# Reconciliation Report Sample for Audit Workpapers

- Author: PreciseBankFlow (https://precisebankflow.com)
- Published: 2026-10-16
- Category: Bank statements in an audit
- Canonical: https://precisebankflow.com/blog/reconciliation-report-sample

> A reconciliation report sample for audit workpapers: the exception list, preparer and reviewer sign-off, a tickmark legend and the format reviewers accept.
A reconciliation report sample for audit workpapers has six parts: a header naming the account and period, the footing proof, the reconciliation itself, an exception list with evidence, a tickmark legend, and preparer and reviewer sign-off. The report below shows each part for a fictional company, so you can copy the layout.

## What belongs on a reconciliation report sample for workpapers?

A workpaper reconciliation report needs enough to stand alone: someone who was not on the engagement should be able to read it and know what was tested, what was found and who signed. That means a header, the arithmetic, the exceptions, a legend for the marks, and two sets of initials.

Here is an annotated example. The company, account and every figure are made up. Each section is labelled with a letter so the notes can point to it.

**A. Header**

> Cedar Ridge Dental LLC. Operating account, checking ending 2208. Statement period 09/01/2026 to 09/30/2026. Workpaper ref: C-2. Source: bank statement PDF, 4 pages. Prepared 10/12/2026. Reviewed 10/14/2026.

**B. Footing proof**

| Line | Amount | Mark |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Opening balance | 41,820.15 | A |
| Add: deposits (38 lines) | 96,430.00 | F |
| Less: withdrawals (112 lines) | 88,912.40 | F |
| Computed closing balance | 49,337.75 | F |
| Closing balance as printed | 49,337.75 | A |
| Difference | 0.00 | |

**C. Reconciliation to books**

| Line | Amount | Mark |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Balance per bank | 49,337.75 | A |
| Add: deposits in transit (09/30) | 4,215.00 | S |
| Less: outstanding checks (6) | (7,486.30) | S |
| Adjusted bank balance | 46,066.45 | F |
| Balance per general ledger | 46,066.45 | G |
| Difference | 0.00 | |

**D. Exceptions** (see the section on the exception list below)

**E. Tickmark legend** and **F. Sign-off** close the page.

### Why each part is there

The header identifies the item, so a reviewer who finds the page loose in a binder knows where it belongs. The footing proof shows the statement itself is sound. The reconciliation shows the book and bank sides agree. The exceptions record what did not fit, and the legend and sign-off make the page a document a reviewer can accept. A page missing any one of these usually comes back with a note.

### One report per account and period

Keep one report for each account and each period, even when a client has several accounts that look alike. Combining three accounts on one page makes the footing proof hard to follow and the sign-off ambiguous, because the reviewer is then signing for three conclusions at once. A short index page that lists the reports and their reference numbers gives the engagement file one place to start, and each report stays complete on its own.

## The report's exception list: differences, duplicates and gaps

An exception list names every item that did not tie out or needs a second look, and for each one it gives the evidence and the status. It is the part of the report a reviewer reads first. A clean reconciliation has an empty list, which is itself a statement worth making.

### How each exception carries its evidence

Give every exception five facts: what it is, the amount, where it is on the statement, what was done about it, and the status. The example list below continues the fictional report.

| # | Type | Item | Amount | Evidence | Status |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1 | Possible duplicate | Pinegrove Utilities, 09/12 and 09/13 | 318.60 | Both lines on page 3; invoice shows one bill | Open: dispute with payee |
| 2 | Check number gap | Check 3187 not on cleared or outstanding lists | | Check register marks 3187 void | Cleared: voided check |
| 3 | Old outstanding check | Check 3102 dated 05/14, still outstanding | 1,240.00 | Not on cutoff statement | Open: ask client |
| 4 | Difference | Footing difference | 0.00 | None | None |

Example values only. Items 1 and 3 stay open until the client answers, and the report says so rather than hiding them. How the duplicate and the gap were found is set out in [finding duplicate and missing transactions with a few rules](/blog/finding-duplicate-transactions-on-bank-statement-lines#same-payee-same-amount-close-dates-duplicate-transaction-rules). The report only records the result.

