ACCA考试P5科目模拟试题(2019-01-04)
发布时间：2019-01-04
特许公认会计师公会(The
Association of Chartered Certified Accountants）简称ACCA，成立于1904年，是目前世界上领先的专业会计师团体，也是国际学员最多、学员规模发展最快的专业会计师组织。今天我们要看的就是ACCA考试中P5科目的模拟试题，希望大家能从做题过程中提升自己。
Question：Which of the following oversees the work of the International
Auditing and Assurance Standards Board?
A.
Financial Reporting Council
B.
UK Corporate Governance Code
C.
Financial Action Task Force
D.
International Accounting Standards Board
E.
Public Interest Oversight Board
The
correct answer is: Public Interest Oversight Board.
The
Public Interest Oversight Board (PIOB) was established in 2005 and set up to
ensure that international auditing and assurance, ethics and education standards
for the accountancy profession are set in a transparent manner that reflects
the public interest.
备考之路漫长艰辛，需要大家持之以恒，每天要进行复习，切忌三天打鱼两天晒网，51题库考试学习网会一直在您的身边，支持您，陪伴您。祝愿大家早日功成名就！！！
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。
(b) Explain how the adoption of residual income (RI) using the annuity method of depreciation might prove to
be a superior basis for the management incentive plan operated by NCL plc.
(N.B. No illustrative calculations should be incorporated into your explanation). (4 marks)
(b) The use of residual income as a basis for the management incentive plan operated by NCL plc would have the following
advantages:
Divisional management would be more willing to accept a project with a positive residual income and this would contribute
to the improved performance of NCL plc. Also, the disincentive to accept a project with a positive residual income but a return
on investment regarded by divisional management as not being in their best interests would be removed, because divisional
management would be rewarded.
The use of annuity depreciation may improve performance appraisal by removing the effect of straight-line depreciation which
tends to distort project returns especially in the early years of a project’s life when invested capital remains relatively high due
to the constant depreciation charge. The residual income approach using annuity depreciation will only match the NPV if the
annual cashflows of a project are constant. Hence the method when applied to the North or South projects would produce
an NPV which does not exactly match that previously calculated. By way of contrast it is forecast that the East project will
have constant cashflows and in this instance the NPV and residual income based approach when discounted, will produce
the same result.
5 You are an audit manager in Bartolome, a firm of Chartered Certified Accountants. You have specific responsibility
for undertaking annual reviews of existing clients and advising whether an engagement can be properly continued.
The following matters have arisen in connection with recent assignments:
(a) Leon Dormido is the senior in charge of the audit of the financial statements of Moreno, a limited liability
company, for the year ending 30 June 2005. Moreno’s Chief Executive Officer, James Bay, has just sent you an
e-mail to advise you that Leon has been short-listed for the position of Finance Director. You were not previously
aware that Leon had applied for the position. (5 marks)
Required:
Comment on the ethical and other professional issues raised by each of the above matters and their implications,
if any, for the continuation of each assignment.
NOTE: The mark allocation is shown against each of the three issues.
5 BARTOLOME
(a) Senior audit staff leaving for employment with client
Ethical and professional issues
■ Leon’s independence is in doubt as he is threatened by self-interest. Leon’s objectivity in relation to the audit may be
influenced by a desire to please and impress Moreno, as a prospective employer.
■ There appears to be a lack of integrity on the part of James and/or Leon:
? Leon should have confided in an appropriately senior manager/partner of Bartolome. In not doing so he has
compromised the firm by having applied for a position with a client whilst assigned to the client.
? James may lack integrity in having advised Bartolome of the short-listing if he gave an undertaking to Leon not to
do so. (Conversely, James may be acting with integrity in advising Bartolome and as a matter of professional
courtesy.)
■ Leon should be removed from the audit assignment immediately regardless of whether or not he is finally appointed by
Moreno.
■ Leon should be given an oral warning (assuming this to be a first offence) for failing to adhere to Bartolome’s quality
control policies and procedures (requiring disclosure to the firm of any threat of involvement with an audit client).
■ The working papers for all interim audit work relating to Moreno performed under the supervision of Leon should be
reviewed as soon as possible, before the balance sheet date (at the end of the month).
