备考资料：2020年ACCA考试审计与认证业务知识点(5)

正确答案：
(b) Increased information disclosure benefits users by reducing the likelihood that they will misallocate their capital. This is
obviously a direct benefit to individual users of corporate reports. The disclosure reduces the risk of misallocation of capital
by enabling users to improve their assessments of a company’s prospects. This creates three important results.
(i) Users use information disclosed to increase their investment returns and by definition support the most profitable
companies which are likely to be those that contribute most to economic growth. Thus, an important benefit of
information disclosure is that it improves the effectiveness of the investment process.
(ii) The second result lies in the effect on the liquidity of the capital markets. A more liquid market assists the effective
allocation of capital by allowing users to reallocate their capital quickly. The degree of information asymmetry between
the buyer and seller and the degree of uncertainty of the buyer and the seller will affect the liquidity of the market as
lower asymmetry and less uncertainty will increase the number of transactions and make the market more liquid.
Disclosure will affect uncertainty and information asymmetry.
(iii) Information disclosure helps users understand the risk of a prospective investment. Without any information, the user
has no way of assessing a company’s prospects. Information disclosure helps investors predict a company’s prospects.
Getting a better understanding of the true risk could lower the price of capital for the company. It is difficult to prove
however that the average cost of capital is lowered by information disclosure, even though it is logically and practically
impossible to assess a company’s risk without relevant information. Lower capital costs promote investment, which can
stimulate productivity and economic growth.
However although increased information can benefit users, there are problems of understandability and information overload.
Information disclosure provides a degree of protection to users. The benefit is fairness to users and is part of corporate
accountability to society as a whole.
The main costs to the preparer of financial statements are as follows:
(i) the cost of developing and disseminating information,
(ii) the cost of possible litigation attributable to information disclosure,
(iii) the cost of competitive disadvantage attributable to disclosure.
The costs of developing and disseminating the information include those of gathering, creating and auditing the information.
Additional costs to the preparers include training costs, changes to systems (for example on moving to IFRS), and the more
complex and the greater the information provided, the more it will cost the company.
Although litigation costs are known to arise from information disclosure, it does not follow that all information disclosure leads
to litigation costs. Cases can arise from insufficient disclosure and misleading disclosure. Only the latter is normally prompted
by the presentation of information disclosure. Fuller disclosure could lead to lower costs of litigation as the stock market would
have more realistic expectations of the company’s prospects and the discrepancy between the valuation implicit in the market
price and the valuation based on a company’s financial statements would be lower. However, litigation costs do not
necessarily increase with the extent of the disclosure. Increased disclosure could reduce litigation costs.
Disclosure could weaken a company’s ability to generate future cash flows by aiding its competitors. The effect of disclosure
on competitiveness involves benefits as well as costs. Competitive disadvantage could be created if disclosure is made relating
to strategies, plans, (for example, planned product development, new market targeting) or information about operations (for
example, production-cost figures). There is a significant difference between the purpose of disclosure to users and
competitors. The purpose of disclosure to users is to help them to estimate the amount, timing, and certainty of future cash
flows. Competitors are not trying to predict a company’s future cash flows, and information of use in that context is not
necessarily of use in obtaining competitive advantage. Overlap between information designed to meet users’ needs and
information designed to further the purposes of a competitor is often coincidental. Every company that could suffer competitive
disadvantage from disclosure could gain competitive advantage from comparable disclosure by competitors. Published figures
are often aggregated with little use to competitors.
Companies bargain with suppliers and with customers, and information disclosure could give those parties an advantage in
negotiations. In such cases, the advantage would be a cost for the disclosing entity. However, the cost would be offset
whenever information disclosure was presented by both parties, each would receive an advantage and a disadvantage.
There are other criteria to consider such as whether the information to be disclosed is about the company. This is both a
benefit and a cost criterion. Users of corporate reports need company-specific data, and it is typically more costly to obtain
and present information about matters external to the company. Additionally, consideration must be given as to whether the
company is the best source for the information. It could be inefficient for a company to obtain or develop data that other, more
expert parties could develop and present or do develop at present.
There are many benefits to information disclosure and users have unmet information needs. It cannot be known with any
certainty what the optimal disclosure level is for companies. Some companies through voluntary disclosure may have
achieved their optimal level. There are no quantitative measures of how levels of disclosure stand with respect to optimal
levels. Standard setters have to make such estimates as best they can, guided by prudence, and by what evidence of benefits
and costs they can obtain.

