ACCA报名无法缴费，缴费失败，怎么办？

正确答案：
(b) There are a number of potential problems which the directors of HFG need to recognise. These are as follows:
(i) There needs to exist a sufficient incentive for SFO to share their information with HFG as the success of any
benchmarking programme is dependent upon obtaining accurate information about the comparator organisation. This is
not an easy task to accomplish, as many organisations are reluctant to reveal confidential information to competitors.
The directors of HFG must be able to convince the directors of SFO that entering into a benchmarking arrangement is a
potential ‘win-win situation’.
(ii) The value of the exercise must be sufficient to justify the cost involved. Also, it is inevitable that behavioural issues will
need to be addressed in any benchmarking programme. Management should give priority to the need to communicate
the reasons for undertaking a programme of benchmarking in order to gain the full co-operation of its personnel whilst
reducing the potential level of resistance to change.
(iii) Management need to handle the ethical implications relating to the introduction of benchmarking in a sensitive manner
and should endeavour, insofar as possible, to provide reassurance to employees that their status, remuneration and
working conditions will not suffer as a consequence of the introduction of any benchmarking initiatives.

正确答案：

 

正确答案：
(c) Application of ethical principles to a fraud investigation
IFAC’s Code of Ethics for Professional Accountants applies to all ACCA members involved in professional assignments,
including forensic investigations. There are specific considerations in the application of each of the principles in providing
such a service.
Integrity
The forensic investigator is likely to deal frequently with individuals who lack integrity, are dishonest, and attempt to conceal
the true facts from the investigator. It is imperative that the investigator recognises this, and acts with impeccable integrity
throughout the whole investigation.
Objectivity
As in an audit engagement, the investigator’s objectivity must be beyond question. The report that is the outcome of the
forensic investigation must be perceived as independent, as it forms part of the legal evidence presented at court. The
investigator must adhere to the concept that the overriding objective of court proceedings is to deal with cases fairly and justly.
Any real or perceived threats to objectivity could undermine the credibility of the evidence provided by the investigator.
This issue poses a particular problem where an audit client requests its auditors to conduct a forensic investigation. In this
situation, the audit firm would be exposed to threats to objectivity in terms of advocacy, management involvement and selfreview.
The advocacy threat arises because the audit firm may feel pressured into promoting the interests and point of view
of their client, which would breach the overriding issue of objectivity in court proceedings. Secondly, the investigators could
be perceived to be involved in management decisions regarding the implications of the fraud, especially where the investigator
acts as an expert witness. It is however the self-review threat that would be the most significant threat to objectivity. The selfreview
threat arises because the investigation is likely to involve the estimation of an amount (i.e. the loss), which could be
material to the financial statements.
For the reasons outlined above, The Code states that the firm should evaluate threats and put appropriate safeguards in place,
and if safeguards cannot reduce the threats to an acceptable level, then the firm cannot provide both the audit service and
the forensic investigation.
Professional competence and due care
Forensic investigations will involve very specialist skills, which accountants are unlikely to possess without extensive training.
Such skills would include:
– Detailed knowledge of the relevant legal framework surrounding fraud,
– An understanding of how to gather specialist evidence,
– Skills in the safe custody of evidence, including maintaining a clear ‘chain’ of evidence, and
– Strong personal skills in, for example, interview techniques, presentation of material at court, and tactful dealing with
difficult and stressful situations.
It is therefore essential that forensic work is only ever undertaken by highly skilled individuals, under the direction and
supervision of an experienced fraud investigator. Any doubt over the competence of the investigation team could severely
undermine the credibility of the evidence presented at court.
Confidentiality
Normally accountants should not disclose information without the explicit consent of their client. However, during legal
proceedings arising from a fraud investigation, the court will require the investigator to reveal information discovered during
the investigation. There is an overriding requirement for the investigator to disclose all of the information deemed necessary
by the court.
Outside of the court, the investigator must ensure faultless confidentiality, especially because much of the information they
have access to will be highly sensitive.
Professional behaviour
Fraud investigations can become a matter of public interest, and much media attention is often focused on the work of the
forensic investigator. A highly professional attitude must be displayed at all times, in order to avoid damage to the reputation
of the firm, and of the profession. Any lapse in professional behaviour could also undermine the integrity of the forensic
evidence, and of the credibility of the investigator, especially when acting in the capacity of expert witness.
During legal proceedings, the forensic investigator may be involved in discussions with both sides in the court case, and here
it is essential that a courteous and considerate attitude is presented to all parties.