陕西省非会计专业考生能报名参加ACCA国际会计师考试吗？

正确答案：A

正确答案：
(b) Tiltman Co
Tiltman’s total assets at 31 March 2006 represent 29% (16·1/55·2 × 100) of Johnston’s total assets. The subsidiary is
therefore material to Johnston’s consolidated financial statements.
Tutorial note: Tiltman’s profit for the year is not relevant as the acquisition took place just before the year end and will
therefore have no impact on the consolidated income statement. Calculations of the effect on consolidated profit before
taxation are therefore inappropriate and will not be awarded marks.
(i) Inventory overvaluation
This should have been written off to the income statement in the year to 31 March 2005 and not spread over three
years (contrary to IAS 2 ‘Inventories’).
At 31 March 2006 inventory is overvalued by $0·9m. This represents all Tiltmans’s profit for the year and 5·6% of
total assets and is material. At 31 March 2005 inventory was materially overvalued by $1·8m ($1·7m reported profit
should have been a $0·1m loss).
Tutorial note: 1/3 of the overvaluation was written off in the prior period (i.e. year to 31 March 2005) instead of $2·7m.
That the prior period’s auditor’s report was unmodified means that the previous auditor concurred with an incorrect
accounting treatment (or otherwise gave an inappropriate audit opinion).
As the matter is material a prior period adjustment is required (IAS 8 ‘Accounting Policies, Changes in Accounting
Estimates and Errors’). $1·8m should be written off against opening reserves (i.e. restated as at 1 April 2005).
(ii) Restructuring provision
$2·3m expense has been charged to Tiltman’s profit and loss in arriving at a draft profit of $0·7m. This is very material.
(The provision represents 14·3% of Tiltman’s total assets and is material to the balance sheet date also.)
The provision for redundancies and onerous contracts should not have been made for the year ended 31 March 2006
unless there was a constructive obligation at the balance sheet date (IAS 37 ‘Provisions, Contingent Liabilities and
Contingent Assets’). So, unless the main features of the restructuring plan had been announced to those affected (i.e.
redundancy notifications issued to employees), the provision should be reversed. However, it should then be disclosed
as a non-adjusting post balance sheet event (IAS 10 ‘Events After the Balance Sheet Date’).
Given the short time (less than one month) between acquisition and the balance sheet it is very possible that a
constructive obligation does not arise at the balance sheet date. The relocation in May was only part of a restructuring
(and could be the first evidence that Johnston’s management has started to implement a restructuring plan).
There is a risk that goodwill on consolidation of Tiltman may be overstated in Johnston’s consolidated financial
statements. To avoid the $2·3 expense having a significant effect on post-acquisition profit (which may be negligible
due to the short time between acquisition and year end), Johnston may have recognised it as a liability in the
determination of goodwill on acquisition.
However, the execution of Tiltman’s restructuring plan, though made for the year ended 31 March 2006, was conditional
upon its acquisition by Johnston. It does not therefore represent, immediately before the business combination, a
present obligation of Johnston. Nor is it a contingent liability of Johnston immediately before the combination. Therefore
Johnston cannot recognise a liability for Tiltman’s restructuring plans as part of allocating the cost of the combination
(IFRS 3 ‘Business Combinations’).
Tiltman’s auditor’s report
The following adjustments are required to the financial statements:
■ restructuring provision, $2·3m, eliminated;
■ adequate disclosure of relocation as a non-adjusting post balance sheet event;
■ current period inventory written down by $0·9m;
■ prior period inventory (and reserves) written down by $1·8m.
Profit for the year to 31 March 2006 should be $3·9m ($0·7 + $0·9 + $2·3).
If all these adjustments are made the auditor’s report should be unmodified. Otherwise, the auditor’s report should be
qualified ‘except for’ on grounds of disagreement. If none of the adjustments are made, the qualification should still be
‘except for’ as the matters are not pervasive.
Johnston’s auditor’s report
If Tiltman’s auditor’s report is unmodified (because the required adjustments are made) the auditor’s report of Johnston
should be similarly unmodified. As Tiltman is wholly-owned by Johnston there should be no problem getting the
adjustments made.
If no adjustments were made in Tiltman’s financial statements, adjustments could be made on consolidation, if
necessary, to avoid modification of the auditor’s report on Johnston’s financial statements.
The effect of these adjustments on Tiltman’s net assets is an increase of $1·4m. Goodwill arising on consolidation (if
any) would be reduced by $1·4m. The reduction in consolidated total assets required ($0·9m + $1·4m) is therefore
the same as the reduction in consolidated total liabilities (i.e. $2·3m). $2·3m is material (4·2% consolidated total
assets). If Tiltman’s financial statements are not adjusted and no adjustments are made on consolidation, the
consolidated financial position (balance sheet) should be qualified ‘except for’. The results of operations (i.e. profit for
the period) should be unqualified (if permitted in the jurisdiction in which Johnston reports).
Adjustment in respect of the inventory valuation may not be required as Johnston should have consolidated inventory
at fair value on acquisition. In this case, consolidated total liabilities should be reduced by $2·3m and goodwill arising
on consolidation (if any) reduced by $2·3m.
Tutorial note: The effect of any possible goodwill impairment has been ignored as the subsidiary has only just been
acquired and the balance sheet date is very close to the date of acquisition.

