山东省考生：ACCA考试的科目和报考规定是什么呀？

正确答案：
(b) Internal control statement
The United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) guidelines are to disclose in the annual report as follows:
A statement of management’s responsibility for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting
for the company. This will always include the nature and extent of involvement by the chairman and chief executive, but may
also specify the other members of the board involved in the internal controls over financial reporting. The purpose is for
shareholders to be clear about who is accountable for the controls.
A statement identifying the framework used by management to evaluate the effectiveness of this internal control. This will
usually involve a description of the key metrics, measurement methods (e.g. rates of compliance, fair value measures, etc)
and tolerances allowed within these. Within a rules-based environment, these are likely to be underpinned by law.
Management’s assessment of the effectiveness of this internal control as at the end of the company’s most recent fiscal year.
This may involve reporting on rates of compliance, failures, costs, resources committed and outputs (if measurable) achieved.
A statement that its auditor has issued an attestation report on management’s assessment. Any qualification to the attestation
should be reported in this statement.
Tutorial note: guidance from other corporate governance codes is also acceptable.

正确答案：
6 DEVELOPMENTS
General comments
Tutorial note: The following comments, that could be made in respect of any of the three areas of development, will be given
credit only once.
■ Audit scope – the scope of a statutory audit should be as necessary to form. an audit opinion (i.e. unlimited).
■ Audit work undertaken – the nature, timing and extent of audit procedures should be as necessary to implement the overall
audit plan.
(a) Fair value accounting
■ Different definitions of fair value exist (among financial reporting frameworks or for different assets and liabilities within
a particular framework). For example, under IFRS it is ‘the amount for which an asset could be exchanged (or a liability
settled) between knowledgeable, willing parties in an arm’s length transaction’.
■ The term ‘fair value accounting’ is used to describe the measurement and disclosure of assets and/or liabilities at fair
value and the charging to profit and loss (or directly to equity) of any changes in fair value measurements.
■ Fair value accounting concerns measurements and disclosures but not initial recognition of assets and liabilities in
financial statements. It does not then, for example, affect the nature, timing and extent of audit procedures to confirm
the existence and completeness of rights and obligations.
■ Fair value may be determined with varying degrees of subjectivity. For example, there will be little (if any) subjectivity
for assets bought and sold in active and open markets that readily provide reliable information on the prices at which
exchange transactions occur. However, the valuation of assets with unique characteristics (or entity-specific assets) often
requires the projection and discounting of future cash flows.
■ The audit of estimates of fair values based on valuation models/techniques can be approached like other accounting
estimates (in accordance with ISA 540 ‘Audit of Accounting Estimates’). However, although the auditor should be able
to review and test the process used by management to develop the estimate, there may be:
? a much greater need for an independent estimate (and hence greater reliance on the work of experts in accordance
with ISA 620);
? no suitable subsequent events to confirm the estimate made (e.g. for assets that are held for use and not for
trading).
Tutorial note: Consider, for example, how the audit of ‘in-process research and development’ might compare with that
for an allowance for slow-moving inventory.
■ Different financial reporting frameworks require or permit a variety of fair value measures and disclosures in financial
statements. They also vary in the level of guidance provided (to preparers of the financial statements – and hence their
auditors). Under IFRS, certain fair values are based on management intent and ‘reasonable supportable assumptions’.
■ The audit of management intent potentially increases the auditor’s reliance on management representations. The auditor
must obtain such representations from the highest level of management and exercise an appropriate degree of
professional scepticism, being particularly alert to the implications of any conflicting evidence.
■ A significant development in international financial reporting is that it is no longer sufficient to report transactions and
past and future events that may only be possible. IAS 1 ‘Presentation of Financial Statements’ (Revised) requires that
key assumptions (and other key sources of estimation uncertainty) be disclosed. This requirement gives rise to yet
another area on which auditors may qualify their audit opinion, on grounds of disagreement, where such disclosure is
incorrect or inadequate.
■ Perhaps one of the most significant impacts of fair value accounting on audit work is that it necessarily increases it.
Consider for example, that even where the fair value of an asset is as easily vouched as original cost, fair value is
determined at least annually whereas historic cost is unchanged (and not re-vouched to original purchase
documentation).

