ACCA含金量如何?看完你就明白了！

正确答案：
(b) Directors’ retirement benefits
The directors’ retirement benefits are unfunded plans which may fall under IAS19 ‘Employee Benefits’.
Sirus should review its contractual or constructive obligation to make retirement benefit payments to its former directors at the
time when they leave the firm. The payments may create a financial liability under IAS32, or may give rise to a liability of
uncertain timing and amount which may fall within the scope of IAS37 ‘Provisions, contingent liabilities and contingent
assets’. Certain former directors are paid a fixed annuity for a fixed term which is payable annually, and on death, the present
value of future payments are paid to the director’s estate. An annuity meets the definition of a financial liability under IAS32,
if there is a contractual obligation to deliver cash or a financial asset. The latter form. of annuity falls within the scope of
IAS32/39. The present value of the annuity payments should be determined. The liability is recognised because the directors
have a contractual right to the annuity and the firm has no discretion in terms of withholding the payment. As the rights to
the annuities are earned over the period of the service of the directors, then the costs should have been recognised also over
the service period.
Where an annuity has a life contingent element and, therefore, embodies a mortality risk, it falls outside the scope of IAS39
because the annuity will meet the definition of an insurance contract which is scoped out of IAS39, along with employers’
rights and obligations under IAS19. Such annuities will, therefore, fall within the scope of IAS37 if a constructive obligation
exists. Sirus should assess the probability of the future cash outflow of the present obligation. Because there are a number of
similar obligations, IAS37 requires that the class of obligations as a whole should be considered (similar to a warranty
provision). A provision should be made for the best estimate of the costs of the annuity and this would include any liability
for post retirement payments to directors earned to date. The liability should be built up over the service period rather than
just when the director leaves. In practice the liability will be calculated on an actuarial basis consistent with the principles in
IAS19. The liability should be recalculated on an annual basis, as for any provision, to take account of changes in directors
and other factors. The liability will be discounted where the effect is material.

正确答案：
(b) The relative performance of GBC and TTC is difficult to assess due to the following:
(i) They would appear to have differing objectives. GBC provides free transport for senior citizens and charges lower fares
than TTC. GBC also uses environmentally friendly fuel. Each of these factors inhibits a direct comparison of the two
organisations.
(ii) The organisations are funded differently. It is evident that TTC uses loan finance to fund operations which gives rise to
interest charges which are not incurred by GBC. On the other hand GBC is funded by the government.
(iii) TTC has higher fixed asset values which precipitate much higher depreciation charges.
(iv) There is also a lack of non-financial performance indicators such as the number of on-time arrivals, number of accidents,
complaints re passenger dissatisfaction, staff turnover, adherence to relevant legislation, convenience of pick-up/drop-off
points etc.
The following items of additional information would assist in assessing the financial and operating performance of the two
companies:
(1) The number of staff employed by each organisation would assist in the assessment of the financial and operating
performance. Ratios such as revenue generated per employee and operating costs per employee might provide useful
comparators of financial and operating efficiency.
(2) Safety and accident records of each organisation would give an indication of the reliability and safety afforded to
passengers by each organisation. Passenger safety is of paramount importance to all passenger transport businesses.
(3) Records of late/cancelled buses together with the number of complaints received from the passengers would provide an
indication of the efficiency of the service provided by each organisation.
(4) The accessibility of the services, location of pick-up/drop-off points would provide an indication of the flexibility of service
delivery provided by each organisation.
(5) The comfort, cleanliness and age of the respective bus fleets would provide a further indication of the level of service
quality provided by each organisation.
(6) The fuel emission levels of the buses operated by each organisation would provide an indication of the extent of their
‘social responsibility’.
Notes: (i) Only three items of additional information were required.
(ii) Alternative relevant discussion and examples would be acceptable.

正确答案：
(b) Report to the management of Razor Ltd
To           The management of Razor Ltd
From       Tax advisers
Date         6 June 2007
Subject    The proposed activities of Cutlass Inc
(i) Rate of tax on profits of Cutlass Inc
When considering the manner in which the profits of Cutlass Inc will be taxed it must be recognised that the system of
corporation tax in Sharpenia is the same as that in the UK.
