速看！ACCA考试科目一定要按顺序来进行吗？

正确答案：
(c) As the trust is created in the settlors’ (Paul and Sharon’s) lifetime its creation will constitute a chargeable disposal for capital
gains tax. Also, as the settlors and trustees are connected persons, the disposal will be deemed to be at market value, resulting
in a chargeable gain of ￡80,000 (160,000 – 80,000). No taper relief will be available as the property is a non-business
asset, and has been held for less than three years, but annual exemptions of ￡17,000 (2 x ￡8,500) will be available.
However, in the case of a discretionary trust, gift hold over relief will be available. This is because the gift will constitute a
chargeable lifetime transfer and because there is an immediate charge to inheritance tax (even though no tax is payable due
to the nil rate band) relief is available if a specific accumulation and maintenance trust is used, as in this case the gift will
qualify as a potentially exempt transfer and so gift relief would only be available in respect of business assets. The use of a
basic discretionary trust will thus facilitate the deferral of an immediate capital gains tax charge of ￡25,200 (63,000 x 40%).
If/when the property is disposed of, however, the trustees will pay capital gains tax on the deferred gain at the trust income
tax rate of 40%, and have an annual exemption of only ￡4,250 (50% of the normal individual rate) available to them. The
40% rate of tax and lower annual exemption rate also apply to chargeable gains arising in a specific accumulation and
maintenance trust, as well as a basic discretionary trust.
A chargeable disposal between connected persons will also arise for the purposes of capital gains tax if/when the property
vests in a beneficiary, i.e. one or more of the beneficiaries becomes absolutely entitled to all or part of the income or capital
of the trust. Gift hold over relief will again be available on all assets in the case of a discretionary trust, but only on business
assets in the case of an accumulation and maintenance trust, except where a beneficiary becomes entitled to both income
and capital at the same time.
The trust will have taxable property income in the form. of net rents from its creation and in future years is also likely to have
other investment income, probably in the form. of interest, to the extent that monies are retained in the trust. Whichever form
of trust is used, the trustees will pay tax at the standard trust rate of 40% on income other than dividend income (32·5%),
except to the extent of (1) the first ￡500 of taxable income, which is taxed at the rate that would otherwise apply to such
income (i.e. 22% for non-savings (rental) income, 20% for savings income (interest) and 10% for dividends) but, only to the
extent that it is not distributed; and (2) the legitimate trust management expenses, which are offsettable for the purposes of
the higher trust tax rates against the income with the lowest rate(s) of normal tax and so bear tax only at that rate. The higher
trust tax rate always applies to income that is distributed, other than to the extent that it has been treated as the settlor’s
income, and taxed at that settlor’s marginal tax rate.
As Paul and Sharon intend to create a trust for their unmarried minor (under 18) children, then even if the trust specifically
excludes them from any benefit under the trust, the trust income will be treated as theirs for income tax purposes to the extent
that it constitutes income paid for on behalf (including maintenance payments) of Gisella and Gavin; except where (1) the
total income arising does not exceed ￡100 gross per annum, and (2) income is held for the benefit of a child under an
accumulation and maintenance settlement, to the extent that it is not paid out.

正确答案：
(b) A central feature of many performance measurement systems is the widespread use of league tables that display each
business unit’s performance relative to one another. In the case of service organisations such as TSC the use of league tables
emphasises the company’s critical success factors of profitability and quality of service by reporting results on a weekly basis
at the depot level. The fact that such league tables are used by management will actively encourage competition, in terms of
performance, among depots. The individual position of a business unit in the league table is keenly observed both by the
manager of that unit and his/her peers.
In theory, performance is transparent. In practice although each depot performs essentially the same function and is subject
to the same modes of measurement, circumstances pertaining to different business units may vary significantly. Some depots
may be situated near to the hub (main distribution centre), some may be located far away and some may be in urban zones
with well developed road networks whilst others may be in remote rural areas. Measuring performance via a league table
makes no allowance whatsoever for these relative differences, hence, inequality is built into the performance measurement
system.
Moreover, depot managers might be held responsible for areas over which they have no formal control. The network nature
of the business suggests that there will be a high degree of interdependence of depots; the depot responsible for collection
will very often not be the depot responsible for delivery. Therefore, it is frequently the case that business may be gained for
which the collecting depot receives the revenue, but for which the delivering depot bears the cost. Obviously this impacts
upon the profit statements of both depots. The formal system might not recognise such difficulties, the corporate view being
that ‘the business needs to be managed’; the depots should therefore see any such anomalies as mild constraints to work
around rather than barriers to break down. In such circumstances delivering depots and collecting depots should discuss such
problems on an informal basis. Such informal discussions are aided by close communications between depots recognising
the interdependencies of the business.

