2022年ACCA考试报名条件是什么？

正确答案：
6 There are many forms of communication within an organisation, both formal and informal. Formally communicated information often flows in one of three main directions: downwards, upwards and lateral. However, all organisations also have informal communication channels and management must understand their importance.
(a) Formal communicated information flows in three main directions.
(i) Downwards. This form. of communication is often the one most easily recognised and understood. The purpose of downward communication is to give specific directives, to provide information about procedures and practices and to provide information about work practices. It also serves to tell employees about their performance and provides information on organisational and departmental objectives.

正确答案：
3 KEFFLER CO
Tutorial note: None of the issues have any bearing on revenue. Therefore any materiality calculations assessed on revenue are
inappropriate and will not be awarded marks.
(a) Landfill site
(i) Matters
■ $1·1m cost of the right represents 3·3% of total assets and is therefore material.
■ The right should be amortised over its useful life, that is just 10 years, rather than the 15-year period for which
the right has been granted.
Tutorial note: Recalculation on the stated basis (see audit evidence) shows that a 10-year amortisation has been
correctly used.
■ The amortisation charge represents 1% of profit before tax (PBT) and is not material.
■ The amortisation method used should reflect the pattern in which the future economic benefits of the right are
expected to be consumed by Keffler. If that pattern cannot be determined reliably, the straight-line method must
be used (IAS 38 ‘Intangible Assets’).
■ Using an increasing sum-of-digits will ‘end-load’ the amortisation charge (i.e. least charge in the first year, highest
charge in the last year). However, according to IAS 38 there is rarely, if ever, persuasive evidence to support an
amortisation method that results in accumulated amortisation lower than that under the straight-line method.
Tutorial note: Over the first half of the asset’s life, depreciation will be lower than under the straight-line basis
(and higher over the second half of the asset’s life).
■ On a straight line basis the annual amortisation charge would be $0·11m, an increase of $90,000. Although this
difference is just below materiality (4·5% PBT) the cumulative effect (of undercharging amortisation) will become
material.
■ Also, when account is taken of the understatement of cost (see below), the undercharging of amortisation will be
material.
■ The sum-of-digits method might be suitable as an approximation to the unit-of-production method if Keffler has
evidence to show that use of the landfill site will increase annually.
■ However, in the absence of such evidence, the audit opinion should be qualified ‘except for’ disagreement with the
amortisation method (resulting in intangible asset overstatement/amortisation expense understatement).
■ The annual restoration provision represents 5% of PBT and 0·3% of total assets. Although this is only borderline
material (in terms of profit), there will be a cumulative impact.
■ Annual provisioning is contrary to IAS 37 ‘Provisions, Contingent Liabilities and Contingent Assets’.
■ The estimate of the future restoration cost is (presumably) $1·5m (i.e. $0·1 × 15). The present value of this
amount should have been provided in full in the current year and included in the cost of the right.
■ Thus the amortisation being charged on the cost of the right (including the restoration cost) is currently understated
(on any basis).
Tutorial note: A 15-year discount factor at 10% (say) is 0·239. $1·5m × 0·239 is approximately $0·36m. The
resulting present value (of the future cost) would be added to the cost of the right. Amortisation over 10 years
on a straight-line basis would then be increased by $36,000, increasing the difference between amortisation
charged and that which should be charged. The lower the discount rate, the greater the understatement of
amortisation expense.
Total amount expensed ($120k) is less than what should have been expensed (say $146k amortisation + $36k
unwinding of discount). However, this is not material.
■ Whether Keffler will wait until the right is about to expire before restoring the land or might restore earlier (if the
site is completely filled in 10 years).
(ii) Audit evidence
■ Written agreement for purchase of right and contractual terms therein (e.g. to make restoration in 15 years’ time).
■ Cash book/bank statement entries in April 2005 for $1·1m payment.
■ Physical inspection of the landfill site to confirm Keffler’s use of it.
■ Annual dump budget/projection over next 10 years and comparison with sum-of-digits proportions.
■ Amount actually dumped in the year (per dump records) compared with budget and as a percentage/proportion of
the total available.
■ Recalculation of current year’s amortisation based on sum-of-digits. That is, $1·1m ÷ 55 = $20,000.
Tutorial note: The sum-of-digits from 1 to 10 may be calculated long-hand or using the formula n(n+1)/2 i.e.
(10 × 11)/2 = 55.
■ The basis of the calculation of the estimated restoration costs and principal assumptions made.
■ If estimated by a quantity surveyor/other expert then a copy of the expert’s report.
■ Written management representation confirming the planned timing of the restoration in 15 years (or sooner).

正确答案：

(b) Controlling variable costs
The first step in the process of controlling costs is to measure actual costs. The second step is to calculate variances that show
the difference between actual costs and budgeted or standard costs. These variances then need to be reported to those
managers who have responsibility for them. These managers can then decide whether action needs to be taken to bring actual
costs back into line with budgeted or standard costs. The operating statement therefore has a role to play in reporting
information to management in a way that assists in the decision-making process.
The operating statement quantifies the effect of the volume difference between budgeted and actual sales so that the actual
cost of the actual output can be compared with the standard (or budgeted) cost of the actual output. The statement clearly
differentiates between adverse and favourable variances so that managers can identify areas where there is a significant
difference between actual results and planned performance. This supports management by exception, since managers can
focus their efforts on these significant areas in order to obtain the most impact in terms of getting actual operations back in
line with planned activity.
In control terms, variable costs can be affected in the short term and so an operating statement for the last month showing
variable cost variances will highlight those areas where management action may be effective. In the short term, for example,
managers may be able to improve labour efficiency through training, or through reducing or eliminating staff actions which
do not assist the production process. In this way the adverse direct labour efficiency variance of ￡252, which is 7·3% of the
standard direct labour cost of the actual output, could be reduced.
Controlling fixed production overhead costs
In the short term, it is unlikely that fixed production overhead costs can be controlled. An operating statement from last month
showing fixed production overhead variances may not therefore assist in controlling fixed costs. Managers will not be able to
take any action to correct the adverse fixed production overhead expenditure variance, for example, which may in fact simply
show the need for improvement in the area of budget planning. Investigation of the component parts of fixed production
overhead will show, however, whether any of these are controllable. In general, this is not the case2.
Absorption costing gives rise to a fixed production overhead volume variance, which shows the effect of actual production
being different from planned production. Since fixed production overheads are a sunk cost, the volume variance shows little
more than that the standard hours for actual production were different from budgeted standard hours3. Similarly, the fixed
production overhead efficiency variance offers little more in information terms than the direct labour efficiency variance. While
fixed production overhead variances assist in reconciling budgeted profit with actual profit, therefore, their reporting in an
operating statement is unlikely to assist in controlling fixed costs.