2020年ACCA考试报名学历要求

正确答案：
(b) There are several issues which need to be addressed when developing IFRSs for SMEs:
(i) The purpose of the standards and type of entity
The principal aim of the development of an accounting framework for SMEs is to provide a framework which generates
relevant, reliable and useful information. The standards should provide high quality and understandable accounting
standards suitable for SMEs globally. Additionally they should meet the needs set out in (a) above. For example reduce
the financial reporting burden for SMEs. It is unlikely that one of the objectives would be to provide information for
management or meet the needs of the tax authorities as these bodies will have specific requirements which would be
difficult to meet in an accounting standard. However, it is likely that the standards for SMEs will be a modified version
of the full IFRSs and not an independently developed set of standards in order that they are based on the same
conceptual framework and will allow easier transition to full IFRS if the SME grows or decides to become a publicly listed
entity.
It is important to define the type of entity for which the standards are intended. Companies who have issued shares to
the public would be expected to use full IFRS. The question arises as to whether SME standards should apply to all
unlisted entities or just those listed entities below a certain size threshold. The difficulty with size criteria is that it would
have to apply worldwide and it would be very difficult to specify such criteria. Additionally some unlisted companies, for
example public utilities, have a reporting obligation that is equivalent to that of a listed company and should follow full
IFRS.
The main characteristic which distinguishes SMEs from other entities is the degree of public accountability. Thus the
definition of what constitutes an SME could revolve around those entities that do not have public accountability.
Indicators of public accountability will have to be developed. For example, a listed company or companies holding assets
in a fiduciary capacity (bank), or a public utility, or an entity with economic significance in its country. Thus all entities
that do not have public accountability may be considered as potential users of IFRSs for SMEs.
Size may not be the best way to determine what is an SME. SMEs could be defined by reference to ownership and themanagement of the entity. SMEs are not necessarily just smaller versions of public companies.

正确答案：

(iii) Internal audit services
A self-review threat may be created when a firm, or network firm, provides internal audit services to a financial statement
audit client. Internal audit services may comprise:
■ an extension of the firm’s audit service beyond requirements of International Standards on Auditing (ISAs);
■ assistance in the performance of a client’s internal audit activities; or
■ outsourcing of the activities.
The nature of the service must be considered in evaluating any threats to independence. (For this purpose, internal audit
services do not include operational internal audit services unrelated to the internal accounting controls, financial systems
or financial statements.)
Services involving an extension of the procedures required to conduct a financial statement audit in accordance with
ISAs would not be considered to impair independence with respect to the audit client provided that the firm’s or network
firm’s personnel do not act or appear to act in a capacity equivalent to a member of audit client management.

When the firm, or a network firm, provides an audit client with assistance in the performance of internal audit activities
or undertakes the outsourcing, any self-review threat created may be reduced to an acceptable level by a clear separation
of:
■ the management and control of the internal audit by client management;
■ the internal audit activities.
Performing a significant portion of an audit client’s internal audit activities may create a self-review threat. Appropriate
safeguards should include the audit client’s acknowledgement of its responsibilities for establishing, maintaining and
monitoring the system of internal controls.
Other safeguards include:
■ the audit client designating a competent employee, preferably within senior management, to be responsible for
internal audit activities;
■ the audit client, audit committee or supervisory body approving the scope, risk and frequency of internal audit
work;
■ the audit client being responsible for evaluating and determining which recommendations of the firm should be
implemented;
■ the audit client evaluating the adequacy of the internal audit procedures performed and the resultant findings by
obtaining and acting on reports from the firm; and
■ appropriate reporting of findings and recommendations resulting from the internal audit activities to the audit
committee or supervisory body.
Consideration should also be given to whether such non-assurance services should be provided only by personnel not
involved in the financial statement audit engagement and with different reporting lines within the firm.