### Rules for a good exception row

Write each row so it makes sense without the rest of the page. Name the amount to the cent. Point to a page or line on the statement, not a vague "see statement". State the status in one word: open, cleared, or adjusted by journal entry. Never delete an exception once raised. If it is cleared, change the status and say how.

## Preparer and reviewer sign-off on the reconciliation report

Sign-off records who did the work and who checked it, with dates. The preparer initials the report once the procedures are complete, and the reviewer initials after reading it and clearing the review notes. The two should be different people, and the reviewer's date must not come before the preparer's.

### Who initials what

The preparer signs for the procedures: the footing, the tracing and the exception work. The reviewer signs for the conclusion: that the evidence supports it, the exceptions were handled and the open items are disclosed. If a software tool produced the footing and the exception list, the preparer still owns the result after reading it. PreciseBankFlow's report shows the preparation as extracted and footed automatically and leaves the reviewer's line waiting for your initials, because the conclusion stays with the person.

### What the dates show

Dates matter as much as initials. A report with both signatures on the same minute suggests no real review. A report signed after the issuance of the financial statements suggests the work came late. A good sign-off block has initials, a date, and a line for review notes cleared.

## Tickmark legends that make a reconciliation report readable

A tickmark is a small symbol or letter placed next to a figure to show what work was done on it. A legend defines each mark once, at the foot of the page. Without the legend, a reviewer cannot tell whether an A means agreed to the statement or added up.

### Standard marks

There is no universal set, since every firm keeps its own. The marks below are an example, used in the report above:

| Mark | Meaning |
| --- | --- |
| A | Agreed to the bank statement or confirmation |
| F | Footed, with the arithmetic recomputed |
| G | Agreed to the general ledger |
| S | Traced to the subsequent (cutoff) statement |
| V | Vouched to supporting documents |
| X | Exception, see the exception list |

Keep the list short, define each mark once, and use the same set on every workpaper in the file. A mark that appears on the page but not in the legend will draw a review note. The program in [audit procedures for bank reconciliation](/blog/audit-procedures-for-bank-reconciliation) pairs each procedure with its own mark, and its letters differ from these, so merge the two into one legend if you use both.

## Should the reconciliation report go in Excel or PDF?

Choose the format by who reads the report. Excel suits the preparer and the reviewer who want to re-foot, filter and trace. PDF suits the permanent file and anyone who must read the report without changing it. Many engagements keep both: the spreadsheet as the working copy and the PDF as the signed version.

### Excel for working, PDF for filing

An Excel report lets a reviewer click through a formula, sort exceptions by status and test a total. Its weakness is that figures can be changed without a trace. A PDF fixes the content at the moment of signing, which is what an archive needs. If your firm signs electronically, sign the PDF, and keep the Excel version that produced it beside it.

PreciseBankFlow exports Excel and PDF workpapers with the reconciliation, the exceptions and the source lines behind them. Whichever you pick, follow your firm's methodology for file naming and retention, since those rules differ from firm to firm.

## Reconciliation report errors reviewers send back

Reviewers send back reports for a short list of repeat problems: missing or undefined marks, exceptions with no evidence, unsigned or undated pages, figures that do not foot, and open items not carried forward. Each is easy to avoid when you check the page against a list before you pass it on.

Before you hand the report over, check these points:

1. **Does the header name the account, period and source?**
2. **Does every number foot?** Recompute the totals on the page.
3. **Is every mark in the legend, and every legend entry used?**
4. **Does each exception show amount, location, evidence and status?**
5. **Are open items still open, with a next step?**
6. **Are both sets of initials present, with dates in the right order?**
7. **Does the conclusion say what the evidence supports?** A line such as "reconciled, no exceptions" should not sit above an open exception.

### The mistake that costs most

The costliest error is a reconciliation that agrees only because someone forced it. A plug figure, an unexplained adjusting line or a difference written off as "rounding" removes the point of the report. If the difference is real, show it, trace it and let the reviewer decide. The [test of the assertions behind a bank reconciliation](/blog/test-bank-reconciliation-assertions) explains what the reviewer is trying to be satisfied about.

To see a report like this produced from your own statements, look at [bank reconciliation software built for auditors](/blog/bank-reconciliation-software) or [request a place in PreciseBankFlow](/get-started).