我想请教各位大神些，怎样学习ACCAP5。三个...

发布时间：2021-04-16

我想请教各位大神些，怎样学习ACCAP5。三个月备考时间够吗？

最佳答案

从时间来说没问题的，关键在于你之前的基础如何，以及你的英文阅读理解以及表达能力如何?这两门就是相当于运用之前学习的科目内容进行案例分析，如果你的基础与表达能力不行的话，两门过的几率都不高，当然如果你再这两门多花点精力这三个月，还是有机会的，至于多大那就要看你个人的学习理解了。


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。

(ii) Comment briefly on the use of its own tree plantations as a source of raw materials by Our Timbers Ltd.

(3 marks)

正确答案：
(ii) The use of its own tree plantations as a source of raw materials not only ensures available supplies of timber but may
also demonstrate that the directors of Our Timbers Ltd are mindful of the need for careful planning in the consumption
of natural resources. This concern with the need to protect the environment will enhance the reputation of Our Timbers
Ltd as an environmentally-conscious organisation which in turn may translate into a source of competitive advantage
since contemporary thought is very much focused on the environmental responsibilities of organisations with particular
regard to the use of natural resources such as timber.

(c) Advise Alan on the proposed disposal of the shares in Mobile Ltd. Your answer should include calculations

of the potential capital gain, and explain any options available to Alan to reduce this tax liability. (7 marks)

正确答案：

 

However, an exemption from corporation tax exists for any gain arising when a trading company (or member of a trading
group) sells the whole or any part of a substantial shareholding in another trading company.
A substantial shareholding is one where the investing company holds 10% of the ordinary share capital and is beneficially
entitled to at least 10% of the
(i) profits available for distribution to equity holders and
(ii) assets of the company available for distribution to equity holders on a winding up.
In meeting the 10% test, shares owned by a chargeable gains group may be amalgamated. The 10% test must have been
met for a continuous 12 month period during the 2 years preceding the disposal.
The companies making the disposals must have been trading companies (or members of a trading group) throughout the
12 month period, as well as at the date of disposal. In addition, they must also be trading companies (or members of a trading
group) immediately after the disposal.
The exemption is given automatically, and acts to deny losses as well as eliminate gains.
While Alantech Ltd has owned its holding in Mobile Ltd for 33 months, its ownership of the Boron holding has only lasted
for 10 months (at 1 June 2005) since Boron was acquired on 1 July 2004. Selling the shares in June 2005 will fail the
12 month test, and the gain will become chargeable.
It would be better for the companies to wait for a further month until July 2005 before selling the amalgamated shareholding.
By doing so, they will both be able to take advantage of the substantial shareholdings relief, thereby saving tax of ￡29,625
assuming a corporation tax rate of 19%.

3 You are the manager responsible for the audit of Lamont Co. The company’s principal activity is wholesaling frozen

fish. The draft consolidated financial statements for the year ended 31 March 2007 show revenue of $67·0 million

(2006 – $62·3 million), profit before taxation of $11·9 million (2006 – $14·2 million) and total assets of

$48·0 million (2006 – $36·4 million).

The following issues arising during the final audit have been noted on a schedule of points for your attention:

(a) In early 2007 a chemical leakage from refrigeration units owned by Lamont caused contamination of some of its

property. Lamont has incurred $0·3 million in clean up costs, $0·6 million in modernisation of the units to

prevent future leakage and a $30,000 fine to a regulatory agency. Apart from the fine, which has been expensed,

these costs have been capitalised as improvements. (7 marks)

Required:

For each of the above issues:

(i) comment on the matters that you should consider; and

(ii) state the audit evidence that you should expect to find,

in undertaking your review of the audit working papers and financial statements of Lamont Co for the year ended

31 March 2007.

NOTE: The mark allocation is shown against each of the three issues.

正确答案：
3 LAMONT CO
(a) Chemical leakage
(i) Matters
■ $30,000 fine is very immaterial (just 1/4% profit before tax). This is revenue expenditure and it is correct that it
has been expensed to the income statement.
■ $0·3 million represents 0·6% total assets and 2·5% profit before tax and is not material on its own. $0·6 million
represents 1·2% total assets and 5% profit before tax and is therefore material to the financial statements.
■ The $0·3 million clean-up costs should not have been capitalised as the condition of the property is not improved
as compared with its condition before the leakage occurred. Although not material in isolation this amount should
be adjusted for and expensed, thereby reducing the aggregate of uncorrected misstatements.
■ It may be correct that $0·6 million incurred in modernising the refrigeration units should be capitalised as a major
overhaul (IAS 16 Property, Plant and Equipment). However, any parts scrapped as a result of the modernisation
should be treated as disposals (i.e. written off to the income statement).
■ The carrying amount of the refrigeration units at 31 March 2007, including the $0·6 million for modernisation,
should not exceed recoverable amount (i.e. the higher of value in use and fair value less costs to sell). If it does,
an allowance for the impairment loss arising must be recognised in accordance with IAS 36 Impairment of Assets.
(ii) Audit evidence
■ A breakdown/analysis of costs incurred on the clean-up and modernisation amounting to $0·3 million and
$0·6 million respectively.
■ Agreement of largest amounts to invoices from suppliers/consultants/sub-contractors, etc and settlement thereof
traced from the cash book to the bank statement.
■ Physical inspection of the refrigeration units to confirm their modernisation and that they are in working order. (Do
they contain frozen fish?)
■ Sample of components selected from the non-current asset register traced to the refrigeration units and inspected
to ensure continuing existence.
■ $30,000 penalty notice from the regulatory agency and corresponding cash book payment/payment per the bank
statement.
■ Written management representation that there are no further penalties that should be provided for or disclosed other
than the $30,000 that has been accounted for.

4 (a) For this part, assume today’s date is 1 March 2006.

Bill and Ben each own 50% of the ordinary share capital in Flower Limited, an unquoted UK trading company

that makes electronic toys. Flower Limited was incorporated on 1 August 2005 with 1,000 ￡1 ordinary shares,

and commenced trading on the same day. The business has been successful, and the company has accumulated

a large cash balance of ￡180,000, which is to be used to purchase a new factory. However, Bill and Ben have

received an offer from a rival company, which they are considering. The offer provides Bill and Ben with two

alternative methods of payment for the purchase of their shares:

(i) ￡480,000 for the company, inclusive of the ￡180,000 cash balance.

(ii) ￡300,000 for the company assuming the cash available for the factory purchase is extracted prior to sale.

Bill and Ben each currently receive a gross salary of ￡3,750 per month from Flower Limited. Part of the offer

terms is that Bill and Ben would be retained as employees of the company on the same salary.

Neither Bill nor Ben has used any of their capital gains tax annual exemption for the tax year 2005/06.

Required:

(i) Calculate which of the following means of extracting the ￡180,000 from Flower Limited on 31 March

2006 will result in the highest after tax cash amount for Bill and Ben:

(1) payment of a dividend, or

(2) payment of a salary bonus.

You are not required to consider the corporation tax (CT) implications for Flower Limited in your

answer. (5 marks)

正确答案：

 

As a result, Bill and Ben would each be better off by ￡15,005 (69,142 – 54,137). If the cash were extracted by way
of dividend.
Tutorial note: In this answer the employers’ national insurance liability on the salary has been ignored. Credit would be
given to a candidate who recognised this issue.

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。

站内搜索
热门标签