2020年ACCA考试审计与认证业务（基础）精选考点(3)

正确答案：

 

When considering the shortfall
– The family’s expenditure is likely to increase as the children get older, particularly if there is a need for school fees.
– There will be a need for some cash immediately to pay for the cost of the funeral.
– It is assumed that the whole of Jane’s estate has been left to Charles such that there will be no inheritance tax on her
death.
– The shortfall may be reduced by:
(i) State benefits and tax credits.
(ii) Expenditure on non-essential items, e.g. holidays and entertainment included in the annual expenditure of
￡45,500.
(iii) The income generated by Charles if he were to return to work.
– The shortfall may be increased by additional child-care costs due to Charles being a single parent, particularly if he
returns to work full-time.
Further information required
– The level of state benefits and tax credits available to Charles.
– The current level of expenditure on non-essential items.
– The costs of child-care if Charles were to return to work.
– Details of any wills made by Charles or Jane.
– Whether Charles’ investment properties could be sold and the proceeds invested in assets with a higher annual return.
– Whether there is any value in Speak Write Ltd independent of Jane, such that the company could be sold after Jane’s
death.
Other related issues
– The couple should consider making provision for their retirement via pension contributions or some other form. of long
term investment plan.
– The couple should recognise that there would be significant financial problems if Jane were to become seriously ill. In
addition to the family’s income falling as set out above, its expenditure would probably increase.
Protection products
– Term life assurance
A qualifying life policy would pay out a tax-free lump sum on Jane’s death.
– Permanent health insurance
Would provide a regular income if Jane were unable to work due to illness.
– Critical illness insurance
Would provide a capital sum in the event of Jane being diagnosed with an insured illness.

正确答案：

(a) (i) IAS12 ‘Income Taxes’ adopts a balance sheet approach to accounting for deferred taxation. The IAS adopts a full
provision approach to accounting for deferred taxation. It is assumed that the recovery of all assets and the settlement
of all liabilities have tax consequences and that these consequences can be estimated reliably and are unavoidable.
IFRS recognition criteria are generally different from those embodied in tax law, and thus ‘temporary’ differences will
arise which represent the difference between the carrying amount of an asset and liability and its basis for taxation
purposes (tax base). The principle is that a company will settle its liabilities and recover its assets over time and at that
point the tax consequences will crystallise.

Thus a change in an accounting standard will often affect the carrying value of an asset or liability which in turn will
affect the amount of the temporary difference between the carrying value and the tax base. This in turn will affect the
amount of the deferred taxation provision which is the tax rate multiplied by the amount of the temporary differences(assuming a net liability for deferred tax.)

 

正确答案：
(b) Implications for the auditor’s report
(i) Corruption of perpetual inventory records
■ The loss of data (of physical inventory quantities at the balance sheet date) gives rise to a limitation on scope.
Tutorial note: It is the records of the asset that have been destroyed – not the physical asset.
■ The systems failure in October 2005 is clearly a non-adjusting post balance sheet event (IAS 10). If it is material
(such that non-disclosure could influence the economic decisions of users) Jinack should disclose:
– the nature of the event (i.e. systems failure); and
– an estimate of its financial effect (i.e. the cost of disruption and reconstruction of data to the extent that it is
not covered by insurance).
Tutorial note: The event has no financial effect on the realisability of inventory, only on its measurement for the
purpose of reporting it in the financial statements.
■ If material this disclosure could be made in the context of explaining how inventory has been estimated at
30 September 2005 (see later). If such disclosure, that the auditor considers to be necessary, is not made, the
audit opinion should be qualified ‘except for’ disagreement (over lack of disclosure).
Tutorial note: Such qualifications are extremely rare since management should be persuaded to make necessary
disclosure in the notes to the financial statements rather than have users’ attention drawn to the matter through
a qualification of the audit opinion.
■ The limitation on scope of the auditor’s work has been imposed by circumstances. Jinack’s accounting records
(for inventory) are inadequate (non-existent) for the auditor to perform. tests on them.
■ An alternative procedure to obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence of inventory quantities at a year end is
subsequent count and ‘rollback’. However, the extent of ‘roll back’ testing is limited as records are still under
reconstruction.
■ The auditor may be able to obtain sufficient evidence that there is no material misstatement through a combination
of procedures:
– testing management’s controls over counting inventory after the balance sheet date and recording inventory
movements (e.g. sales and goods received);
– reperforming the reconstruction for significant items on a sample basis;
– analytical procedures such as a review of profit margins by inventory category.
■ ‘An extensive range of inventory’ is clearly material. The matter (i.e. systems failure) is not however pervasive, as
only inventory is affected.
■ Unless the reconstruction is substantially completed (i.e. inventory items not accounted for are insignificant) the
auditor cannot determine what adjustment, if any, might be determined to be necessary. The auditor’s report
should then be modified, ‘except for’, limitation on scope.
■ However, if sufficient evidence is obtained the auditor’s report should be unmodified.
■ An ‘emphasis of matter’ paragraph would not be appropriate because this matter is not one of significant
uncertainty.
Tutorial note: An uncertainty in this context is a matter whose outcome depends on future actions or events not
under the direct control of Jinack.
2006
■ If the 2005 auditor’s report is qualified ‘except for’ on grounds of limitation on scope there are two possibilities for
the inventory figure as at 30 September 2005 determined on completion of the reconstruction exercise:
(1) it is not materially different from the inventory figure reported; or
(2) it is materially different.
■ In (1), with the limitation now removed, the need for qualification is removed and the 2006 auditor’s report would
be unmodified (in respect of this matter).
■ In (2) the opening position should be restated and the comparatives adjusted in accordance with IAS 8 ‘Accounting
Policies, Changes in Accounting Estimates and Errors’. The 2006 auditor’s report would again be unmodified.
Tutorial note: If the error was not corrected in accordance with IAS 8 it would be a different matter and the
auditor’s report would be modified (‘except for’ qualification) disagreement on accounting treatment.