快看！了解关于ACCA有年费吗？年费是多少呢？赶紧看看！

正确答案：

(ii) The implications of delaying the sale of the business
The implications of delaying the sale of the business until 30 April would have been as follows:
– Clint would have received an additional two months of profits amounting to ￡6,920 (￡20,760 x 1/3).
– Clint’s trading income in 2006/07 would have been reduced by ￡13,015 (￡43,723 – ￡30,708), much of which
would have been subject to income tax at 40%. His additional trading income in 2007/08 of ￡19,935 would all
have been taxed at 10% and 22%.
– Clint is entitled to the personal age allowance of ￡7,280 in both years. However, it is abated by ￡1 for every ￡2
by which his total income exceeds ￡20,100. Once Clint’s total income exceeds ￡24,590 (￡20,100 + ((￡7,280
– ￡5,035) x 2)), his personal allowance will be reduced to the standard amount of ￡5,035. Accordingly, the
increased personal allowance would not be available in 2006/07 regardless of the year in which the business was
sold. It is available in 2007/08 (although part of it is wasted) but would not have been if the sale of the business
had been delayed.
– Clint’s class 4 national insurance contributions in 2006/07 would have been reduced due to the fall in the level
of his trading income. However, much of the saving would be at 1% only. Clint is not liable to class 4 national
insurance contributions in 2007/08 as he is 65 at the start of the year.
– Changing the date on which the business was sold would have had no effect on Clint’s class 2 liability as he is
not required to make class 2 contributions once he is 65 years old.

正确答案：
(d) The dividend growth model calculates the ex div share price from knowledge of the cost of equity capital, the expected growth
rate in dividends and the current dividend per share (or next year’s dividend per share). Using the formula given in the
formulae sheet, the dividend growth rate expected by the company of 8% per year and the decreased dividend of 7·5p per
share:
Share price = (7·5 x 1·08)/(0·11 – 0·08) = 270p or ￡2·70
This is the same as the share price prior to the announcement (￡2·70) and so if dividend growth of 8% per year is achieved,
the dividend growth model forecasts zero share price growth. The share price growth claim made by the company regarding
expansion into the retail camera market cannot therefore be substantiated.
In fact, a lower future share price of ￡2·49 was predicted by applying the current price-earnings ratio to the earnings per
share resulting from the proposed expansion. If this estimate is correct, a fall in share price of 7% can be expected.
The share price predicted by the dividend growth model of ￡2·70 would require an after-tax return on the proposed expansion
of 11·66%, which is more than the 9% predicted by the Board. The current return on shareholders’ funds is 7·5% (4·5/60),
but in 2005 it was 12·8% (7·3/57), so 11·66% may be achievable, but looks unlikely.
Since the market price fell from ￡2·70 to ￡2·45 following the announcement, it appears that the market does not believe
that the forecast dividend growth can be achieved.

正确答案：
(b) Draft guidance
(i) Gifts and hospitality
Gifts and hospitality may be offered as an inducement i.e. to unduly influence actions or decisions, encourage illegal or
dishonest behaviour or to obtain confidential information. An offer of gifts and/or hospitality from a client ordinarily gives
rise to threats to compliance with the fundamental principles, for example:
■ self-interest threats to objectivity and/or confidentiality may be created if a gift from a client is accepted;
■ intimidation threats to objectivity and/or confidentiality may arise through the possibility of such offers being made
public and damaging the reputation of the professional accountant (or close family member).
The significance of such threats will depend on the nature, value and intent behind the offer. There may be no significant
threat to compliance with the fundamental principles if a reasonable and informed third party would consider gifts and
hospitality to be clearly insignificant. For example, if the offer of gifts or hospitality is made in the normal course of
business without the specific intent to influence decision making or to obtain information.
If evaluated threats are other than clearly insignificant, safeguards should be considered and applied as necessary to
eliminate them or reduce them to an acceptable level.
Offers of gifts and hospitality should not be accepted if the threats cannot be eliminated or reduced to an acceptable
level through the application of safeguards.
As the real or apparent threats to compliance with the fundamental principles do not merely arise from acceptance of
an inducement but, sometimes, merely from the fact of the offer having been made, additional safeguards should be
adopted. For example:
■ immediately informing higher levels of management or those charged with governance that an inducement has
been offered;
■ informing third parties (e.g. a professional body) of the offer (after seeking legal advice);
■ advising immediate or close family members of relevant threats and safeguards where they are potentially in
positions that might result in offers of inducements (e.g. as a result of their employment situation); and
■ informing higher levels of management or those charged with governance where immediate or close family
members are employed by competitors or potential suppliers of that organisation.