The effectiveness of audits in detecting fraudulent misstatements in financial statements is of major concern to the auditing profession. This concern led to the issuance of Statement on Auditing Standards (SAS) No. 82, which made several changes in the manner in which auditors are required to consider the risk of material misstatements due to fraud. This manuscript reports the results of a study of the practices of CPA firms in implementing SAS No. 82. We compared audit manuals and practice aids and interviewed firm personnel from all of the Big 5 firms and two second‐tier firms. Results of this study indicate that audit firms differ as to (1) whether their practice aids for fraud risk assessment are separate or integrated with other risk assessment practice aids, (2) the timing of the fraud risk assessment, and (3) the method of assessing fraud risk. Furthermore, although all of the firms studied include all of the SAS No. 82 factors in their audit practice aids, certain other fraud risk factors identified in academic research are not included in firm practice aids.
