2018年广东ACCA12月考期成绩查询时间2019年1月16日

发布时间:2019-01-05


已经参加完201812ACCA考试的同学不要着急,你的考试成绩将于2019116日(星期三)左右公布,届时大家可根据以下三种方式查询到你的考试结果。

ACCA成绩查询方式:

一、邮寄

关于考试成绩的唯一官方的正式的通知。每次考试的两个半月后由ACCA总部发出,您收到邮件的时间决定于邮局的工作速度。

二、假如你并没有等待的耐心,你想更加快速地查看自己的成绩,那么你还可以通过电子邮件来接受你的考试成绩。具体方法为:登录myACCA,并选择通过email接收考试成绩。

另外,你还可以在线查看自己的考试成绩。

具体查询方法:

1.进入ACCA官网点击右上角My ACCA进行登录:

2.输入账号、密码登录后进入主页面,点击Exam status&Results

3.跳转页面后选择View your status report

4.进入之后,就可以查询自己所报科目的成绩详情了。

以上就是查询201812ACCA考试成绩公布的具体时间及查分方法。


下面小编为大家准备了 ACCA考试 的相关考题,供大家学习参考。

(b) (i) Discuss the main factors that should be taken into account when determining how to treat gains and

losses arising on tangible non-current assets in a single statement of financial performance. (8 marks)

正确答案:
(b) (i) Currently there are many rules on how gains and losses on tangible non current assets should be reported and these
have traditionally varied from country to country. The main issues revolve around the reporting of depreciation,
disposal/revaluation gains and losses, and impairment losses. The reporting of such elements should take into account
whether the tangible non current assets have been revalued or held at historical cost. The problem facing standard
setters is where to report such gains and losses.The question is whether they should be reported as part of operating
activities or as ‘other gains and losses’.
Holding gains arising on the sale of tangible non current assets could be reported separately from operating results so
that the latter is not obscured by an asset realisation that reflects more a change in market prices than any increase in
the operating activity of the entity. Other changes in the carrying amounts of tangible non current assets will be reported
as part of the operating results. For example, the depreciation charge tries to reflect the consumption of the asset by the
entity and as such is not a holding loss. There may be cases where the depreciation charge does not reflect the
consumption of economic benefits. For example, the pattern and rate of depreciation could have been misjudged
because the asset’s useful life has been assessed incorrectly. In this case, when an asset is sold any excess or shortfall
of depreciation may need to be dealt with in the operating result.
Impairment is another factor to consider in reporting gains and losses on tangible non current assets. Impairment is
effectively accelerated depreciation. Impairment arises when the carrying amount of the asset is above its recoverable
amount. It follows therefore that any impairment loss should be reported as part of the operating result. Any losses on
disposal, to the extent that they represent impairment, could therefore be reported as part of the operating results. Any
losses which represent holding losses could be reported in ‘other gains and losses’. The difficulty will be differentiating
between holding losses and impairment losses. There will have to be clear and concise definitions of these terms or it
could lead to abuse by companies in their quest to maximise operating profits.
A distinction should be made between gains and losses arising on tangible non current assets as a result of revaluations
and those arising on disposal. The nature of the gain or loss is essentially the same although the timing and certainty
of the gain/loss is different. Therefore revaluation gains/losses may be reported in the ‘other gains and losses’ section.
Where an asset has been revalued, any loss on disposal that represents an impairment would be charged to operating
results and any remaining loss reported in ‘other gains and losses’.
Essentially, gains and losses should be reported on the basis of the characteristics of the gains and losses themselves.
Gains and losses with similar characteristics should be reported together thus helping the comparability of financial
performance nationally and internationally.

(c) Describe the examination procedures you should use to verify Cusiter Co’s prospective financial information.

