江西省考生想知道ACCA的科目F3怎么备考?
发布时间:2020-01-10
步入2020年,离ACCA考试越来越近了,虽然在ACCA考试中F1科目是难度比较低的一个考试科目了,但还是很多ACCAer们不知道如何备考考试科目F1。不用担心,小伙伴们所遇到的问题51题库考试学习网都一一帮助大家找寻到了答案,现在就来告诉你:
F3科目介绍
F3财务会计师ACCA很重要的一个系列,主要包括财务会计的基本框架,如何运用复式记账法对企业发生的各项交易进行记录,对于考生的计算能力是一个十分巨大的挑战。试算平衡表的编制,合并报表的基本内容(该知识点在后续的F7、P2课程会有深入的学习),如何对财务报表进行分析,进一步探索报表数字背后的故事。作为财务会计基础类的一门课,要求学生夯实基础,为阶段学习打下坚实的基础。
备考心得
听网课与做题同步
报网课其实是最简单的,帮助最大的方法,听网课可以不用听直播课,但听课一定要和做题同步。
F3我就换了一种学习方式:听了一章的课程,就去做题,这样既巩固了这章课程的内容,又可以及时补漏了这章没学懂的。我觉得这种方式特别适合我这种记性不太好的人。
重难点要死磕到底
我的网课大概刷了20多天,后面报表的部分花的时间比较多,也是F3最难但又是最重要的部分。第一遍课听过去一脸懵,不知道讲了些什么,有点晕,自己又重新把讲义看了一遍,貌似悟到了一些
我是那种一个点没搞懂绝对不会放弃的人,于是又把没看懂的地方再看了一遍,然后在笔记本看自己总结的一些套路和需要注意的点,再去做BPP上的题。说实话有几个还是挺难的,它没有按套路出题,题目有些难懂,但是多读几遍,一句一句去分析还是能搞懂的。
做报表题我的思路是首先把套路写在草稿纸上然后再去一个点一个点去对应,这样子就不容易遗漏。因为我提前一个月就报名考试了,所以课上完了就没有任何可以停留的时间,就紧接着复习
讲义和刷题,孰轻孰重?
我的复习思路可能和大多数人不太一样,大部分人都把时间花在刷题上,而我是用周末整天的时间先把讲义看了一遍,边看边总结重点,每一次看讲义我都会有不同的收获,有些点之前不怎么明白的,也会在重复看讲义的时候豁然开朗,这时候也是最开心的。
考前查漏补缺不可少
第二遍BPP我只是把错题做了一遍,把一些概念性的题目总结在笔记本上。最后,考试的前一周,我就是听冲刺班的课和习题课,去查漏补缺,我个人认为这个课很重要,因为老师带着我把整本书的思路都串了一遍,这让我的整个知识框架更加得完整。
原地徘徊一千步,抵不上向前迈出第一步;心中想过无数次,不如挽起袖子大干一次。加油各位ACCAer们~
下面小编为大家准备了 ACCA考试 的相关考题,供大家学习参考。
5 You are the audit manager for three clients of Bertie & Co, a firm of Chartered Certified Accountants. The financial
year end for each client is 30 September 2007.
You are reviewing the audit senior’s proposed audit reports for two clients, Alpha Co and Deema Co.
Alpha Co, a listed company, permanently closed several factories in May 2007, with all costs of closure finalised and
paid in August 2007. The factories all produced the same item, which contributed 10% of Alpha Co’s total revenue
for the year ended 30 September 2007 (2006 – 23%). The closure has been discussed accurately and fully in the
chairman’s statement and Directors’ Report. However, the closure is not mentioned in the notes to the financial
statements, nor separately disclosed on the financial statements.
The audit senior has proposed an unmodified audit opinion for Alpha Co as the matter has been fully addressed in
the chairman’s statement and Directors’ Report.
In October 2007 a legal claim was filed against Deema Co, a retailer of toys. The claim is from a customer who slipped
on a greasy step outside one of the retail outlets. The matter has been fully disclosed as a material contingent liability
in the notes to the financial statements, and audit working papers provide sufficient evidence that no provision is
necessary as Deema Co’s lawyers have stated in writing that the likelihood of the claim succeeding is only possible.
The amount of the claim is fixed and is adequately covered by cash resources.
