Therefore, a company really has no way of identifying the accuracy of the fixed asset ledger, so auditors really can't certify that the internal controls over PP&E are functioning.
In other words, if you take a physical inventory of a production area, you may also find the zombie assets physically present that can't be easily identified against anything on the fixed asset ledger.
Both property tax liabilities and insurance expense are based on a firm's fixed asset ledger, so a correction of the ledger balances should, and probably will, result in savings.
One argument can be that studies have shown that companies spend some $5 per year per line record on the fixed asset ledger.
Some of the equipment is just being kept in storage, so the company disposes of it and removes it from the fixed asset ledger.
The fixed asset ledger should specifically classify all high-tech equipment.
Next, machinery and equipment were appraised based on a physical inspection of the facility and referenced to XYZ's fixed asset ledger
Should we begin with a printout of what the fixed asset ledger shows and go looking for the assets?
Here's how it can be done: Most asset ledgers have a location for each line item, so each one can be sorted by location and in descending dollar amounts.
This view grossly underestimates the administrative burden to account for the addition or deletion of the assets from fixed asset ledgers, to compute the proper depreciation under multiple tax regimes, and to calculate the proper gain or loss under the various tax regimes on disposition of the fixed assets.
The varying schedules, computations, and fixed asset ledgers require tremendous investments in systems and personnel simply to track and compute the requisite amounts under the various systems.