正确答案：
(c) Mr Hogg’s belief that employing child labour is ‘always ethically wrong’
Deontological perspective:
In the case scenario, Mr Hogg is demonstrating a deontological position on child labour by saying that it is ‘always’ wrong.
He is adopting an absolutist rather than a relativist or situational stance in arguing that there are no situations in which child
labour might be ethically acceptable. The deontological view is that an act is right or wrong in itself and does not depend
upon any other considerations (such as economic necessity or the extent of the child’s willingness to work). If child labour is
wrong in one situation, it follows that it is wrong in all situations because of the Kantian principle of generalisability (in the
categorical imperative). Because child labour is wrong and potentially exploitative in some situations, the deontological
position says that it must be assumed to be wrong in all situations. The fact that it may cause favourable outcomes in some
situations does not make it ethically right, because the deontological position is not situational and the quality of the outcome
is not taken into account.
Teleological perspective:
According to the teleological perspective, an act is right or wrong depending on the favourableness of the outcome. It is
sometimes called the consequentialist perspective because the consequences of the action are considered more important
than the act itself.
In the teleological perspective, ethics is situational and not absolute. Therefore child labour is morally justified if the outcome
is favourable. The economic support of a child’s family by provision of wages for family support might be considered to be a
favourable outcome that justifies child labour. There is an ethical trade-off between the importance of the family income from
child labour and the need to avoid exploitation and interfere with the child’s education. Education is clearly important but
family financial support might be a more favourable outcome, at least in the short term, and if so, this would justify the child
working rather than being in school. For HPC, child labour is likely to be cheaper than adult labour but will alienate European
buyers and be in breach of its code of ethics. Child labour may be ethically acceptable if the negative consequences can be
addressed and overcome.
[Tutorial note: other, equally relevant points made in evaluating Mr Hogg’s opinion will be valid. The texts discuss teleology
in terms of utilitarianism and egoism. Although this distinction is not relevant to the question, candidates should not be
penalised for introducing the distinction if the other points raised are relevant]

正确答案：

(a) Calculation of corporation tax
Year ended 31 March 2003
Corporation tax payable
There are three adjusting items:.
(i) The computers are capital items, as they have an enduring benefit. These need to be added back in the Schedule D
Case I calculation, and capital allowances claimed instead. The company is not small or medium by Companies Act
definitions and therefore no first year allowances are available. Allowances of ￡12,500 (50,000 x 25%) can be claimed,
leaving a TWDV of ￡37,500.
(ii) The provision appears to be general in nature. In addition there is insufficient information to justify the provision and it
should be disallowed until such times as it is released or utilised.
(iii) Costs relating to trading loan relationships are allowable, as are costs relating to the trade (debt collection, trade disputes
and accounting work). Costs relating to capital items (￡5,700) are not allowable so will have to be added back.
Total profit chargeable to corporation tax is therefore ￡704,300 + 50,000 – 12,500 + 10,000 + 5,700 = 757,500. There are two associates, and therefore the 30% tax rate starts at ￡1,500,000/2 = ￡750,000. Corporation tax payable is 30% x￡757,500 = ￡227,250.
Payment date
Although the rate of tax is 30% and the company ‘large’, quarterly payments will not apply, as the company was not large in the previous year. The due date for payment of tax is therefore nine months and one day after the end of the tax accounting period (31 March 2003) i.e. 1 January 2004.
Filing date
This is the later of:
– 12 months after the end of the period of account: 31 March 2004
– 3 months after the date of the notice requiring the return 1 May 2004
i.e. 1 May 2004.

正确答案：
(ii) If the directors agree to disclose the note, it should be reviewed by the auditors to ensure that it is sufficiently detailed.
In evaluating the adequacy of the disclosure in the note, the auditor should consider whether the disclosure explicitly
draws the reader’s attention to the possibility that the entity may not be able to continue as a going concern in the
foreseeable future. The note should include a description of conditions giving rise to significant doubt, and the directors’
plans to deal with the conditions. If the note provided contains adequate information then there is no breach of financial
reporting standards, and so no disagreement with the directors.
If the disclosure is considered adequate, then the opinion should not be qualified. The auditors should consider a
modification by adding an emphasis of matter paragraph to highlight the existence of the material uncertainties, and to
draw attention to the note to the financial statements. The emphasis of matter paragraph should firstly contain a brief
description of the uncertainties, and also refer explicitly to the note to the financial statements where the situation has
been fully described. The emphasis of matter paragraph should re-iterate that the audit opinion is not qualified.
However, it could be the case that a note has been given in the financial statements, but that the details are inadequate
and do not fully explain the significant uncertainties affecting the going concern status of the company. In this situation
the auditors should express a qualified opinion, disagreeing with the preparation of the financial statements, as the
disclosure requirements of IAS 1 have not been followed.