The audit senior proposes that the audit opinion for Deema Co should not be qualified, but that an emphasis of matter
paragraph should be included after the audit opinion to highlight the situation.
Hugh Co was incorporated in October 2006, using a bank loan for finance. Revenue for the first year of trading is
$750,000, and there are hopes of rapid growth in the next few years. The business retails luxury hand made wooden
toys, currently in a single retail outlet. The two directors (who also own all of the shares in Hugh Co) are aware that
due to the small size of the company, the financial statements do not have to be subject to annual external audit, but
they are unsure whether there would be any benefit in a voluntary audit of the first year financial statements. The
directors are also aware that a review of the financial statements could be performed as an alternative to a full audit.
Hugh Co currently employs a part-time, part-qualified accountant, Monty Parkes, who has prepared a year end
balance sheet and income statement, and who produces summary management accounts every three months.
Required:
(a) Evaluate whether the audit senior’s proposed audit report is appropriate, and where you disagree with the
proposed report, recommend the amendment necessary to the audit report of:
(i) Alpha Co; (6 marks)
5 BERTIE & CO
(a) (i) Alpha Co
The factory closures constitute a discontinued operation per IFRS 5 Non-Current Assets Held for Sale and Discontinued
Operations, due to the discontinuance of a separate major component of the business. It is a major component due to
the 10% contribution to revenue in the year to 30 September 2007 and 23% contribution in 2006. It is a separate
business component of the company due to the factories having made only one item, indicating a separate income
generating unit.
Under IFRS 5 there must be separate disclosure on the face of the income statement of the post tax results of the
discontinued operation, and of any profit or loss resulting from the closures. The revenue and costs of the discontinued
operation should be separately disclosed either on the face of the income statement or in the notes to the financial
statements. Cash flows relating to the discontinued operation should also be separately disclosed per IAS 7 Cash Flow
Statements.
In addition, as Alpha Co is a listed company, IFRS 8 Operating Segments requires separate segmental disclosure of
discontinued operations.
Failure to disclose the above information in the financial statements is a material breach of International Accounting
Standards. The audit opinion should therefore be qualified on the grounds of disagreement on disclosure (IFRS 5,
IAS 7 and IFRS 8). The matter is material, but not pervasive, and therefore an ‘except for’ opinion should be issued.
The opinion paragraph should clearly state the reason for the disagreement, and an indication of the financial
significance of the matter.
The audit opinion relates only to the financial statements which have been audited, and the contents of the other
information (chairman’s statement and Directors’ Report) are irrelevant when deciding if the financial statements show
a true and fair view, or are fairly presented.
Tutorial note: there is no indication in the question scenario that Alpha Co is in financial or operational difficulty
therefore no marks are awarded for irrelevant discussion of going concern issues and the resultant impact on the audit
opinion.
(b) Illustrate how you might use analytical procedures to provide audit evidence and reduce the level of detailed
substantive procedures. (7 marks)
(b) Illustration of use of analytical procedures as audit evidence
Tutorial note: Note that ‘as audit evidence’ requires consideration of substantive analytical procedures rather that the
identification of risks (relevant to part (a)).
Revenue
Analytical procedures may be used in testing revenue for completeness of recording (‘understatement’). The average selling
price of a vehicle in 2005 was $68,830 ($526·0 million ÷ 7,642 vehicles). Applying this to the number of vehicles sold
in 2006, might be projected to generate $698·8 million ($68,830 × 10,153) revenue from the sale of vehicles. The draft
financial statements therefore show a potential shortfall of $110·8 million ($(698·8 – 588·0) million) that is, 15·6%.
This should be investigated and substantiated through more detailed analytical procedures. For example, the number of
vehicles sold should be analysed into models and multiplied by the list price of each for a more accurate estimate of potential
revenue. The impact of discounts and other incentives (e.g. 0% finance) on the list prices should then be allowed for. If
recorded revenue for 2006 (as per draft income statement adjusted for cutoff and consignment inventories) is materially lower
than that calculated, detailed substantive procedures may be required in order to show that there is no material error.
