请问香港考生ACCA国际会计师证书应该怎么注册呢?

正确答案：
(c) Non-consolidated entities under common control
■ Horizontal groups of entities under common control were a significant feature of the Enron and Parmalat business
empires.
■ Such business empires increase audit risk as fraud is often disguised through labyrinthine group structures. Hence
auditors need to understand and confirm the economic purpose of entities within business empires (as well as special
purpose entities (SPEs) and non-trading entities).
■ Horizontal groups fall outside the requirement for the preparation of group accounts. It is not only finance that is offbalance
sheet when controlled entities are excluded from consolidated financial statements.
■ In the absence of consolidated financial statements, users of accounts of entities in horizontal groups have to rely on the
disclosure of related party transactions and control relationships for information about transactions and arrangements
with other group entities. Difficulties faced by auditors include:
? failing to detect related party transactions and control relationships;
? not understanding the substance of transactions with entities under common control;
? excessively creative tax planning;
? the implications of transfer pricing (e.g. failure to recognise profits unrealised at the business empire level);
? a lack of access to relevant confidential information held by others;
? relying on representations made in good faith by those whom the auditors believe manage the company when
control rests elsewhere.
■ Audit work is inevitably increased if an auditor is put upon inquiry to investigate dubious transactions and arrangements.
However, the complexity of business empires across multiple jurisdictions with different auditors may deter auditors from
liaising with other auditors (especially where legal or professional confidentiality considerations prevent this).

正确答案：

 

正确答案：
(c) Management letter effectiveness criteria
Tutorial note: Candidates at this level must know that a management letter is a letter of weakness (also called post-audit
letter). NO marks will be awarded for consideration of any other letters (e.g. management representation letters, engagement
letters).
■ Timeliness – a management letter should be issued as soon as possible after completion of the audit procedures giving
rise to comment. This is particularly important when audit work is carried out on more than one audit visit and where
it is a matter of urgency that management make improvements to their procedures (e.g. where there is evidence of
serious weakness).
■ Clarity – wording must be clear so that recipients understand the significance of weaknesses that are being drawn to
their attention. It is particularly important that implications are explained clearly in terms that will prompt management
to respond positively (e.g. drawing attention to the risks of financial loss arising).
■ Illustrative – specific illustrative examples (e.g. of where controls have not been evidenced) should aid management in
understanding the nature of the problem(s).
■ Constructive comments/advice – recommendations for improvements must be practicable (i.e. appropriate and costeffective
in the light of the client’s resources) if the client is to take corrective action.
■ Conciseness – unnecessary volume will distract management from new/additional matters that require their attention.
For example, matters adequately dealt with in the internal auditor’s report should not be repeated.
■ Factual accuracy is essential. Inaccuracies will not only aggravate the client and appear unprofessional but could, in rare
circumstances, result in liability. Similarly, the letter should not criticise (or ‘cast aspersions’) on individual staff members
if it is the system that is inadequate.
■ A suitable structure – for example ‘tiered’, where the report contains matters of varying levels of significance. By directing
different classes of matters to the appropriate level or area of responsibility action by management can be taken more
speedily and constructively.
Tutorial note: An alternative structure might be one that sequences those recommendations that improve
profitability/cash flows before those that deal with information systems.
■ Inclusion of staff responses – both to advise senior management of action proposed/being taken by their staff and to give
credit to recommendations for improvements where it is due (e.g. where client’s staff have proposed recommendations).
■ Inclusion of management’s response – an indication of the actions that management intends to take is more likely to
result in action being taken. Discussing findings with management first should also ensure their factual accuracy.
■ Client’s perspective – implications from the client’s viewpoint (e.g. in terms of cost savings) are more likely to be acted
on than those expressed from an audit perspective (e.g. in terms of lowered audit risk).
■ Professional tone – should not be offensive. Comments that fault management’s knowledge, competence, motives or
integrity are likely to provoke defensive reactions. Comments should be positive/constructive by emphasising
solutions/benefits.
Tutorial notes: Other points that candidates may include:
■ Inclusion of matters of future relevance
■ Cost effectiveness – minutes of discussions with management instead of a formal weakness letter
■ Not raising ‘people problems’ in such a formal communication (a confidential discussion is preferable).