(9 marks)

正确答案:
(c) Examination procedures
■ The arithmetic accuracy of the PFI should be confirmed, i.e. subtotals and totals should be recast and agreed.
■ The actual information for the year to 31 December 2006 that is shown as comparative information should be agreed
to the audited financial statements for that year to ensure consistency.
■ Balances and transaction totals for the quarter to 31 March 2007 should be agreed to general ledger account balances
at that date. The net book value of property, plant and equipment should be agreed to the non-current asset register;
accounts receivable/payable to control accounts and cash at bank to a bank reconciliation statement.
■ Tenders for the new equipment should be inspected to confirm the additional cost included in property, plant and
equipment included in the forecast for the year to 31 December 2008 and that it can be purchased with the funds being
lent by the bank.
■ The reasonableness of all new assumptions should be considered. For example, the expected useful life of the new
equipment, the capacity at which it will be operating, the volume of new product that can be sold, and at what price.
■ The forecast income statement should be reviewed for completeness of costs associated with the expansion. For
example, operating expenses should include salaries of additional equipment operatives or supervisors.
■ The consistency of accounting practices reflected in the forecast with International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS)
should be considered. For example, the intangible asset might be expected to be less than $10,000 at 31 December
2008 as it should be carried at amortised cost.
■ The cost of property, plant and equipment at 31 December 2008 is $280,000 more than as at 31 December 2007.
Consideration should be given to the adequacy of borrowing $250,000 if the actual investment is $30,000 more.
■ The terms of existing borrowings (both non-current and short-term) should be reviewed to ensure that the forecast takes
full account of existing repayment schedules. For example, to confirm that only $23,000 of term borrowings will become
current by the end of 2007.
Trends should be reviewed and fluctuations explained, for example:
■ Revenue for the first quarter of 2007 is only 22% of revenue for 2006 and so may appear to be understated. However,
revenue may not be understated if sales are seasonal and the first quarter is traditionally ‘quieter’.
■ Forecast revenue for 2007 is 18% up on 2006. However, forecast revenue for 2008 is only 19% up on 2007. As the
growth in 2007 is before the investment in new plant and equipment it does not look as though the new investment
will be contributing significantly to increased growth in the first year.
■ The gross profit % is maintained at around 29% for the three years. However, the earnings before interest and tax (EBIT)
% is forecast to fall by 2% for 2008. Earnings after interest might be worrying to the potential lender as this is forecast
to rise from 12·2% in 2006 to 13·7% in 2007 but then fall to 7·6% in 2008.
The reasonableness of relationships between income statement and balance sheet items should be considered. For example:
■ The average collection period at each of the balance sheet dates presented is 66, 69, 66 and 66 days respectively (e.g.
71/394 × 365 = 66 days). Although it may be realistic to assume that the current average collection period may be
maintained in future it is possible that it could deteriorate if, for example, new customers taken on to launch the new
product are not as credit worthy as the existing customer base.
■ The number of days sales in inventory at each balance sheet date is 66, 88, 66 and 65 days respectively (e.g. 50/278
× 365 = 66 days). The reason for the increase to 88 at the end of the first quarter must be established and
management’s assertion that 66 days will be re-established as the ‘norm’ corroborated.
■ As the $42,000 movement on retained earnings from 2007 to 2008 is the earnings before income tax for 2008 it may
be that there is no tax in 2008 or that tax effects have not been forecast. (However, some deferred tax effect might be
expected if the investment in new plant and equipment is likely to attract accelerated capital allowances.)

TQ Company, a listed company, recently went into administration (it had become insolvent and was being managed by a firm of insolvency practitioners). A group of shareholders expressed the belief that it was the chairman, Miss Heike Hoiku, who was primarily to blame. Although the company’s management had made a number of strategic errors that brought about the company failure, the shareholders blamed the chairman for failing to hold senior management to account. In particular, they were angry that Miss Hoiku had not challenged chief executive Rupert Smith who was regarded by some as arrogant and domineering. Some said that Miss Hoiku was scared of Mr Smith.

Some shareholders wrote a letter to Miss Hoiku last year demanding that she hold Mr Smith to account for a number of previous strategic errors. They also asked her to explain why she had not warned of the strategic problems in her chairman’s statement in the annual report earlier in the year. In particular, they asked if she could remove Mr Smith from office for incompetence. Miss Hoiku replied saying that whilst she understood their concerns, it was difficult to remove a serving chief executive from office.

Some of the shareholders believed that Mr Smith may have performed better in his role had his reward package been better designed in the first place. There was previously a remuneration committee at TQ but when two of its four non-executive members left the company, they were not replaced and so the committee effectively collapsed.