Implications for continuation with assignment
The assignment can be properly continued with a new senior in charge of the audit of the financial statements for the year
ending 30 June 2005. Any planning of the year end and final audit work by Leon should be reviewed, amended as necessary
and approved before any further work is undertaken.
A company predicted that the learning rate for production of a new product would be 80%. The actual learning rate was 75%. The following possible reasons were stated for this:
(i) The number of new employees recruited was lower than expected
(ii) Unexpected problems were encountered with production
(iii) Unexpected changes to Health and Safety laws meant that the company had to increase the number of breaks during production for employees
Which of the above reasons could have caused the difference between the expected rate of learning and the actual rate of learning?
A.All of the above
B.(ii) and (iii) only
C.(i) only
D.None of the above
The learning rate was actually better than expected and only (i) could cause it to improve.
Moonstar Co is a property development company which is planning to undertake a $200 million commercial property development. Moonstar Co has had some difficulties over the last few years, with some developments not generating the expected returns and the company has at times struggled to pay its finance costs. As a result Moonstar Co’s credit rating has been lowered, affecting the terms it can obtain for bank finance. Although Moonstar Co is listed on its local stock exchange, 75% of the share capital is held by members of the family who founded the company. The family members who are shareholders do not wish to subscribe for a rights issue and are unwilling to dilute their control over the company by authorising a new issue of equity shares. Moonstar Co’s board is therefore considering other methods of financing the development, which the directors believe will generate higher returns than other recent investments, as the country where Moonstar Co is based appears to be emerging from recession.
Securitisation proposals
One of the non-executive directors of Moonstar Co has proposed that it should raise funds by means of a securitisation process, transferring the rights to the rental income from the commercial property development to a special purpose vehicle. Her proposals assume that the leases will generate an income of 11% per annum to Moonstar Co over a ten-year period. She proposes that Moonstar Co should use 90% of the value of the investment for a collateralised loan obligation which should be structured as follows:
– 60% of the collateral value to support a tranche of A-rated floating rate loan notes offering investors LIBOR plus 150 basis points
– 15% of the collateral value to support a tranche of B-rated fixed rate loan notes offering investors 12%
– 15% of the collateral value to support a tranche of C-rated fixed rate loan notes offering investors 13%
– 10% of the collateral value to support a tranche as subordinated certificates, with the return being the excess of receipts over payments from the securitisation process
The non-executive director believes that there will be sufficient demand for all tranches of the loan notes from investors. Investors will expect that the income stream from the development to be low risk, as they will expect the property market to improve with the recession coming to an end and enough potential lessees to be attracted by the new development.
The non-executive director predicts that there would be annual costs of $200,000 in administering the loan. She acknowledges that there would be interest rate risks associated with the proposal, and proposes a fixed for variable interest rate swap on the A-rated floating rate notes, exchanging LIBOR for 9·5%.
However the finance director believes that the prediction of the income from the development that the non-executive director has made is over-optimistic. He believes that it is most likely that the total value of the rental income will be 5% lower than the non-executive director has forecast. He believes that there is some risk that the returns could be so low as to jeopardise the income for the C-rated fixed rate loan note holders.
Islamic finance
Moonstar Co’s chief executive has wondered whether Sukuk finance would be a better way of funding the development than the securitisation.
Moonstar Co’s chairman has pointed out that a major bank in the country where Moonstar Co is located has begun to offer a range of Islamic financial products. The chairman has suggested that a Mudaraba contract would be the most appropriate method of providing the funds required for the investment.
Required:
(a) Calculate the amounts in $ which each of the tranches can expect to receive from the securitisation arrangement proposed by the non-executive director and discuss how the variability in rental income affects the returns from the securitisation. (11 marks)
(b) Discuss the benefits and risks for Moonstar Co associated with the securitisation arrangement that the non-executive director has proposed. (6 marks)
(c) (i) Discuss the suitability of Sukuk finance to fund the investment, including an assessment of its appeal to potential investors. (4 marks)
(ii) Discuss whether a Mudaraba contract would be an appropriate method of financing the investment and discuss why the bank may have concerns about providing finance by this method. (4 marks)
(a) An annual cash flow account compares the estimated cash flows receivable from the property against the liabilities within the securitisation process. The swap introduces leverage into the arrangement.
