\/h3>\n
\n
Conclusion<\/h3>\n
Official sources<\/h3>\n
\n
Is the revised NIA-ES 570 already in force in Spain?<\/h2>\n
Does the consultation require companies to redo their 2026 accounts?<\/h2>\n
How long should the assessment period be?<\/h2>\n
Does a liquidity problem automatically lead to an adverse opinion?<\/h2>\n
Is the auditor responsible for preparing the viability plan?<\/h2>\n
Which document should be prepared first?<\/h2>\n