【在线查询】你符合2020年ACCA考试报名条件吗？

正确答案：
(ii) The summary analysis in (a)(i) shows that using overall points gained, Michaelangelotown has achieved the best
performance with 12 points. Donatellotown and Leonardotown have achieved a reasonable level of performance with
eight points each. Raphaeltown has under performed, however, gaining only four out of the available 12 points.
Michaelangelotown is the only depot to have achieved both an increase in revenue over budget and an increased
profit:revenue percentage.
In the customer care and service delivery statistics, Michaelangelotown has achieved all six of the target standards,
Donatellotown four; Leonardotown three. The Raphaeltown statistic of achieving only one out of six targets indicates the
need for investigation.
With regard to the credit control and administrative efficiency statistics, Leonardotown and Michaelangelotown achieved
all four standards and Donatellotown achieved three of the four standards. Once again, Raphaeltown is the ‘poor
performer’ achieving only two of the four standards.

正确答案：
(c) From the information given in the scenario, DPP will face significant problems if it chooses to develop a greenfield site. The
bureaucratic planning procedures adopted by the host government can add considerable time to get an efficient plant up and
running. In some ways, such governments are in a dilemma, anxious to secure foreign direct investment, but at the same
time protect inefficient domestic manufacturers. Certainly, DPP in its own risk assessment would need to take political risk
into account. In assessing the risks of a greenfield site, Ken could use Porter’s ‘diamond’ to good effect. Factor conditions
might be seen as quite favourable, with an educated, trained, albeit low productivity, labour force. However, the lack of
demanding tough global customers, a weak and inefficient domestic industry to supply the new venture and competitors who
have been highly protected mean that DPP will have to battle to create a supportive and sustaining environment. Financial
exposure may be increased through currency risk.
Clearly, the fresh start will allow integrated information systems to be developed and the latest technology to be used.
However, the new capacity will have a significant impact on DPP’s existing plants. The extent to which expatriate
management is used is clearly an issue. The host government is likely to require some commitment to the training of local
management and the degree of autonomy given to the new plant may well be an issue. Cultural issues and sensitivities will
be significant – often shop floor workers and managers will be used to high levels of absenteeism being tolerated in
government owned and controlled firms. Also the issue of involvement and participation could be an issue – there may be a
marked reluctance on the shop floor to contribute ideas towards raising productivity and quality. DPP is part of a group that
has experience of operating abroad and there is a real need to access information on key problems in greenfield operations.
In many ways the move to a greenfield site links the macro environmental analysis generated by a SLEPT or PEST to five
forces industry analysis with its focus on customers, competitors and suppliers. Certainly, creating an integrated value chain
with DPP’s existing business will be a real challenge to the management. It also adds capacity to a European industry where
there is already a problem. Choosing between the two options to achieve the strategic goal of a lower cost base can be doneusing the tests of suitability, acceptability and feasibility. The decision will not be an easy one.