正确答案：
(b) Financial statement ratios can provide useful measures of liquidity but an analysis of the information in the cash flow
statement, particularly cash flow generated from operations, can provide specific insights into the liquidity of Warrburt. It is
important to look at the generation of cash and its efficient usage. An entity must generate cash from trading activity in order
to avoid the constant raising of funds from non-trading sources. The ‘quality of the profits’ is a measure of an entity’s ability
to do this. The statement of cash flow shows that the company has generated cash in the period despite sustaining a
significant loss ($92m cash flow but $21m loss). The problem is the fact that the entity will not be able to sustain this level
of cash generation if losses continue.
An important measure of cash flow is the comparison of the cash from operating activity to current liabilities. In the case of
Warrburt, this is $92m as compared to $155m. Thus the cash flow has not covered the current liabilities.
Operating cash flow ($92 million) determines the extent to which Warrburt has generated sufficient funds to repay loans,
maintain operating capability, pay dividends and make new investments without external financing. Operating cash flow
appears to be healthy, partially through the release of cash from working capital. This cash flow has been used to pay
contributions to the pension scheme, pay finance costs and income taxes. These uses of cash generated would be normal for
any entity. However, the release of working capital has also financed in part the investing activities of the entity which includes
the purchase of an associate and property, plant and equipment. The investing activities show a net cash outflow of
$43 million which has been financed partly out of working capital, partly from the sale of PPE and AFS financial assets and
partly out of cash generated from operations which include changes in working capital. It seems also that the issue of share
capital has been utilised to repay the long term borrowings and pay dividends. Also a significant amount of cash has been
raised through selling AFS investments. This may not continue in the future as it will depend on the liquidity of the market.
This action seems to indicate that the long term borrowings have effectively been ‘capitalised’. The main issue raised by the
cash flow statement is the use of working capital to partially finance investing activities. However, the working capital ratio
and liquidity ratios are still quite healthy but these ratios will deteriorate if the trend continues.

正确答案：
(c) One of the main qualitative benefits that may arise from an investment in a new IT system by Moffat Ltd is the improved level
of service to its customers in the form. of reduced waiting times which may arise as a consequence of better scheduling of
appointments, inventory management etc. This could be assessed via the introduction of a questionnaire requiring customers
to rate the service that they have received from their recent visit to a location within Moffat Ltd according to specific criteria
such as adherence to appointment times, time taken to service the vehicle, cleanliness of the vehicle, attitude of staff etc.
Alternatively a follow-up telephone call from a centralised customer services department may be made by Moffat Ltd
personnel in order to gather such information.
Another qualitative benefit of the proposed investment may arise in the form. of competitive advantage. Improvements in
customer specific information and service levels may give Moffat Ltd a competitive advantage. Likewise, improved inventory
management may enable costs to be reduced thereby enabling a ‘win-win’ relationship to be enjoyed with its customers.