Audit engagement
Regulatory Controls Assessment
An independent review of control design and operating evidence for licensed or pre-license fintech firms preparing for board, investor, or supervisory scrutiny in Taiwan.
Who this is for
Compliance, risk, and operations leaders at remittance firms, digital wallets, lending platforms, and other fintech entities that need a ranked view of control gaps before an FSC meeting or funding round.
What you receive
A findings register with severity rankings, sampled evidence references, remediation owners, and a management letter suitable for board packs — plus a closing walkthrough with your named contacts.
Scope included
- Mapping of stated policies to actual operating procedures for the in-scope product lines
- Sample testing of customer files, exception queues, and reconciliations agreed in the planning memo
- Interviews with control owners across compliance, operations, and finance
- Draft findings meeting before the final report is issued
- Final report and remediation map with suggested timelines
Scope excluded
- Legal opinions or representation before the Financial Supervisory Commission
- Implementation of remediations or second-line staffing
- Penetration testing or source-code review
- Continuous monitoring retainers (available only as a separate follow-up)
How fieldwork proceeds
- Scoping call — we agree product lines, sample periods, and document room access.
- Planning memo — you receive the testing plan and evidence request list.
- Fieldwork — interviews, sampling, and walkthroughs over the agreed window.
- Draft findings — factual clearance with your team.
- Final report — issued for board or counsel use.
Preparation we ask of you
Nominate a single engagement lead, open a secure document room before week one, and block interview slots with corridor owners. Delays in evidence uploads are the most common reason a four-week plan becomes six.
Constraints
We will not alter findings to soften supervisory exposure. If a sample reveals a material mismatch, it is recorded with the evidence reference. Clients who need advocacy rather than independent review should engage counsel first.