ACCA考试F2考试试题每日一练(2020-08-14)

正确答案：
(a) (i) In order to facilitate BAG profit maximising decisions the following strategy should apply:
Division C should offer to transfer chemical CC to Division B at marginal cost plus opportunity cost. This would apply
as follows:
– 40,000 kilograms of CC at $105 per kilogram since this is the price that could be achieved from sales to external
customers of BAG.
– 60,000 kilograms of CC at marginal cost of $50 per kilogram since no alternative opportunity exists.
Division B has a sales forecast of 360,000 litres of product BF. This will require 360,000/4 = 90,000 kilograms of
chemical CC input.
Based on the pricing by Division C indicated above, Division B would choose to purchase 60,000 kilograms of CC from
Division C at $50 per kilogram, since this is less than the $55 per kilogram quoted by the independent supplier.
Division B would purchase its remaining requirement for 30,000 kilograms of CC from the independent supplier at $55
per kilogram since this is less than the $105 per kilogram at which Division C would offer to transfer its remaining output
– given that it can sell the residual output to external customers of BAG.

正确答案：
(b) Principal matters to be included in submission to provide internal audit services
■ Introduction/background – details about York including its organisation (of functions), offices (locations) and number of
internal auditors working within each office. The office that would be responsible for managing the contract should be
stated.
■ A description of York’s services most relevant to RBG’s needs (e.g. in the areas of risk management, IT audits, value for
money (VFM) and corporate governance).
■ Client-specific issues identified. For example, revenue audits will be required routinely for control purposes and to
substantiate the contingent rents due. Other areas of expertise that RBG may be interested in taking advantage of, for
example, special projects such as acquisitions and mergers.
■ York’s approach to assessing audit needs including the key stages and who will be involved. For example:
(1) Preliminary – review of business, industry and the entity’s operating characteristics
(2) Planning – including needs analysis and co-ordination with external audit plan
(3) Post-Audit – assurance that activities were effectively and efficiently executed
(4) Review – of services provided, reports issued and management’s responses.
■ A description of internal audit tools used and methodologies/approach to audit fieldwork including use of embedded
audit software and programs developed by York.
■ A description of York’s systems-based audit, the IT issues to be addressed and the technological support that can be
provided.
■ Any training that will be offered to RBG’s managers and staff, for example, in a risk management approach.
■ A description and quantity of resources, in particular the number of full-time staff, to be deployed in providing services
to RBG. An outline of RBG’s track record in human resource retention and development.
■ Relevant experience – e.g. in internal and external audit in the retail industry. The relative qualifications and skills of
each grade of audit staff and the contract manager in particular.
■ Insurance certifications covering, for example, public liability and professional indemnity insurance.
■ Work ethic policies relating to health and safety, equal opportunities’ and race relations.
■ How York ensures quality throughout the internal audit process including standards to be followed (e.g. Institute of
Internal Auditors’ standards).
■ Sample report templates – e.g. for reporting the results of risk analysis, audit plans and quarterly reporting of findings
to the Audit and Risk Management Committee.
■ Current clients to whom internal audit services are provided from whom RBG will be able to take up references, by
arrangement, if York is short-listed.
■ Any work currently carried out/competed for that could cause a conflict of interest (and the measures to avoid such
conflicts).
■ Fees (daily rates) for each grade of staff and travel and other expenses to be reimbursed. An indication of price increases,
if any, over the three-year contract period. Invoicing terms (e.g. on presentation of reports) and payment terms (e.g. the
end of the month following receipt of the invoice).
■ Performance targets to be met such as deadlines for completing work and submitting and issuing reports.

正确答案：
(c) Further advice
Mabel should consider delaying one of the gifts until after 1 May 2007 such that it is made more than seven years after the
gift to the discretionary trust. Both PETs would then be covered by the nil rate band resulting in a saving of inheritance tax
of ￡6,720 (from (b)).
Mabel should ensure that she uses her inheritance tax annual exemption of ￡3,000 every year by, say, making gifts of ￡1,500
each year to both Bruce and Padma. The effect of this will be to save inheritance tax of ￡1,200 (￡3,000 x 40%) every year.

