$1.$ A company changes from FIFO to LIFO for inventory valuation and the auditor concurs with the change. The change has a material effect on the comparability of the entity's F$/$S this year, but is expected to have an immaterial effect in the future.

$2.$ A group auditor decides not to take responsibility for the work of the component auditor who audited $70\%$ owned subsidiary and issued an unmodified opinion. The total assets and revenues of the subsidiary are $5\%$ and $8\%$ respectively, of the total assets and revenues of the entity being audited.

$3.$ The auditors believe that the financial statements have been presented in conformity with GAAP in all respects, except that a loss contingency that should be disclosed through a note to the f$/$s is not included. While they consider this a material omission, they do not believe that it pervasively affects the f$/$s$.$

$4.$ The client has changed from LIFO to FIFO for inventory valuation purposes. The auditors concur with this change. The effect is considered material to the f$/$s although inventory is not a large part of total assets.

$5.$ The client has changed from LIFO to FIFO for inventory valuation purposes, the auditors do not concur with this change. The effect is considered material and pervasive.

Required: For each of the above situations you are required to indicate the type of audit opinion you would issue and explain your reasons.