The holders of the certificates are expected to receive $3·17million on $18 million, giving them a return of 17·6%. If the cash flows are 5% lower than the non-executive director has predicted, annual revenue received will fall to $20·90 million, reducing the balance available for the subordinated certificates to $2·07 million, giving a return of 11·5% on the subordinated certificates, which is below the returns offered on the B and C-rated loan notes. The point at which the holders of the certificates will receive nothing and below which the holders of the C-rated loan notes will not receive their full income will be an annual income of $18·83 million (a return of 9·4%), which is 14·4% less than the income that the non-executive director has forecast.
(b) Benefits
The finance costs of the securitisation may be lower than the finance costs of ordinary loan capital. The cash flows from the commercial property development may be regarded as lower risk than Moonstar Co’s other revenue streams. This will impact upon the rates that Moonstar Co is able to offer borrowers.
The securitisation matches the assets of the future cash flows to the liabilities to loan note holders. The non-executive director is assuming a steady stream of lease income over the next 10 years, with the development probably being close to being fully occupied over that period.
The securitisation means that Moonstar Co is no longer concerned with the risk that the level of earnings from the properties will be insufficient to pay the finance costs. Risks have effectively been transferred to the loan note holders.
Risks
Not all of the tranches may appeal to investors. The risk-return relationship on the subordinated certificates does not look very appealing, with the return quite likely to be below what is received on the C-rated loan notes. Even the C-rated loan note holders may question the relationship between the risk and return if there is continued uncertainty in the property sector.
If Moonstar Co seeks funding from other sources for other developments, transferring out a lower risk income stream means that the residual risks associated with the rest of Moonstar Co’s portfolio will be higher. This may affect the availability and terms of other borrowing.
It appears that the size of the securitisation should be large enough for the costs to be bearable. However Moonstar Co may face unforeseen costs, possibly unexpected management or legal expenses.
(c) (i) Sukuk finance could be appropriate for the securitisation of the leasing portfolio. An asset-backed Sukuk would be the same kind of arrangement as the securitisation, where assets are transferred to a special purpose vehicle and the returns and repayments are directly financed by the income from the assets. The Sukuk holders would bear the risks and returns of the relationship.
The other type of Sukuk would be more like a sale and leaseback of the development. Here the Sukuk holders would be guaranteed a rental, so it would seem less appropriate for Moonstar Co if there is significant uncertainty about the returns from the development.
The main issue with the asset-backed Sukuk finance is whether it would be as appealing as certainly the A-tranche of the securitisation arrangement which the non-executive director has proposed. The safer income that the securitisation offers A-tranche investors may be more appealing to investors than a marginally better return from the Sukuk. There will also be costs involved in establishing and gaining approval for the Sukuk, although these costs may be less than for the securitisation arrangement described above.
(ii) A Mudaraba contract would involve the bank providing capital for Moonstar Co to invest in the development. Moonstar Co would manage the investment which the capital funded. Profits from the investment would be shared with the bank, but losses would be solely borne by the bank. A Mudaraba contract is essentially an equity partnership, so Moonstar Co might not face the threat to its credit rating which it would if it obtained ordinary loan finance for the development. A Mudaraba contract would also represent a diversification of sources of finance. It would not require the commitment to pay interest that loan finance would involve.
Moonstar Co would maintain control over the running of the project. A Mudaraba contract would offer a method of obtaining equity funding without the dilution of control which an issue of shares to external shareholders would bring. This is likely to make it appealing to Moonstar Co’s directors, given their desire to maintain a dominant influence over the business.
The bank would be concerned about the uncertainties regarding the rental income from the development. Although the lack of involvement by the bank might appeal to Moonstar Co's directors, the bank might not find it so attractive. The bank might be concerned about information asymmetry – that Moonstar Co’s management might be reluctant to supply the bank with the information it needs to judge how well its investment is performing.
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。
- 2019-01-04
- 2019-01-04
- 2019-01-04
- 2019-01-04
- 2019-01-04
- 2019-01-04