正确答案：
(c) A joint audit is when two or more audit firms are jointly responsible for giving the audit opinion. This is very common in a
group situation where the principal auditor is appointed jointly with the auditor of a subsidiary to provide a joint opinion on
the subsidiary’s financial statements. There are several advantages and disadvantages in a joint audit being performed.
Advantages
It can be beneficial in terms of audit efficiency for a joint audit to be conducted, especially in the case of a new subsidiary.
In this case, Lead & Co will have built up an understanding of Maxwell Co’s business, systems and controls, and financial
statement issues. It will be time efficient for the two firms of auditors to work together in order for Chien & Co to build up
knowledge of the new subsidiary. This is a key issue, as Chien & Co need to acquire a thorough understanding of the
subsidiary in order to assess any risks inherent in the company which could impact on the overall assessment of risk within
the group. Lead & Co will be able to provide a good insight into the company, and advise Chien & Co of the key risk areas
they have previously identified.
On the practical side, it seems that Maxwell Co is a significant addition to the group, as it is expected to increase operating
facilities by 40%. If Chien & Co were appointed as sole auditors to Maxwell Co it may be difficult for the audit firm to provide
adequate resources to conduct the audit at the same time as auditing the other group companies. A joint audit will allow
sufficient resources to be allocated to the audit of Maxwell Co, assuring the quality of the opinion provided.
If there is a tight deadline, as is common with the audit of subsidiaries, which should be completed before the group audit
commences, then having access to two firms’ resources should enable the audit to be completed in good time.
The audit should also benefit from an improvement in quality. The two audit firms may have different points of view, and
would be able to discuss contentious issues throughout the audit process. In particular, the newly appointed audit team will
have a ‘fresh pair of eyes’ and be able to offer new insight to matters identified. It should be easier to challenge management
and therefore ensure that the auditors’ position is taken seriously.
Tutorial note: Candidates may have referred to the recent debate over whether joint audits increase competition in the
profession. In particular, joint audits have been proposed as a way for ‘mid tier’ audit firms to break into the market of
auditing large companies and groups, which at the moment is monopolised by the ‘Big 4’. Although this does not answer
the specific question set, credit will be awarded for demonstration of awareness of this topical issue.
Disadvantages
For the client, it is likely to be more expensive to engage two audit firms than to have the audit opinion provided by one firm.
From a cost/benefit point of view there is clearly no point in paying twice for one opinion to be provided. Despite the audit
workload being shared, both firms will have a high cost for being involved in the audit in terms of senior manager and partner
time. These costs will be passed on to the client within the audit fee.
The two audit firms may use very different audit approaches and terminology. This could make it difficult for the audit firms
to work closely together, negating some of the efficiency and cost benefits discussed above. Problems could arise in deciding
which firm’s method to use, for example, to calculate materiality, design and pick samples for audit procedures, or evaluate
controls within the accounting system. It may be impossible to reconcile two different methods and one firm’s methods may
end up dominating the audit process, which then eliminates the benefit of a joint audit being conducted. It could be time
consuming to develop a ‘joint’ audit approach, based on elements of each of the two firms’ methodologies, time which
obviously would not have been spent if a single firm was providing the audit.
There may be problems for the two audit firms to work together harmoniously. Lead & Co may feel that ultimately they will
be replaced by Chien & Co as audit provider, and therefore could be unwilling to offer assistance and help.
Potentially, problems could arise in terms of liability. In the event of litigation, because both firms have provided the audit
opinion, it follows that the firms would be jointly liable. The firms could blame each other for any negligence which was
discovered, making the litigation process more complex than if a single audit firm had provided the opinion. However, it could
be argued that joint liability is not necessarily a drawback, as the firms should both be covered by professional indemnity
insurance.