2019ACCA这些免考福利政策你都清楚了吗？

正确答案：
(c) Target costing should be viewed as an integral part of a strategic profit management system. The initial consideration in target
costing is the determination of an estimate of the selling price for a new product which will enable a firm to capture its required
share of the market. In this particular example, Superstores plc, which on the face of it looks a powerful commercial
organisation, wishes to apply a 35% mark-up on the purchase price of each cake from GWCC. Since Superstores plc has
already decided on a launch price of ￡20·25 then it follows that the maximum selling price that can be charged by GWCC
is (100/135) x ￡20·25 which is ￡15·00.
This is clearly a situation which lends itself to the application of target costing/pricing techniques as in essence GWCC can
see the extent to which they fall short of the required level of return with regard to a contract with Superstores plc which ends
after twelve months. Thus it is necessary to reduce the total costs by ￡556,029 to this figure in order to achieve the desired
level of profit, having regard to the rate of return required on new capital investment. The deduction of required profit from
the proposed selling price will produce a target price that must be met in order to ensure that the desired rate of return is
obtained. Thus the main theme that underpins target costing can be seen to be ‘what should a product cost in order to achieve
the desired level of return’.
Target costing will necessitate comparison of current estimated cost levels against the target level which must be achieved if
the desired levels of profitability, and hence return on investment, are to be achieved. Thus where a gap exists between the
current estimated cost levels and the target cost, it is essential that this gap be closed.
The Directors of GWCC plc should be aware of the fact that it is far easier to ‘design out’ cost during the pre-production phase
than to ‘control out’ cost during the production phase. Thus cost reduction at this stage of a product’s life cycle is of critical
significance to business success.
A number of techniques may be employed in order to help in the achievement and maintenance of the desired level of target
cost. Attention should be focussed upon the identification of value added and non-value added activities with the aim of the
elimination of the latter. The product should be developed in an atmosphere of ‘continuous improvement’. In this regard, total
quality techniques such as the use of Quality circles may be used in attempting to find ways of achieving reductions in product
cost.
Value engineering techniques can be used to evaluate necessary product features such as the quality of materials used. It is
essential that a collaborative approach is taken by the management of GWCC and that all interested parties such as suppliers
and customers are closely involved in order to engineer product enhancements at reduced cost.
The degree of success that will be achieved by GWCC via the application of target costing principles will be very much
dependent on the extent of ‘flexibility’ in variable costs. Also the accuracy of information gathered by GWCC will assume
critical importance because the use of inaccurate information will produce calculated ‘cost gaps’ which are meaningless and
render the application of target costing principles of little value.

正确答案：
5 ETHICS COLUMN
(a) ‘Assurance team’
■ All members of the engagement team (for the assurance engagement);
■ All others within a firm who can directly influence the outcome of the assurance engagement, for example:
– those who recommend the compensation of, or who provide direct supervisory, management or other oversight of
the assurance engagement partner in connection with the performance of the assurance engagement;
– those who provide consultation regarding technical or industry specific issues, transactions or events for the
assurance engagement; and
– those who provide quality control for the assurance.