正确答案：
(c) A joint audit is when two or more audit firms are jointly responsible for giving the audit opinion. This is very common in a
group situation where the principal auditor is appointed jointly with the auditor of a subsidiary to provide a joint opinion on
the subsidiary’s financial statements. There are several advantages and disadvantages in a joint audit being performed.
Advantages
It can be beneficial in terms of audit efficiency for a joint audit to be conducted, especially in the case of a new subsidiary.
In this case, Lead & Co will have built up an understanding of Maxwell Co’s business, systems and controls, and financial
statement issues. It will be time efficient for the two firms of auditors to work together in order for Chien & Co to build up
knowledge of the new subsidiary. This is a key issue, as Chien & Co need to acquire a thorough understanding of the
subsidiary in order to assess any risks inherent in the company which could impact on the overall assessment of risk within
the group. Lead & Co will be able to provide a good insight into the company, and advise Chien & Co of the key risk areas
they have previously identified.
On the practical side, it seems that Maxwell Co is a significant addition to the group, as it is expected to increase operating
facilities by 40%. If Chien & Co were appointed as sole auditors to Maxwell Co it may be difficult for the audit firm to provide
adequate resources to conduct the audit at the same time as auditing the other group companies. A joint audit will allow
sufficient resources to be allocated to the audit of Maxwell Co, assuring the quality of the opinion provided.
If there is a tight deadline, as is common with the audit of subsidiaries, which should be completed before the group audit
commences, then having access to two firms’ resources should enable the audit to be completed in good time.
The audit should also benefit from an improvement in quality. The two audit firms may have different points of view, and
would be able to discuss contentious issues throughout the audit process. In particular, the newly appointed audit team will
have a ‘fresh pair of eyes’ and be able to offer new insight to matters identified. It should be easier to challenge management
and therefore ensure that the auditors’ position is taken seriously.
Tutorial note: Candidates may have referred to the recent debate over whether joint audits increase competition in the
profession. In particular, joint audits have been proposed as a way for ‘mid tier’ audit firms to break into the market of
auditing large companies and groups, which at the moment is monopolised by the ‘Big 4’. Although this does not answer
the specific question set, credit will be awarded for demonstration of awareness of this topical issue.
Disadvantages
For the client, it is likely to be more expensive to engage two audit firms than to have the audit opinion provided by one firm.
From a cost/benefit point of view there is clearly no point in paying twice for one opinion to be provided. Despite the audit
workload being shared, both firms will have a high cost for being involved in the audit in terms of senior manager and partner
time. These costs will be passed on to the client within the audit fee.
The two audit firms may use very different audit approaches and terminology. This could make it difficult for the audit firms
to work closely together, negating some of the efficiency and cost benefits discussed above. Problems could arise in deciding
which firm’s method to use, for example, to calculate materiality, design and pick samples for audit procedures, or evaluate
controls within the accounting system. It may be impossible to reconcile two different methods and one firm’s methods may
end up dominating the audit process, which then eliminates the benefit of a joint audit being conducted. It could be time
consuming to develop a ‘joint’ audit approach, based on elements of each of the two firms’ methodologies, time which
obviously would not have been spent if a single firm was providing the audit.
There may be problems for the two audit firms to work together harmoniously. Lead & Co may feel that ultimately they will
be replaced by Chien & Co as audit provider, and therefore could be unwilling to offer assistance and help.
Potentially, problems could arise in terms of liability. In the event of litigation, because both firms have provided the audit
opinion, it follows that the firms would be jointly liable. The firms could blame each other for any negligence which was
discovered, making the litigation process more complex than if a single audit firm had provided the opinion. However, it could
be argued that joint liability is not necessarily a drawback, as the firms should both be covered by professional indemnity
insurance.

正确答案：A