全国考生想知道的ACCA国际会计师考试的几种题型

正确答案：
(ii) Quality of service is the totality of features and characteristics of the service package that bear upon its ability to satisfy
client needs. To some extent the number of complaints and the need to provide non-chargeable consultations associated
with the remedying of those complaints is indicative of a service quality problem that must be addressed. Hence this
problem needs to be investigated at the earliest opportunity. Assuming consultants could have otherwise undertaken
chargeable work, the revenue foregone as a consequence of the remedial consultations relating to commercial work
amounted to (180 x ￡1500) = ￡27,000. Client complaints received by HLP during the year amounted to 1·24% of
consultations undertaken by commercial advisors whereas none were budgeted. In contrast, competitor MAS received
135 complaints which coincided with the number of non-chargeable consultations undertaken by them. This may
indicate that MAS operate a policy of a remedial consultation in respect of all complaints received from clients.
With regard to the number of on-time consultations, HLP only achieved an on-time consultation percentage of 94·4%
which is far inferior to that of 99% achieved by competitor MAS. Also, HLP re-scheduled the appointment times of
1,620 (3%) of its total consultations whereas competitor MAS only re-scheduled 0·5% of its consultation times. The
percentage number of successful consultations provided by HLP and MAS was 85% and 95% respectively which
indicates that competitor MAS possesses a superior skills-base to that of HLP.
The most alarming statistic lies in the fact that HLP was subject to three successful legal actions for negligence. This
may not only account for the 150% increase in the cost of professional indemnity insurance premiums but may also
result in a loss of client confidence and precipitate a considerable fall in future levels of business should the claims
become much publicised.

正确答案：A

Where there is a significant change in ownership of the company, ISA 210 Agreeing the Terms of Audit Engagements recommends that a new audit engagement letter is sent to avoid misunderstandings.

正确答案：
(b) (i) Cost of investment on acquisition of Dylan Co
Matters to consider
According to the schedule provided by the client, the cost of investment comprises three elements. One matter to
consider is whether the cost of investment is complete.
It appears that no legal or professional fees have been included in the cost of investment (unless included within the
heading ‘cash consideration’). Directly attributable costs should be included per IFRS 3 Business Combinations, and
there is a risk that these costs may be expensed in error, leading to understatement of the investment.
The cash consideration of $2·5 million is the least problematical component. The only matter to consider is whether the
cash has actually been paid. Given that Dylan Co was acquired in the last month of the financial year it is possible that
the amount had not been paid before the year end, in which case the amount should be recognised as a current liability
on the statement of financial position (balance sheet). However, this seems unlikely given that normally control of an
acquired company only passes to the acquirer on cash payment.
IFRS 3 states that the cost of investment should be recognised at fair value, which means that deferred consideration
should be discounted to present value at the date of acquisition. If the consideration payable on 31 January 2009 has
not been discounted, the cost of investment, and the corresponding liability, will be overstated. It is possible that the
impact of discounting the $1·5 million payable one year after acquisition would be immaterial to the financial
statements, in which case it would be acceptable to leave the consideration at face value within the cost of investment.
Contingent consideration should be accrued if it is probable to be paid. Here the amount is payable if revenue growth
targets are achieved over the next four years. The auditor must therefore assess the probability of the targets being
achieved, using forecasts and projections of Maxwell Co’s revenue. Such information is inherently subjective, and could
have been manipulated, if prepared by the vendor of Maxwell Co, in order to secure the deal and maximise
consideration. Here it will be crucial to be sceptical when reviewing the forecasts, and the assumptions underlying the
data. The management of Rosie Co should have reached their own opinion on the probability of paying the contingent
consideration, but they may have relied heavily on information provided at the time of the acquisition.
Audit evidence
– Agreement of the monetary value and payment dates of the consideration per the client schedule to legal
documentation signed by vendor and acquirer.
– Agreement of $2·5 million paid to Rosie Co’s bank statement and cash book prior to year end. If payment occurs
after year end confirm that a current liability is recognised on the individual company and consolidated statement
of financial position (balance sheet).
– Board minutes approving the payment.
– Recomputation of discounting calculations applied to deferred and contingent consideration.
– Agreement that the discount rate used is pre-tax, and reflects current market assessment of the time value of money
(e.g. by comparison to Rosie Co’s weighted average cost of capital).
– Revenue and profit projections for the period until January 2012, checked for arithmetic accuracy.
– A review of assumptions used in the projections, and agreement that the assumptions are comparable with the
auditor’s understanding of Dylan Co’s business.
Tutorial note: As the scenario states that Chien & Co has audited Dylan Co for several years, it is reasonable to rely on
their cumulative knowledge and understanding of the business in auditing the revenue projections.