‘Proof in total’/reasonableness tests
The material correctness, or otherwise, of income statement items (in particular) may be assessed through appropriate ‘proof
in total’ calculations (or ‘reasonableness’ tests). For example:
■ Employee benefits costs: the average number of employees by category (waged/salaried/apprenticed) × the average pay
rate for each might prove that in total $91·0 million (as adjusted to actual at 31 December 2006) is not materially
misstated. The average number of employees needs to be checked substantively (e.g. recalculated based on the number
of employees on each payroll) and the average pay rates (e.g. to rates agreed with employee representatives).
Tutorial note: An alternative reasonableness might be to take last year’s actual adjusted for 2006 numbers of
employees grossed-up for any pay increases during the year (pro-rated as necessary).
■ Depreciation: the cost (or net book value) of each category of asset × by the relevant straight-line (or reducing balance)
depreciation rate. If a ‘ballpark’ calculation for the year is materially different to the annual charge a more detailed
calculation can be made using monthly depreciation calculations. The cost (or net book value) on which depreciation
is calculated should be substantively tested, for example by agreeing brought forward balances to prior year working
papers and additions to purchase invoices (costings in respect of assets under construction).
Tutorial note: Alternatively, last year’s depreciation charge may be reconciled to this year’s by considering depreciation
rates applied to brought forward balances with adjustments for additions/disposals.
■ Interest income: an average interest rate for the year can be applied to the monthly balance invested (e.g. in deposit
accounts) and compared with the amount recognised for the year to 31 December 2006 (as adjusted for any accrued
interest per the bank letter for audit purposes). The monthly balances (or averages) on which the calculation is
performed should be substantiated to bank deposit statements.
■ Interest expense: if the cash balances do not go into overdraft then this may be similar expenses (e.g. prompt payment
discounts to customers). If this is to particular dealers then a proof in total might be to apply the discount rate to the
amounts invoiced to the dealer during the period.
Immaterial items
For immaterial items analytical procedures alone may provide sufficient audit evidence that amounts in the financial
statements are not materially misstated so that detailed substantive procedures are not required. For example, a comparison
of administration and distribution, maintenance and insurance costs for 2006 compared with 2005 may be sufficient to show
that material error is highly unlikely. If necessary, further reasonableness tests could be performed. For example, considering
insurance costs to value of assets insured or maintenance costs to costs of assets maintained.
Ratio analysis
Ratio analysis can provide substantive evidence that income statement and balance sheet items are not materially misstated
by considering their inter-relationships. For example:
■ Asset turnover: Based on the draft financial statements property, plant and equipment has turned over 5·2 times
($645·5/124·5) compared with 5·9 times in 2005. This again highlights that income may be overstated, or assets
overstated (e.g. if depreciation is understated).
■ Inventory turnover: Using cost of materials adjusted for changes in inventories this has remained stable at 10·9 times.
Tutorial note: This is to be expected as in (a) the cost in the income statement has increased by 9% and the value of
inventories by 8·5%.
Inventories represent the smallest asset value on the balance sheet at 31 December 2006 (7·8% of total assets).
Therefore substantive procedures may be limited to agreeing physical count of material items (vehicles) and agreeing
cutoff.
■ Average collection period: This has increased to 41 days (73·1/645·5 × 365) from 30 days. Further substantive analysis
is required, for example, separating out non-current amounts (for sales on 0% finance terms). Substantive procedures
may be limited to confirmation of amounts due from dealers (and/or receipt of after-date cash) and agreeing cutoff of
goods on consignment.
■ Payment periods: This has remained constant at 37 days (2005 – 38 days). Detailed substantive procedures may be
restricted to reconciling only major suppliers’ statements and agreeing the cutoff on parts purchased from them.
(b) Both divisions have recognised the need for a strategic alliance to help them achieve a successful entry into
European markets.
Critically evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of the divisions using strategic alliances to develop their
respective businesses in Europe. (15 marks)
(b) Johnson, Scholes and Whittington define a strategic alliance as ‘where two or more organisations share resources and
activities to pursue a strategy’. There are a number of types of alliance ranging from a formal joint venture through to networks
where there is collaboration but no formal agreement. The type of strategic alliance will be affected by how quickly market
conditions are changing – swift rates of change may require flexible less formal types of alliance and determine whether
specific dedicated resources are required or whether the partners can use existing resources. Johnson, Scholes and
Whittington argue that for an alliance to be successful there needs to be a clear strategic purpose and senior management
support; compatibility between the partners at all levels – this may be complicated if it is a cross-border alliance; time spent
defining and meeting performance expectations including clear goals, governance and organisational arrangements; and
finally trust both in terms of respective competences and trustworthiness.