Mr Smith was then able to propose his own remuneration package and Miss Hoiku did not feel able to refuse him.

He massively increased the proportion of the package that was basic salary and also awarded himself a new and much more expensive company car. Some shareholders regarded the car as ‘excessively’ expensive. In addition, suspecting that the company’s performance might deteriorate this year, he exercised all of his share options last year and immediately sold all of his shares in TQ Company.

It was noted that Mr Smith spent long periods of time travelling away on company business whilst less experienced directors struggled with implementing strategy at the company headquarters. This meant that operational procedures were often uncoordinated and this was one of the causes of the eventual strategic failure.

(a) Miss Hoiku stated that it was difficult to remove a serving chief executive from office.

Required:

(i) Explain the ways in which a company director can leave the service of a board. (4 marks)

(ii) Discuss Miss Hoiku’s statement that it is difficult to remove a serving chief executive from a board.

(4 marks)

(b) Assess, in the context of the case, the importance of the chairman’s statement to shareholders in TQ

Company’s annual report. (5 marks)

(c) Criticise the structure of the reward package that Mr Smith awarded himself. (4 marks)

(d) Criticise Miss Hoiku’s performance as chairman of TQ Company. (8 marks)

正确答案:

(a) (i) Leaving the service of a board
Resignation with or without notice. Any director is free to withdraw his or her labour at any time but there is normally
a notice period required to facilitate an orderly transition from the outgoing chief executive to the incoming one.
Not offering himself/herself for re-election. Terms of office, which are typically three years, are renewable if the director
offers him or herself for re-election and the shareholders support the renewal. Retirement usually takes place at the end
of a three-year term when the director decides not to seek re-election.
Death in service when, obviously, the director is unable to either provide notice or seek retirement.
Failure of the company. When a company fails, all directors’ contracts are cancelled although this need not signal the
end of the directors’ involvement with company affairs as there may be ongoing legal issues to be resolved.
Being removed e.g. by being dismissed for disciplinary offences. It is relatively easy to ‘prove’ a disciplinary offence but
much more difficult to ‘prove’ incompetence. The nature of disciplinary offences are usually made clear in the terms and
conditions of employment and company policy.
Prolonged absence. Directors unable to perform. their duties owing to protracted absence, for any reason, may be
removed. The length of qualifying absence period varies by jurisdiction.
Being disqualified from being a company director by a court. Directors can be banned from holding directorships by a
court for a number of reasons including personal bankruptcy and other legal issues.
Failing to be re-elected if, having offered him or herself for re-election, shareholders elect not to re-appoint.
An ‘agreed departure’ such as by providing compensation to a director to leave.

(ii) Discuss Miss Hoiku’s statement
The way that directors’ contracts and company law are written (in most countries) makes it difficult to remove a director
such as Mr Smith from office during an elected term of office so in that respect, Miss Hoiku is correct. Unless his contract
has highly specific performance targets built in to it, it is difficult to remove Mr Smith for incompetence in the
short-term as it is sometimes difficult to assess the success of strategies until some time has passed. If the alleged
incompetence is within Mr Smith’s term of office (typically three years) then it will usually be necessary to wait until the
director offers himself for re-election. The shareholders can then simply not re-elect the incompetent director (in this
case, Mr Smith). The most likely way to achieve the departure of Mr Smith within his term of office will be to ‘encourage’
him to resign by other directors failing to support him or by shareholders issuing a vote of no confidence at an AGM or
EGM. This would probably involve offering him a suitable financial package to depart at a time chosen by the other
members of the board or company shareholders.
(b) Importance of the chairman’s statement
The chairman’s statement (or president’s letter in some countries) is an important and usually voluntary item, typically carried
at the very beginning of an annual report. In general terms, it is intended to convey important messages to shareholders in
general, strategic terms. As a separate section from other narrative reporting sections of an annual report, it offers the
chairman the opportunity to inform. shareholders about issues that he or she feels it would be beneficial for them to be aware
of. This independent communication is an important part of the separation of the roles of CEO and chairman.
In the case of TQ Company, the role of the chairman is of particular importance because of the dominance of Mr Smith.
Miss Hoiku had a particular responsibility to use her most recent statement to inform. shareholders about going concern issues
notwithstanding the difficulties that might cause in her relationship with Mr Smith. Miss Hoiku has an ethical as well as an
agency responsibility to express her independence in the chairman’s statement and convey issues relevant to company value
to the company’s shareholders. She can use her chairman’s statement for this purpose.