The profits of Cutlass Inc will be subject to corporation tax in the country in which it is resident or where it has a
permanent establishment. It is desirable for the profits of Cutlass Inc to be taxed in the UK rather than in Sharpenia as
the rate of corporation tax in the UK on annual profits of ￡120,000 will be 19% whereas in Sharpenia the rate of tax
would be 38%.
Residency of Cutlass Inc
Cutlass Inc will be resident in Sharpenia, because it is incorporated there. However, it will also be resident in the UK if
it is centrally managed and controlled from the UK. For this to be the case, Amy and Ben should hold the company’s
board meetings in the UK.
Under the double tax treaty between the UK and Sharpenia, a company resident in both countries is treated as being
resident in the country where it is effectively managed and controlled. For Cutlass Inc to be treated as UK resident under
the treaty, Amy and Ben would need to ensure that all key management and commercial decisions are made in the UK
and not in Sharpenia.
Permanent establishment
A permanent establishment is a fixed place of business, including an office, factory or workshop, through which the
business of an enterprise is carried on. A permanent establishment will also exist in a country if contracts in the
company’s name are habitually concluded there.
The trading profits of Cutlass Inc will be taxable in Sharpenia if they are derived from a permanent establishment in
Sharpenia even if it can be established that Cutlass Inc is UK resident under the double tax treaty.
Double taxation
If Cutlass Inc is UK resident but has a permanent establishment in Sharpenia, its trading profits will be subject to
corporation tax in both the UK and Sharpenia with double tax relief available in the UK. The double tax relief will be the
lower of the UK tax and the Sharpenian tax on the trading profits. Accordingly, as the rate of tax is higher in Sharpenia
than it is in the UK, there will be no UK tax to pay on the company’s trading profits and the rate of tax on the profits
would be the rate in Sharpenia, i.e. 38%.
If Cutlass Inc is UK resident and does not have a permanent establishment in Sharpenia, its profits will be taxable in
the UK at the rate of 19% and not in Sharpenia.

正确答案：
4 (i) Proposed dividend
The dividend was proposed after the balance sheet date and the company, therefore, did not have a liability at the balance
sheet date. No provision for the dividend should be recognised. The approval by the directors and the shareholders are
enough to create a valid expectation that the payment will be made and give rise to an obligation. However, this occurred
after the current year end and, therefore, will be charged against the profits for the year ending 31 October 2006.
The existence of a good record of dividend payments and an established dividend policy does not create a valid expectation
or an obligation. However, the proposed dividend will be disclosed in the notes to the financial statements as the directors
approved it prior to the authorisation of the financial statements.
(ii) Disposal of subsidiary
It would appear that the loss on the sale of the subsidiary provides evidence that the value of the consolidated net assets of
the subsidiary was impaired at the year end as there has been no significant event since 31 October 2005 which would have
caused the reduction in the value of the subsidiary. The disposal loss provides evidence of the impairment and, therefore,
the value of the net assets and goodwill should be reduced by the loss of $9 million plus the loss ($2 million) to the date of
the disposal, i.e. $11 million. The sale provides evidence of a condition that must have existed at the balance sheet date
(IAS10). This amount will be charged to the income statement and written off goodwill of $12 million, leaving a balance of
$1 million on that account. The subsidiary’s assets are impaired because the carrying values are not recoverable. The net
assets and goodwill of Krup would form. a separate income generating unit as the subsidiary is being disposed of before the
financial statements are authorised. The recoverable amount will be the sale proceeds at the date of sale and represents the
value-in-use to the group. The impairment loss is effectively taking account of the ultimate loss on sale at an earlier point in
time. IFRS5, ‘Non-current assets held for sale and discontinued operations’, will not apply as the company had no intention
of selling the subsidiary at the year end. IAS10 would require disclosure of the disposal of the subsidiary as a non-adjusting
event after the balance sheet date.