正确答案：
(b) Financial statement risks
Tutorial note: Note the timeframe. Financial statements for the year to 30 June 2006 are draft. Certain misstatements
may therefore exist due to year-end procedures not yet having taken place.
Revenue/(Receivables)
■ Revenue has increased by 11·8% ((161·5 – 144·4)/144·4 × 100). Overstatement could arise if rebates due to customers
have not yet been accounted for in full (as they are calculated in arrears). If rebates have still to be accounted for trade
receivables will be similarly overstated.
Materials expense
■ Materials expense has increased by 17·8% ((88.0 – 74·7)/74·7 × 100). This is more than the increase in revenue. This
could be legitimate (e.g. if fuel costs have increased significantly). However, the increase could indicate misclassification
of:
– revenue expenditure (see fall in other expenses below);
– capital expenditure (e.g. on overhauls or major refurbishment) as revenue;
– finance lease payments as operating lease.
Depreciation/amortisation
■ This has fallen by 10·5% ((8·5 – 9·5)/9·5 × 100). This could be valid (e.g. if Yates has significant assets already fully
depreciated or the asset base is lower since last year’s restructuring). However, there is a risk of understatement if, for
example:
– not all assets have been depreciated (or depreciated at the wrong rates, or only for 11 months of the year);
– cost of non-current assets is understated (e.g. due to failure to recognise capital expenditure)1;
– impairment losses have not been recognised (as compared with the prior year).
Tutorial note: Depreciation on vehicles and transport equipment represents only 7% of cost. If all items were being
depreciated on a straight-line basis over eight years this should be 12·5%. The depreciation on other equipment looks more
reasonable as it amounts to 14% which would be consistent with an average age of vehicles of seven years (i.e. in the middle
of the range 3 – 13 years).
Other expenses
■ These have fallen by 15·5% ((19·6 – 23·2)/23·2 × 100). They may have fallen (e.g. following the restructuring) or may be
understated due to:
– expenses being misclassified as materials expense;
– underestimation of accrued expenses (especially as the financial reporting period has not yet expired).
Intangibles
■ Intangible assets have increased by $1m (16% on the prior year). Although this may only just be material to the
financial statements as a whole (see (a)) this is the net movement, therefore additions could be material.
■ Internally-generated intangibles will be overstated if:
– any of the IAS 38 recognition criteria cannot be demonstrated;
– any impairment in the year has not yet been written off in accordance with IAS 36 ‘Impairment of Assets’.
Tangible assets
■ The net book value of property (at cost) has fallen by 5%, vehicles are virtually unchanged (increased by just 2·5%)
and other equipment (though the least material category) has fallen by 20·4%.
■ Vehicles and equipment may be overstated if:
– disposals have not been recorded;
– depreciation has been undercharged (e.g. not for a whole year);
– impairments have not yet been accounted for.
■ Understatement will arise if finance leases are treated as operating leases.
Receivables
■ Trade receivables have increased by just 2·2% (although sales increased by 11·8%) and may be understated due to a
cutoff error resulting in overstatement of cash receipts.
■ There is a risk of overstatement if sufficient allowances have not been made for the impairment of individually significant
balances and for the remainder assessed on a portfolio or group basis.
Restructuring provision
■ The restructuring provision that was made last year has fallen/been utilised by 10·2%. There is a risk of overstatement
if the provision is underutilised/not needed for the purpose for which it was established.
Finance lease liabilities
■ Although finance lease liabilities have increased (by $1m) there is a greater risk of understatement than overstatement
if leased assets are not recognised on the balance sheet (i.e. capitalised).
■ Disclosure risk arises if the requirements of IAS 17 ‘Leases’ (e.g. in respect of minimum lease payments) are not met.
Trade payables
■ These have increased by only 5·3% compared with the 17·8% increase in materials expense. There is a risk of
understatement as notifications (e.g. suppliers’ invoices) of liabilities outstanding at 30 June 2006 may have still to be
received (the month of June being an unexpired period).
Other (employee) liabilities
■ These may be understated as they have increased by only 7·5% although staff costs have increased by 14%. For
example, balances owing in respect of outstanding holiday entitlements at the year end may not yet be accurately
estimated.
Tutorial note: Credit will be given to other financial statements risks specific to the scenario. For example, ‘time-sensitive
delivery schedules’ might give rise to penalties or claims, that could result in understated provisions or undisclosed
contingent liabilities. Also, given that this is a new audit and the result has changed significantly (from loss to profit) might
suggest a risk of misstatement in the opening balances (and hence comparative information).
1 Tutorial note: This may be unlikely as other expenses have fallen also.

正确答案：
(ii) Shares held in Date Inc and the related dividend income
Degrouping charge
There will be a degrouping charge in Nikau Ltd in the year ending 31 March 2008 in respect of the shares in Date Inc.
This is because Nikau Ltd has left the Facet Group within six years of the no gain, no loss transfer of the shares whilst
still owning them.
Nikau Ltd is treated as if it has sold the shares in Date Inc for their market value as at the time of the no gain, no loss
transfer. This will give rise to a gain, ignoring indexation allowance, of ￡201,000 (￡338,000 – ￡137,000).
This gain will give rise to additional corporation tax of ￡60,300 (￡201,000 x 30%).
Controlled foreign company
Date Inc is a controlled foreign company. The profits of such a company are normally attributed to its UK resident
shareholders such that they are subject to UK corporation tax.
However, none of the profits of Date Inc will be attributed to Nikau Ltd because Date Inc distributes more than 90%
(￡115,000/￡120,000 = 95·8%) of its chargeable profits to its shareholders.
Dividend income
Nikau Ltd is a UK resident company and is therefore subject to corporation tax on its worldwide income.
The dividend income will be grossed up in respect of the withholding tax giving rise to taxable income of ￡39,792
(￡38,200 x 100/96). There is no underlying tax as there are no taxes on income or capital profits in Palladia.
The corporation tax of ￡11,938 (￡39,792 x 30%) will be reduced by unilateral double tax relief equal to the withholding
tax suffered of ￡1,592 (￡39,792 x 4%) resulting in corporation tax due of ￡10,346 (￡11,938 – ￡1,592).