(c) Criticise the structure of the reward package that Mr Smith awarded himself
The balance between basic to performance related pay was very poor. Mr Smith, perhaps being aware that the prospect of
gaining much performance related income was low, took the opportunity to increase the fixed element of his income to
compensate. This was not only unprofessional and unethical on Mr Smith’s part, but it also represented very bad value for
shareholders. Having exercised his share options and sold the resulting shares, there was now no element of alignment of
his package with shareholder interests at all. His award to himself of an ‘excessively’ expensive company car was also not
in the shareholders’ interests. The fact that he exercised and sold all of his share options means that he will now have no
personal financial motivation to take strategic decisions intended to increase TQ Company’s share value. This represents a
poor degree of alignment between Mr Smith’s package and the interests of TQ’s shareholders.
(d) Criticise Miss Hoiku’s performance as chairman of TQ Company
The case describes a particularly poor performance by a company chairman. It is a key function of the chairman to represent
the shareholders’ interests in the company and Miss Hoiku has clearly failed in this duty.
A key reason for her poor performance was her reported inability or unwillingness to face up to Mr Smith who was clearly a
domineering personality. A key quality of a company chairman is his or her ability and willingness to personally challenge the
chief executive if necessary.
She failed to ensure that a committee structure was in place, allowing as she did, the remunerations committee to atrophy
when two members left the company.
Linked to this, it appears from the case that the two non-executive directors that left were not replaced and again, it is a part
of the chairman’s responsibility to ensure that an adequate number of non-executives are in place on the board.
She inexplicably allowed Mr Smith to design his own rewards package and presided over him reducing the performance
related element of his package which was clearly misaligned with the shareholders’ interests.
When Mr Smith failed to co-ordinate the other directors because of his unspecified business travel, she failed to hold him to
account thereby allowing the company’s strategy to fail.
There seems to have been some under-reporting of potential strategic problems in the most recent annual report. A ‘future
prospects’ or ‘continuing business’ statement is often a required disclosure in an annual report (in many countries) and there is evidence that this statement may have been missing or misleading in the most recent annual report.


(b) a discussion (with suitable calculations) as to how the directors’ share options would be accounted for in the

financial statements for the year ended 31 May 2005 including the adjustment to opening balances;

(9 marks)

正确答案:

(b) Accounting in the financial statements for the year ended 31 May 2005
IFRS2 requires an expense to be recognised for the share options granted to the directors with a corresponding amount shown
in equity. Where options do not vest immediately but only after a period of service, then there is a presumption that the
services will be rendered over the ‘vesting period’. The fair value of the services rendered will be measured by reference to
the fair value of the equity instruments at the date that the equity instruments were granted. Fair value should be based on
market prices. The treatment of vesting conditions depends on whether or not the conditions relate to the market price of the
instruments. Market conditions are effectively taken into account in determining the fair value of the instruments and therefore
can be ignored for the purposes of estimating the number of equity instruments that will vest. For other conditions such as
remaining in the employment of the company, the calculations are carried out based on the best estimate of the number of
instruments that will vest. The estimate is revised when subsequent information is available.
The share options granted to J. Van Heflin on 1 June 2002 were before the date set in IFRS2 for accounting for such options
(7 November 2002). Therefore, no expense calculation is required. (Note: candidates calculating the expense for the latter
share options would be given credit if they stated that the company could apply IFRS2 to other options in certaincircumstances.) The remaining options are valued as follows:


声明:本文内容由互联网用户自发贡献自行上传,本网站不拥有所有权,未作人工编辑处理,也不承担相关法律责任。如果您发现有涉嫌版权的内容,欢迎发送邮件至:contact@51tk.com 进行举报,并提供相关证据,工作人员会在5个工作日内联系你,一经查实,本站将立刻删除涉嫌侵权内容。