(iii) Issue of ordinary shares
IAS33 ‘Earnings per share’ states that if there is a bonus issue after the year end but before the date of the approval of the
financial statements, then the earnings per share figure should be based on the new number of shares issued. Additionally
a company should disclose details of all material ordinary share transactions or potential transactions entered into after the
balance sheet date other than the bonus issue or similar events (IAS10/IAS33). The principle is that if there has been a
change in the number of shares in issue without a change in the resources of the company, then the earnings per share
calculation should be based on the new number of shares even though the number of shares used in the earnings per share
calculation will be inconsistent with the number shown in the balance sheet. The conditions relating to the share issue
(contingent) have been met by the end of the period. Although the shares were issued after the balance sheet date, the issue
of the shares was no longer contingent at 31 October 2005, and therefore the relevant shares will be included in the
computation of both basic and diluted EPS. Thus, in this case both the bonus issue and the contingent consideration issue
should be taken into account in the earnings per share calculation and disclosure made to that effect. Any subsequent change
in the estimate of the contingent consideration will be adjusted in the period when the revision is made in accordance with
IAS8.
Additionally IFRS3 ‘Business Combinations’ requires the fair value of all types of consideration to be reflected in the cost of
the acquisition. The contingent consideration should be included in the cost of the business combination at the acquisition
date if the adjustment is probable and can be measured reliably. In the case of Metalic, the contingent consideration has
been paid in the post-balance sheet period and the value of such consideration can be determined ($11 per share). Thus
an accurate calculation of the goodwill arising on the acquisition of Metalic can be made in the period to 31 October 2005.
Prior to the issue of the shares on 12 November 2005, a value of $10 per share would have been used to value the
contingent consideration. The payment of the contingent consideration was probable because the average profits of Metalic
averaged over $7 million for several years. At 31 October 2005 the value of the contingent shares would be included in a
separate category of equity until they were issued on 12 November 2005 when they would be transferred to the share capital
and share premium account. Goodwill will increase by 300,000 x ($11 – $10) i.e. $300,000.
(iv) Property
IFRS5 (paragraph 7) states that for a non-current asset to be classified as held for sale, the asset must be available for
immediate sale in its present condition subject to the usual selling terms, and its sale must be highly probable. The delay in
this case in the selling of the property would indicate that at 31 October 2005 the property was not available for sale. The
property was not to be made available for sale until the repairs were completed and thus could not have been available for
sale at the year end. If the criteria are met after the year end (in this case on 30 November 2005), then the non-current
asset should not be classified as held for sale in the previous financial statements. However, disclosure of the event should
be made if it meets the criteria before the financial statements are authorised (IFRS5 paragraph 12). Thus in this case,
disclosure should be made.
The property on the application of IFRS5 should have been carried at the lower of its carrying amount and fair value less
costs to sell. However, the company has simply used fair value less costs to sell as the basis of valuation and shown the
property at $27 million in the financial statements.
The carrying amount of the property would have been $20 million less depreciation $1 million, i.e. $19 million. Because
the property is not held for sale under IFRS5, then its classification in the balance sheet will change and the property will be
valued at $19 million. Thus the gain of $7 million on the wrong application of IFRS5 will be deducted from reserves, and
the property included in property, plant and equipment. Total equity will therefore be reduced by $8 million.
(v) Share appreciation rights
IFRS2 ‘Share-based payment’ (paragraph 30) requires a company to re-measure the fair value of a liability to pay cash-settled
share based payment transactions at each reporting date and the settlement date, until the liability is settled. An example of
such a transaction is share appreciation rights. Thus the company should recognise a liability of ($8 x 10 million shares),
i.e. $80 million at 31 October 2005, the vesting date. The liability recognised at 31 October 2005 was in fact based on the
share price at the previous year end and would have been shown at ($6 x 1/2) x 10 million shares, i.e. $30 million. This
liability at 31 October 2005 had not been changed since the previous year end by the company. The SARs vest over a twoyear
period and thus at 31 October 2004 there would be a weighting of the eventual cost by 1 year/2 years. Therefore, an
additional liability and expense of $50 million should be accounted for in the financial statements at 31 October 2005. The
SARs would be settled on 1 December 2005 at $9 x 10 million shares, i.e. $90 million. The increase in the value of the
SARs since the year end would not be accrued in the financial statements but charged to profit or loss in the year ended31 October 2006.