6D–ENGAA
Paper 3.5
6D–ENGAA
Paper 3.5
The advantages that may be gained by a successful strategic alliance include creating a joint operation that has a ‘critical
mass’ that may lead to lower costs or an improved offer to the customer. It may also allow each partner to specialise in areas
where they have a particular advantage or competence. Interestingly, alliances are often entered into where a company is
seeking to enter new geographical markets, as is the case with both divisions. The partner brings local knowledge and
expertise in distribution, marketing and customer support. A good strategic alliance will also enable the partners to learn from
one another and develop competences that may be used in other markets. Often firms looking to develop an e-business will
use an alliance with a partner with experience in website development. Once its e-business is up and running a firm may
eventually decide to bring the website design skills in-house and acquire the partner.
Disadvantages of alliances range from over-dependence on the partner, not developing own core competences and a tendency
for them not to have a defined end date. Clearly there is a real danger of the partner eventually becoming a competitor.
In assessing the suitability for each division in using a strategic alliance to enter European markets one clearly has to analyse
the very different positions of the divisions in terms of what they can offer a potential partner. The earlier analysis suggests
that the Shirtmaster division may have the greater difficulty in attracting a partner. One may seriously question the feasibility
of using the Shirtmaster brand in Europe and the competences the division has in terms of manufacturing and selling to large
numbers of small independent UK clothing retailers would seem inappropriate to potential European partners. Ironically, if
the management consultant recommends that the Shirtmaster division sources some or all of its shirts from low cost
manufacturers in Europe this may provide a reason for setting up an alliance with such a manufacturer.
The prospects of developing a strategic alliance in the Corporate Clothing division are much more favourable. The division
has developed a value added service for its corporate customers, indeed its relationship with its customers can be seen as a
relatively informal network or alliance and there seems every chance this could be replicated with large corporate customers
in Europe. Equally, there may be European workwear companies looking to grow and develop who would welcome sharingthe Corporate Clothing division’s expertise.
(ii) State, giving reasons, the tax reliefs in relation to inheritance tax (IHT) and capital gains tax (CGT) which
would be available to Alasdair if he acquires the warehouse and leases it to Gallus & Co, rather than to
an unconnected tenant. (4 marks)
(ii) Apart from the fact that Alasdair can keep an eye on his tenant, the main advantages are twofold:
IHT: If the firm are the tenants, the property will be land and buildings used in a business carried on by a partnership
in which the donor is a partner. Thus, Alasdair will be able to claim business property relief (BPR) at a rate of 50%
so long as he remains a partner in the firm. However, this relief would not be available until Alasdair has owned
the property for at least two years from his firm taking up the tenancy.
CGT: As Alasdair is a partner in the firm using the building, it will also be a qualifying asset for the purposes of rollover
relief on any gains arising from the disposal of the property. Assuming that Alasdair acquires a replacement asset
which will be used in the trade, the gain on sale can be deferred against the tax base cost of the replacement asset.
In the event that rollover relief cannot be used, any gains on disposal will be subject to business asset taper relief.
声明:本文内容由互联网用户自发贡献自行上传,本网站不拥有所有权,未作人工编辑处理,也不承担相关法律责任。如果您发现有涉嫌版权的内容,欢迎发送邮件至:contact@51tk.com 进行举报,并提供相关证据,工作人员会在5个工作日内联系你,一经查实,本站将立刻删除涉嫌侵权内容。
- 2020-03-07
- 2020-03-07
- 2020-01-10
- 2020-04-20
- 2020-01-10
- 2019-07-20
- 2020-04-11
- 2020-01-10
- 2020-08-16
- 2020-01-09
- 2020-01-10
- 2020-01-10
- 2020-04-19
- 2020-01-10
- 2020-01-10
- 2020-01-10
- 2020-04-30
- 2021-08-29
- 2019-03-27
- 2020-01-09
- 2020-03-13
- 2020-03-07
- 2020-01-10
- 2020-01-10
- 2020-05-21
- 2020-01-10
- 2021-07-28
- 2020-01-10
- 2020-03-27
- 2020-01-09