湖北省考生有本科学历但还在读双学位可以考ACCA国际会计师吗？

正确答案：
(ii) The summary analysis in (a)(i) shows that using overall points gained, Michaelangelotown has achieved the best
performance with 12 points. Donatellotown and Leonardotown have achieved a reasonable level of performance with
eight points each. Raphaeltown has under performed, however, gaining only four out of the available 12 points.
Michaelangelotown is the only depot to have achieved both an increase in revenue over budget and an increased
profit:revenue percentage.
In the customer care and service delivery statistics, Michaelangelotown has achieved all six of the target standards,
Donatellotown four; Leonardotown three. The Raphaeltown statistic of achieving only one out of six targets indicates the
need for investigation.
With regard to the credit control and administrative efficiency statistics, Leonardotown and Michaelangelotown achieved
all four standards and Donatellotown achieved three of the four standards. Once again, Raphaeltown is the ‘poor
performer’ achieving only two of the four standards.

正确答案：
(b) Sale of industrial equipment
(i) Matters
■ The industrial equipment was in use for nine years (from April 1996) and would have had a carrying value of
$660,000 at 31 March 2005 (11/20 × $1·2m – assuming nil residual value and a full year’s depreciation charge
in the year of acquisition and none in the year of disposal). Disposal proceeds were therefore only $360,000.
■ The $0·3m loss represents 15% of PBT (for the year to 31 March 2006) and is therefore material. The equipment
was material to the balance sheet at 31 March 2005 representing 2·6% of total assets ($0·66/$25·7 × 100).
■ Separate disclosure, of a material loss on disposal, on the face of the income statement is in accordance with
IAS 16 ‘Property, Plant and Equipment’. However, in accordance with IAS 1 ‘Presentation of Financial Statements’,
it should not be captioned in any way that might suggest that it is not part of normal operating activities (i.e. not
‘extraordinary’, ‘exceptional’, etc).
Tutorial note: However, note that if there is a prior period error to be accounted for (see later), there would be
no impact on the current period income statement requiring consideration of any disclosure.
■ The reason for the sale. For example, whether the equipment was:
– surplus to operating requirements (i.e. not being replaced); or
– being replaced with newer equipment (thereby contributing to the $8·1m increase (33·8 – 25·7) in total
assets).
■ The reason for the loss on sale. For example, whether:
– the sale was at an under-value (e.g. to a related party);
– the equipment had a bad maintenance history (or was otherwise impaired);
– the useful life of the equipment is less than 20 years;
– there is any deferred consideration not yet recorded;
– any non-cash disposal proceeds have been overlooked (e.g. if another asset was acquired in a part-exchange).
■ If the useful life was less than 20 years, tangible non-current assets may be materially overstated in respect of other
items of equipment that are still in use and being depreciated on the same basis.
■ If the sale was to a related party then additional disclosure should be required in a note to the financial statements
for the year to 31 March 2006 (IAS 24 ‘Related Party Disclosures’).
Tutorial note: Since there are no specific pointers to a related party transaction (RPT), this point is not expanded
on.
■ Whether the sale was identified in the prior year audit’s post balance sheet event review. If so:
– the disclosure made in the prior year’s financial statements (IAS 10 ‘Events After the Balance Sheet Date’);
– whether an impairment loss was recognised at 31 March 2005.
■ If not, and the equipment was impaired at 31 March 2005, a prior period error should be accounted for (IAS 8
‘Accounting Policies, Changes in Accounting Estimates and Errors’). An impairment loss of $0·3m would have
been material to prior year profit (12·5%).
Tutorial note: Unless this was a RPT or the impairment arose after 31 March 2005 a prior period adjustment
should be made.
■ Failure to account for a prior period error (if any) would result in modification of the audit opinion ‘except for’ noncompliance
with IAS 8 (in the current year) and IAS 36 (in the prior period).
(ii) Audit evidence
■ Carrying amount ($0·66m as above) agreed to the non-current asset register balances at 31 March 2005 and
recalculation of the loss on disposal.
■ Cost and accumulated depreciation removed from the asset register in the year to 31 March 2006.
■ Receipt of proceeds per cash book agreed to bank statement.
■ Sales invoice transferring title to Deakin.
■ A review of maintenance expenses and records (e.g. to confirm reason for loss on sale).
■ Post balance sheet event review on prior year audit working papers file.
■ Management representation confirming that Deakin is not a related party (provided that there is no evidence to
suggest otherwise).

正确答案：
(b) There are several issues which need to be addressed when developing IFRSs for SMEs:
(i) The purpose of the standards and type of entity
The principal aim of the development of an accounting framework for SMEs is to provide a framework which generates
relevant, reliable and useful information. The standards should provide high quality and understandable accounting
standards suitable for SMEs globally. Additionally they should meet the needs set out in (a) above. For example reduce
the financial reporting burden for SMEs. It is unlikely that one of the objectives would be to provide information for
management or meet the needs of the tax authorities as these bodies will have specific requirements which would be
difficult to meet in an accounting standard. However, it is likely that the standards for SMEs will be a modified version
of the full IFRSs and not an independently developed set of standards in order that they are based on the same
conceptual framework and will allow easier transition to full IFRS if the SME grows or decides to become a publicly listed
entity.
It is important to define the type of entity for which the standards are intended. Companies who have issued shares to
the public would be expected to use full IFRS. The question arises as to whether SME standards should apply to all
unlisted entities or just those listed entities below a certain size threshold. The difficulty with size criteria is that it would
have to apply worldwide and it would be very difficult to specify such criteria. Additionally some unlisted companies, for
example public utilities, have a reporting obligation that is equivalent to that of a listed company and should follow full
IFRS.
The main characteristic which distinguishes SMEs from other entities is the degree of public accountability. Thus the
definition of what constitutes an SME could revolve around those entities that do not have public accountability.
Indicators of public accountability will have to be developed. For example, a listed company or companies holding assets
in a fiduciary capacity (bank), or a public utility, or an entity with economic significance in its country. Thus all entities
that do not have public accountability may be considered as potential users of IFRSs for SMEs.
Size may not be the best way to determine what is an SME. SMEs could be defined by reference to ownership and themanagement of the entity. SMEs are not necessarily just smaller versions of public companies.