注意了！这里有长沙ACCA机考中心汇总

正确答案：
(ii) 10-year guarantee
$18·2 million stainless steel cookware sales amount to 43·1% of revenue and are therefore material. However, the
guarantee was only introduced three months into the year, say in respect of $13·6 million (3/4 × 18·2 million) i.e.
approximately 32% of revenue.
The draft note disclosure could indicate that Petrie’s management believes that Petrie has a legal obligation in respect
of the guarantee, that is not remote and likely to be material (otherwise no disclosure would have been required).
A best estimate of the obligation amounting to 5% profit before tax (or more) is likely to be considered material, i.e.
$90,000 (or more). Therefore, if it is probable that 0·66% of sales made under guarantee will be returned for refund,
this would require a warranty provision that would be material.
Tutorial note: The return of 2/3% of sales over a 10-year period may well be probable.
Clearly there is a present obligation as a result of a past obligating event for sales made during the nine months to
31 March 2007. Although the likelihood of outflow under the guarantee is likely to be insignificant (even remote) it is
probable that some outflow will be needed to settle the class of such obligations.
The note in the financial statements is disclosing this matter as a contingent liability. This term encompasses liabilities
that do not meet the recognition criteria (e.g. of reliable measurement in accordance with IAS 37 Provisions, Contingent
Liabilities and Contingent Assets).
However, it is extremely rare that no reliable estimate can be made (IAS 37) – the use of estimates being essential to
the preparation of financial statements. Petrie’s management must make a best estimate of the cost of refunds/repairs
under guarantee taking into account, for example:
■ the proportion of sales during the nine months to 31 March 2007 that have been returned under guarantee at the
balance sheet date (and in the post balance sheet event period);
■ the average age of cookware showing a defect;
■ the expected cost of a replacement item (as a refund of replacement is more likely than a repair, say).
If management do not make a provision for the best estimate of the obligation the audit opinion should be qualified
‘except for’ non-compliance with IAS 37 (no provision made). The disclosure made in the note to the financial
statements, however detailed, is not a substitute for making the provision.
Tutorial note: No marks will be awarded for suggesting that an emphasis of matter of paragraph would be appropriate
(drawing attention to the matter more fully explained in the note).
Management’s claim that the obligation cannot be measured with sufficient reliability does not give rise to a limitation
on scope on the audit. The auditor has sufficient evidence of the non-compliance with IAS 37 and disagrees with it.

正确答案：
(b) There are several issues that must be addressed as a matter of urgency:
Extra work must be planned to discover the extent of the breakdown in internal controls that occurred during the year. It is
important to decide whether the errors were isolated, or continued through the accounting period and whether similar errors
have occurred in other areas e.g. cash receipts from existing customers or cash payments. A review of the working papers of
the internal audit team should be carried out as soon as possible. The materiality of the errors should be documented.
Errors discovered in the accounting systems will have serious implications for the planned audit approach of new customer
deposits. Nate & Co must plan to expand audit testing on this area as control risk is high. Cash deposits will represent a
significant class of transaction in CF Co. A more detailed substantive approach than used in prior year audits may be needed
in this material area if limited reliance can be placed on internal controls.
A combination of the time spent investigating the reasons for the errors, their materiality, and a detailed substantive audit on
this area means that the audit is likely to take longer than previously anticipated. This may have cost and recoverability
implications. Extra staff may need to be assigned to the audit team, and the deadline for completion of audit procedures may
need to be extended. This will need to be discussed with CF Co.
Due to the increased audit risk, Nate & Co should consider increasing review procedures throughout the audit. In addition CF
Co is likely to be a highly regulated company as it operates in financial services, increasing possible attention focused on the
audit opinion. These two factors indicate that a second partner review would be recommended.
A separate issue is that of Jin Sayed offering advice to the internal audit team. The first problem raised is that of quality control.
A new and junior member of the audit team should be subject to close direction and supervision which does not appear to
have been the case during this assignment.
Secondly, Jin Sayed should not have offered advice to the internal audit team. On being made aware of the errors, he should
have alerted a senior member of the audit team, who then would have decided the action to be taken. This implies that he
does not understand the limited extent of his responsibilities as a junior member of the audit team. Nate & Co may wish to
review the training provided to new members of staff, as it should be made clear when matters should be reported to a senior,
and when matters can be dealt with by the individual.
Thirdly, Jin Sayed must be questioned to discover what exactly he advised the internal audit team to do. Despite his academic
qualification, he has little practical experience in the financial information systems of CF Co. He may have given inappropriate
advice, and it will be crucial to confirm that no action has been taken by the internal audit team.
The audit partner should consider if Nate & Co are at risk because of the advice that has been provided by Jin Sayed. As he
is a member of the audit team, his advice would be considered by the client as advice offered by Nate & Co, and the partner
should ascertain by discussion with the client whether this advice has been acted upon.
Finally Nate & Co should consider whether as a firm they could provide the review of the financial information technology
system, as requested by CF Co. IFAC’s Code of Ethics, and ACCA’s Code of Ethics and Conduct places restrictions on the
provision of non-audit services. Nate & Co must be clear in what exactly the ‘review’ will involve.
Providing a summary of weaknesses in the system, with appropriate recommendations is considered part of normal audit
procedures. However, given the errors that have arisen in the year, CF Co may require Nate & Co to design and implement
changes to the system. This would constitute a self-review threat and should only be considered if significant safeguards are
put in place, for example, using a separate team to provide the non-audit service and/or having a second partner review of
the work.

正确答案：A

正确答案：
(d) Environmental management accounting (EMA) involves the generation and analysis of both financial and non-financial
information in order to support internal environmental management processes. It is complementary to the conventional
management accounting approach, with the aim to develop appropriate mechanisms that assist the management of
organisations in the identification and allocation of environmentally related costs.
Organisations that alter their management accounting practices to incorporate environmental concerns will have greater
awareness of the impact of environment-related activities on their profit and loss accounts and balance sheets. This is because
conventional management accounting systems tend to attribute many environmental costs to general overhead accounts with
the result that they are ‘hidden’ from management. It follows that organisations which adopt EMA are more likely to identify
and take advantage of cost reduction and other improvement opportunities. A concern with environmental costs will also
reduce the chances of employing incorrect pricing of products and services and taking the wrong options in terms of mix and
development decisions. This in turn may lead to enhanced customer value whilst reducing the risk profile attaching to
investments and other decisions which have long term consequences.
Reputational risk will also be reduced as a consequence of adopting (EMA) since management will be seen to be acting in
an environmentally responsible manner. Organisations can learn from the Shell Oil Company whose experience in the much
publicised Brent Spar incident cost the firm millions in terms of lost revenues as a result of a consumer boycott.