正确答案：
(ii) Actuarial services to an audit client
IFAC’s ‘Code of Ethics for Professional Accountants’ does not deal specifically with actuarial valuation services but with
valuation services in general.
A valuation comprises:
■ making assumptions about the future;
■ applying certain methodologies and techniques;
■ computing a value (or range of values) for an asset, a liability or for a business as a whole.
A self-review threat may be created when a firm or network firm2 performs a valuation for a financial statement audit
client that is to be incorporated into the client’s financial statements.
As an actuarial valuation service is likely to involve the valuation of matters material to the financial statements (e.g. the
present value of obligations) and the valuation involves a significant degree of subjectivity (e.g. length of service), the
self-review threat created cannot be reduced to an acceptable level of the application of any safeguard. Accordingly:
■ such valuation services should not be provided; or
■ the firm should withdraw from the financial statement audit engagement.
If the net liability was not material to the financial statements the self-review threat may be reduced to an acceptable
level by the application of safeguards such as:
■ involving an additional professional accountant who was not a member of the audit team to review the work done
by the actuary;
■ confirming with the audit client their understanding of the underlying assumptions of the valuation and the
methodology to be used and obtaining approval for their use;
■ obtaining the audit client‘s acknowledgement of responsibility for the results of the work performed by the firm; and
■ making arrangements so that the partner providing the actuarial services does not participate in the audit
engagement.

正确答案：
(b) Implications for auditor’s report
(i) Selective revaluation of premises
The revaluations are clearly material to the balance sheet as $1·7 million and $5·4 million represent 5·5% and 17·6%
of total assets, respectively (and 23·1% in total). As the effects of the revaluation on line items in the financial statements
are clearly identified (e.g. revalued amount, depreciation, surplus in statement of changes in equity) the matter is not
pervasive.
The valuations of the nine properties after the year end provide additional evidence of conditions existing at the year end
and are therefore adjusting events per IAS 10 Events After the Balance Sheet Date.
Tutorial note: It is ‘now’ still less than three months after the year end so these valuations can reasonably be expected
to reflect year end values.
However, IAS 16 Property, Plant and Equipment does not permit the selective revaluation of assets thus the whole class
of premises would need to have been revalued for the year to 31 March 2007 to change the measurement basis for this
reporting period.
The revaluation exercise is incomplete. Unless the remaining three properties are revalued before the auditor’s report on
the financial statements for the year ended 31 March 2007 is signed off:
(1) the $7·1 revaluation made so far must be reversed to show all premises at depreciated cost as in previous years;
OR
(2) the auditor’s report would be qualified ‘except for’ disagreement regarding non-compliance with IAS 16.
When it is appropriate to adopt the revaluation model (e.g. next year) the change in accounting policy (from a cost model
to a revaluation model) should be accounted for in accordance with IAS 16 (i.e. as a revaluation).
Tutorial note: IAS 8 Accounting Policies, Changes in Accounting Estimates and Errors does not apply to the initial
application of a policy to revalue assets in accordance with IAS 16.
Assuming the revaluation is written back, before giving an unmodified opinion, the auditor should consider why the three
properties were not revalued. In particular if there are any indicators of impairment (e.g. physical dilapidation) there
should be sufficient evidence on the working paper file to show that the carrying amount of these properties is not
materially greater than their recoverable amount (i.e. the higher of value in use and fair value less costs to sell).
If there is insufficient evidence to confirm that the three properties are not impaired (e.g. if the auditor was prevented
from inspecting the properties) the auditor’s report would be qualified ‘except for’ on grounds of limitation on scope.
If there is evidence of material impairment but management fail to write down the carrying amount to recoverable
amount the auditor’s report would be qualified ‘except for’ disagreement regarding non-compliance with IAS 36
Impairment of Assets.