学海无涯，各位奔走在ACCA的各种考试的小伙伴们累了吗？

正确答案：
(a)Thekeystagesinthecapitalinvestmentdecision-makingprocessareidentifyinginvestmentopportunities,screeninginvestmentproposals,analysingandevaluatinginvestmentproposals,approvinginvestmentproposals,andimplementing,monitoringandreviewinginvestments.IdentifyinginvestmentopportunitiesInvestmentopportunitiesorproposalscouldarisefromanalysisofstrategicchoices,analysisofthebusinessenvironment,researchanddevelopment,orlegalrequirements.Thekeyrequirementisthatinvestmentproposalsshouldsupporttheachievementoforganisationalobjectives.ScreeninginvestmentproposalsIntherealworld,capitalmarketsareimperfect,soitisusualforcompaniestoberestrictedintheamountoffinanceavailableforcapitalinvestment.Companiesthereforeneedtochoosebetweencompetinginvestmentproposalsandselectthosewiththebeststrategicfitandthemostappropriateuseofeconomicresources.AnalysingandevaluatinginvestmentproposalsCandidateinvestmentproposalsneedtobeanalysedindepthandevaluatedtodeterminewhichofferthemostattractiveopportunitiestoachieveorganisationalobjectives,forexampletoincreaseshareholderwealth.Thisisthestagewhereinvestmentappraisalplaysakeyrole,indicatingforexamplewhichinvestmentproposalshavethehighestnetpresentvalue.ApprovinginvestmentproposalsThemostsuitableinvestmentproposalsarepassedtotherelevantlevelofauthorityforconsiderationandapproval.Verylargeproposalsmayrequireapprovalbytheboardofdirectors,whilesmallerproposalsmaybeapprovedatdivisionallevel,andsoon.Onceapprovalhasbeengiven,implementationcanbegin.Implementing,monitoringandreviewinginvestmentsThetimerequiredtoimplementtheinvestmentproposalorprojectwilldependonitssizeandcomplexity,andislikelytobeseveralmonths.Followingimplementation,theinvestmentprojectmustbemonitoredtoensurethattheexpectedresultsarebeingachievedandtheperformanceisasexpected.Thewholeoftheinvestmentdecision-makingprocessshouldalsobereviewedinordertofacilitateorganisationallearningandtoimprovefutureinvestmentdecisions.

正确答案：
(a) To: Board of directors
From: Management Accountant
Date: 8 June 2007
The potential benefits of the adoption of a balanced scorecard approach to performance measurement within GER are as
follows:
A broader business perspective
Financial measures invariably have an inward-looking perspective. The balanced scorecard is wider in its scope and
application. It has an external focus and looks at comparisons with competitors in order to establish what constitutes best
practice and ensures that required changes are made in order to achieve it. The use of the balanced scorecard requires a
balance of both financial and non-financial measures and goals.
A greater strategic focus
The use of the balanced scorecard focuses to a much greater extent on the longer term. There is a far greater emphasis on
strategic considerations. It attempts to identify the needs and wants of customers and the new products and markets. Hence
it requires a balance between short term and long term performance measures.
A greater focus on qualitative aspects
The use of the balanced scorecard attempts to overcome the over-emphasis of traditional measures on the quantifiable aspects
of the internal operations of an organisation expressed in purely financial terms. Its use requires a balance between
quantitative and qualitative performance measures. For example, customer satisfaction is a qualitative performance measure
which is given prominence under the balanced scorecard approach.
A greater focus on longer term performance
The use of traditional financial measures is often dominated by financial accounting requirements, for example, the need to
show fixed assets at their historic cost. Also, they are primarily focused on short-term profitability and return on capital
employed in order to gain stakeholder approval of short term financial reports, the longer term or whole life cycle often being
ignored.
The limitations of a balanced scorecard approach to performance measurement may be viewed as follows:
The balanced scorecard attempts to identify the chain of cause and effect relationships which will provide the stimulus for
the future success of an organisation.
Advocates of a balanced scorecard approach to performance measurement suggest that it can constitute a vital component
of the strategic management process.
However, Robert Kaplan and David Norton, the authors of the balanced scorecard concept concede that it may not be suitable
for all firms. Norton suggests that it is most suitable for firms which have a long lead time between management action and
financial benefit and that it will be less suitable for firms with a short-term focus. However, other flaws can be detected in
the balanced scorecard.
The balanced scorecard promises to outline the theory of the firm by clearly linking the driver/outcome measures in a cause
and effect chain, but this will be difficult if not impossible to achieve.
The precise cause and effect relationships between measures for each of the perspectives on the balanced scorecard will be
complex because the driver and outcome measures for the various perspectives are interlinked. For example, customer
satisfaction may be seen to be a function of several drivers, such as employee satisfaction, manufacturing cycle time and
quality. However, employee satisfaction may in turn be partially driven by customer satisfaction and employee satisfaction
may partially drive manufacturing cycle time. A consequence of this non-linearity of the cause and effect chain (i.e., there is
non-linear relationship between an individual driver and a single outcome measure), is that there must be a question mark
as to the accuracy of any calculated correlations between driver and outcome measures. Allied to this point, any calculated
correlations will be historic. This implies that it will only be possible to determine the accuracy of cause and effect linkages
after the event, which could make the use of the balanced scorecard in dynamic industries questionable. If the market is
undergoing rapid evolution, for example, how meaningful are current measures of customer satisfaction or market share?
These criticisms do not necessarily undermine the usefulness of the balanced scorecard in presenting a more comprehensive
picture of organisational performance but they do raise doubts concerning claims that a balanced scorecard can be
constructed which will outline a clear cause and effect chain between driver and outcome measures and the firm’s financial
objectives.

正确答案：
(b) Both companies are listed. The only difference will be in the availability of inheritance tax relief – specifically business property
relief (BPR). If Stuart and Rebecca jointly hold in excess of 50% of the share capital of a listed company, BPR will apply at
the rate of 50%. Otherwise, no BPR is available.
Stuart can only buy 1,005,000 (￡422,100/￡0·42) shares in Omikron plc. This represents a shareholding of 2·00%
(1,005,000/50,250,000). As the shares in Omikron plc are listed, a 2% holding will not qualify for BPR.
At the moment, both Stuart and Rebecca own 2,400,000 shares in Omega plc. Their shareholdings are amalgamated for
IHT purposes under the related property rules. With a joint holding of 48%, BPR is not available. A further 200,001 shares
will be required to attain a 50% holding. Assuming Stuart and Rebecca can buy these shares, they must then hold their 50%
interest in the company for the period of at least two years in order to ensure that BPR applies.
On the basis that Stuart is expected to survive for two to three years, he should therefore buy further shares in Omega plc in
order to take advantage of the BPR available.