正确答案：
6 REQUIREMENTS IN GROUP AUDITS
Tutorial note: The answer which follows is indicative of the range of points which might be made. Other relevant material will be
given suitable credit.
(a) Significant issues
Tutorial note: The objective of the IAASB’s project on the audit of group financial statements (‘group audits’) was to deal
with special considerations in group audits and, in particular, the involvement of other auditors. The re-exposure of ISA 600
(Revised and Redrafted) in March 2006 (following initial publication of a proposed revised ISA in December 2003 and an
exposure draft in March 2005) reflects the significance of the issues that the IAASB has sought to address.
Sole vs divided responsibility
The IAASB has concluded that the group auditor has sole responsibility for the group audit opinion. Thus the exposure drafts
eliminate the distinction between sole and divided responsibility. Therefore no reference to another auditor (e.g. of significant
components) should be made in the group auditor’s report. The practice of referring to another auditor may, arguably, be more
transparent to users of group financial statements. However, it may also mislead users to believe that the group auditor does
not have sole responsibility.
Definition of group auditor
The group auditor is the auditor who signs the auditor’s report on the group financial statements. The project has sought to
clarify whether, for example, an auditor from another office of the group engagement partner’s firm is a member of the group
engagement team or an ‘other auditor’.
‘Related’ vs ‘unrelated’ auditors
IAASB recognises that the nature, timing and extent of procedures performed by the group auditor, including the review of
the other auditor’s audit documentation, are affected by the group auditor’s relationship with the other audit. (For example,
if the other auditor operates under the quality control policies and procedures of the group auditor.) However, IAASB
acknowledges that a consistent distinction between ‘related’ and ‘unrelated’ auditors cannot be made due to the varying
structures of audit firms and their networks. Consequently, the only distinction that is made is between the ‘group’ and ‘other’
auditors.
Acceptance/continuance as group auditor
A group auditor should only accept or continue an engagement if sufficient appropriate evidence is expected to be obtained
on which to base the group audit opinion. Acceptance and continuance as group auditors therefore requires an assessment
of the risk of misstatement in components. IAASB has therefore proposed guidance on the benchmarks that might be used
in identifying significant components.
Access to information
IAASB has concluded that a group audit engagement should be refused (or resigned from) if the group engagement partner
concludes that it will not be possible to obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence, the result of which would be a disclaimer.
However, if the group engagement partner is prohibited from refusing or resigning an engagement, the group audit opinion
must be disclaimed.
Aggregation of components
Sufficient appropriate audit evidence must be obtained in respect of components that are not individually significant (but
significant in aggregate). This requires that components be selected for audit procedures (e.g. on specified account balances).
Analytical procedures are required to be performed on components that are not selected. IAASB has therefore identified factors
to be considered in selecting components that are not individually significant.
Responsibilities of other auditors
Historically, other auditors, knowing the context in which their work will be used by the group auditor, have been required to
cooperate with the group auditor. However, the project did not address guidance for other auditors. Therefore, in providing
guidance on the group audit, the IAASB requires the group auditor to obtain an understanding of the requirements for other
auditors to cooperate with the group auditor and provide access to relevant documentation.

正确答案：
(ii) Actuarial services to an audit client
IFAC’s ‘Code of Ethics for Professional Accountants’ does not deal specifically with actuarial valuation services but with
valuation services in general.
A valuation comprises:
■ making assumptions about the future;
■ applying certain methodologies and techniques;
■ computing a value (or range of values) for an asset, a liability or for a business as a whole.
A self-review threat may be created when a firm or network firm2 performs a valuation for a financial statement audit
client that is to be incorporated into the client’s financial statements.
As an actuarial valuation service is likely to involve the valuation of matters material to the financial statements (e.g. the
present value of obligations) and the valuation involves a significant degree of subjectivity (e.g. length of service), the
self-review threat created cannot be reduced to an acceptable level of the application of any safeguard. Accordingly:
■ such valuation services should not be provided; or
■ the firm should withdraw from the financial statement audit engagement.
If the net liability was not material to the financial statements the self-review threat may be reduced to an acceptable
level by the application of safeguards such as:
■ involving an additional professional accountant who was not a member of the audit team to review the work done
by the actuary;
■ confirming with the audit client their understanding of the underlying assumptions of the valuation and the
methodology to be used and obtaining approval for their use;
■ obtaining the audit client‘s acknowledgement of responsibility for the results of the work performed by the firm; and
■ making arrangements so that the partner providing the actuarial services does not participate in the audit
engagement.