正确答案：
(b) Tiltman Co
Tiltman’s total assets at 31 March 2006 represent 29% (16·1/55·2 × 100) of Johnston’s total assets. The subsidiary is
therefore material to Johnston’s consolidated financial statements.
Tutorial note: Tiltman’s profit for the year is not relevant as the acquisition took place just before the year end and will
therefore have no impact on the consolidated income statement. Calculations of the effect on consolidated profit before
taxation are therefore inappropriate and will not be awarded marks.
(i) Inventory overvaluation
This should have been written off to the income statement in the year to 31 March 2005 and not spread over three
years (contrary to IAS 2 ‘Inventories’).
At 31 March 2006 inventory is overvalued by $0·9m. This represents all Tiltmans’s profit for the year and 5·6% of
total assets and is material. At 31 March 2005 inventory was materially overvalued by $1·8m ($1·7m reported profit
should have been a $0·1m loss).
Tutorial note: 1/3 of the overvaluation was written off in the prior period (i.e. year to 31 March 2005) instead of $2·7m.
That the prior period’s auditor’s report was unmodified means that the previous auditor concurred with an incorrect
accounting treatment (or otherwise gave an inappropriate audit opinion).
As the matter is material a prior period adjustment is required (IAS 8 ‘Accounting Policies, Changes in Accounting
Estimates and Errors’). $1·8m should be written off against opening reserves (i.e. restated as at 1 April 2005).
(ii) Restructuring provision
$2·3m expense has been charged to Tiltman’s profit and loss in arriving at a draft profit of $0·7m. This is very material.
(The provision represents 14·3% of Tiltman’s total assets and is material to the balance sheet date also.)
The provision for redundancies and onerous contracts should not have been made for the year ended 31 March 2006
unless there was a constructive obligation at the balance sheet date (IAS 37 ‘Provisions, Contingent Liabilities and
Contingent Assets’). So, unless the main features of the restructuring plan had been announced to those affected (i.e.
redundancy notifications issued to employees), the provision should be reversed. However, it should then be disclosed
as a non-adjusting post balance sheet event (IAS 10 ‘Events After the Balance Sheet Date’).
Given the short time (less than one month) between acquisition and the balance sheet it is very possible that a
constructive obligation does not arise at the balance sheet date. The relocation in May was only part of a restructuring
(and could be the first evidence that Johnston’s management has started to implement a restructuring plan).
There is a risk that goodwill on consolidation of Tiltman may be overstated in Johnston’s consolidated financial
statements. To avoid the $2·3 expense having a significant effect on post-acquisition profit (which may be negligible
due to the short time between acquisition and year end), Johnston may have recognised it as a liability in the
determination of goodwill on acquisition.
However, the execution of Tiltman’s restructuring plan, though made for the year ended 31 March 2006, was conditional
upon its acquisition by Johnston. It does not therefore represent, immediately before the business combination, a
present obligation of Johnston. Nor is it a contingent liability of Johnston immediately before the combination. Therefore
Johnston cannot recognise a liability for Tiltman’s restructuring plans as part of allocating the cost of the combination
(IFRS 3 ‘Business Combinations’).
Tiltman’s auditor’s report
The following adjustments are required to the financial statements:
■ restructuring provision, $2·3m, eliminated;
■ adequate disclosure of relocation as a non-adjusting post balance sheet event;
■ current period inventory written down by $0·9m;
■ prior period inventory (and reserves) written down by $1·8m.
Profit for the year to 31 March 2006 should be $3·9m ($0·7 + $0·9 + $2·3).
If all these adjustments are made the auditor’s report should be unmodified. Otherwise, the auditor’s report should be
qualified ‘except for’ on grounds of disagreement. If none of the adjustments are made, the qualification should still be
‘except for’ as the matters are not pervasive.
Johnston’s auditor’s report
If Tiltman’s auditor’s report is unmodified (because the required adjustments are made) the auditor’s report of Johnston
should be similarly unmodified. As Tiltman is wholly-owned by Johnston there should be no problem getting the
adjustments made.
If no adjustments were made in Tiltman’s financial statements, adjustments could be made on consolidation, if
necessary, to avoid modification of the auditor’s report on Johnston’s financial statements.
The effect of these adjustments on Tiltman’s net assets is an increase of $1·4m. Goodwill arising on consolidation (if
any) would be reduced by $1·4m. The reduction in consolidated total assets required ($0·9m + $1·4m) is therefore
the same as the reduction in consolidated total liabilities (i.e. $2·3m). $2·3m is material (4·2% consolidated total
assets). If Tiltman’s financial statements are not adjusted and no adjustments are made on consolidation, the
consolidated financial position (balance sheet) should be qualified ‘except for’. The results of operations (i.e. profit for
the period) should be unqualified (if permitted in the jurisdiction in which Johnston reports).
Adjustment in respect of the inventory valuation may not be required as Johnston should have consolidated inventory
at fair value on acquisition. In this case, consolidated total liabilities should be reduced by $2·3m and goodwill arising
on consolidation (if any) reduced by $2·3m.
Tutorial note: The effect of any possible goodwill impairment has been ignored as the subsidiary has only just been
acquired and the balance sheet date is very close to the date of acquisition.