ACCA考试F9模拟练习题：Business Valuations

正确答案：
(a) To: David Gould
From:
Writing a business plan is a critical stage in moving an idea for a business into a reality. The reality includes presenting a
convincing case to potential financers of the business, be they banks or venture capitalists. The key ingredients include clearly
saying what you plan to do and why people should want to buy your particular service. Experts warn of starting with a detailed
cash flow and then working backwards to make the numbers fit. You should regard the business plan as a management tool
and not simply a sales document. Again, the advice is to make credible and achievable projections; it is better to exceed low
targets than fail to achieve over-ambitious ones. Many business plans are based on deeply flawed research. Key to your
business success will be the size of your target market. There is much evidence to suggest that it is the make-up of the team
presenting the plan and their commitment rather than the business idea itself that will determine whether the necessary
financial support is made.
Clearly, you need to say how much money you require and why. Again the advice is not to be afraid to ask for large amounts
if your business requires it. Linked to how much you want is a clear statement of the return the investor or lender will get –
how much of the equity are you willing to give or what security can you offer the lender? Figure are important and you need
projected cash flows, profit and loss accounts and balance sheets for at least three years ahead. Potential investors and/or
lenders are likely to be impressed by a plan which clearly indicates where the major risks are to be found and the strategies
available to handle such risks.
There needs to be a clear statement of the major steps and milestones on the way to achieving your goals. Where are you
now, where do you intend to be and how are you going to get there. One expert argues there are three elements of the plan
itself – an executive summary pulling together the key points in your proposal, secondly the plan itself and finally an ‘elevator
pitch’, a one paragraph description that explains the business in the time it takes to go up in a lift.
In summary, your business plan should contain an executive summary as explained above, the objectives of the business,
including key financial targets and the philosophy of the business, the target market and relevant forecasts, the range of
products/services, the marketing strategy linked to the target markets, resource availability, people and organisation involved,
performance measurement to measure progress towards stated objectives and a summary of financial information.
One final point is to remember that no business plan ever was carried out exactly! In many ways it is the quality of the thinking
the plan includes and the actual process through which it is developed that will determine success.
Yours,

正确答案：
(b) (i) The share options
There are no income tax implications on the grant of the share options.
In the tax year in which Benny exercises the options and acquires the shares, the excess of the market value of the
shares over the price paid, i.e. ￡11,500 ((￡3·35 – ￡2·20) x 10,000) will be subject to income tax.
Benny’s financial exposure is caused by the rule within the share option scheme obliging him to hold the shares for a
year before he can sell them. If the company’s expansion into Eastern Europe fails, such that its share price
subsequently falls to less than ￡2·20 before Benny has the chance to sell the shares, Benny’s financial position may be
summarised as follows:
– Benny will have paid ￡22,000 (￡2·20 x 10,000) for shares which are now worth less than that.
– He will also have paid income tax of ￡4,600 (￡11,500 x 40%).

正确答案：

(a) Except in relation to specifically exempted companies, such as those involved in charitable work, companies are required to indicate that they are operating on the basis of limited liability. Thus private companies are required to end their names, either with the word ‘limited’ or the abbreviation ‘ltd’, and public companies must end their names with the words ‘public limited company’ or the abbreviation ‘plc’. Welsh companies may use the Welsh language equivalents (Companies Act (CA)2006 ss.58, 59 & 60).
Companies Registry maintains a register of business names, and will refuse to register any company with a name that is the same as one already on that index (CA 2006 s.66).
Certain categories of names are, subject to the decision of the Secretary of State, unacceptable per se, as follows:
(i) names which in the opinion of the Secretary of State constitute a criminal offence or are offensive (CA 2006 s.53)
(ii) names which are likely to give the impression that the company is connected with either government or local government authorities (s.54).
(iii) names which include a word or expression specified under the Company and Business Names Regulations 1981 (s.26(2)(b)). This category requires the express approval of the Secretary of State for the use of any of the names or expressions contained on the list, and relates to areas which raise a matter of public concern in relation to their use.
Under s.67 of the Companies Act 2006 the Secretary of State has power to require a company to alter its name under the following circumstances:
(i) where it is the same as a name already on the Registrar’s index of company names.
(ii) where it is ‘too like’ a name that is on that index.
The name of a company can always be changed by a special resolution of the company so long as it continues to comply with the above requirements (s.77).

(b) The tort of passing off was developed to prevent one person from using any name which is likely to divert business their way by suggesting that the business is actually that of some other person or is connected in any way with that other business. It thus enables people to protect the goodwill they have built up in relation to their business activity. In Ewing v Buttercup
Margarine Co Ltd (1917) the plaintiff successfully prevented the defendants from using a name that suggested a link with
his existing dairy company. It cannot be used, however, if there is no likelihood of the public being confused, where for example the companies are conducting different businesses (Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co Ltd v Dunlop Motor Co Ltd (1907)
and Stringfellow v McCain Foods GB Ltd (1984). Nor can it be used where the name consists of a word in general use (Aerators Ltd v Tollitt (1902)).
Part 41 of the Companies Act (CA) 2006, which repeals and replaces the Business Names Act 1985, still does not prevent one business from using the same, or a very similar, name as another business so the tort of passing off will still have an application in the wider business sector. However the Act introduced a new procedure to deal specifically with company names. As previously under the CA 1985, a company cannot register with a name that was the same as any already registered (s.665 Companies Act (CA) 2006) and under CA s.67 the Secretary of State may direct a company to change its name if it has been registered in a name that is the same as, or too like a name appearing on the registrar’s index of company names. In addition, however, a completely new system of complaint has been introduced.

(c) Under ss.69–74 of CA 2006 a new procedure has been introduced to cover situations where a company has been registered with a name
(i) that it is the same as a name associated with the applicant in which he has goodwill, or
(ii) that it is sufficiently similar to such a name that its use in the United Kingdom would be likely to mislead by suggesting a connection between the company and the applicant (s.69).
Section 69 can be used not just by other companies but by any person to object to a company names adjudicator if a company’s name is similar to a name in which the applicant has goodwill. There is list of circumstances raising a presumption that a name was adopted legitimately, however even then, if the objector can show that the name was registered either, to obtain money from them, or to prevent them from using the name, then they will be entitled to an order to require the company to change its name.
Under s.70 the Secretary of State is given the power to appoint company names adjudicators and their staff and to finance their activities, with one person being appointed Chief Adjudicator.
Section 71 provides the Secretary of State with power to make rules for the proceedings before a company names adjudicator.
Section 72 provides that the decision of an adjudicator and the reasons for it, are to be published within 90 days of the decision.
Section 73 provides that if an objection is upheld, then the adjudicator is to direct the company with the offending name to change its name to one that does not similarly offend. A deadline must be set for the change. If the offending name is not changed, then the adjudicator will decide a new name for the company.
Under s.74 either party may appeal to a court against the decision of the company names adjudicator. The court can either uphold or reverse the adjudicator’s decision, and may make any order that the adjudicator might have made.