考生看过来!ACCA考试成绩查询已公布!

正确答案：
(b) IAS16 ‘Property, Plant and Equipment’ permits assets to be revalued on a class by class basis. The different characteristics
of the buildings allow them to be classified separately. Different measurement models can, therefore, be used for the office
buildings and the film studios. However, IAS8 ‘Accounting policies, changes in accounting estimates and errors’ says that
once an entity has decided on its accounting policies, it should apply them consistently from period to period and across all
relevant transactions. An entity can change its accounting policies but only in specific circumstances. These circumstances
are:
(a) where there is a new accounting standard or interpretation or changes to an accounting standard
(b) where the change results in the financial statements providing reliable and more relevant information about the effects
of transactions, other events or conditions on the entity’s financial position, financial performance, or cash flows
Voluntary changes in accounting policies are quite uncommon but may occur when an accounting policy is no longer
appropriate. Router will have to ensure that the change in accounting policy meets the criteria in IAS8. Additionally,
depreciated historical cost will have to be calculated for the film studios at the commencement of the period and the opening
balance on the revaluation reserve and any other affected component of equity adjusted. The comparative amounts for each
prior period should be presented as if the new accounting policy had always been applied. There are limits on retrospective
application on the grounds of impracticability.
It is surprising that the lease of the land is considered to be a finance lease under IAS17 ‘Leases’. Land is considered to have
an indefinite life and should, therefore normally be classified as an operating lease unless ownership passes to the lessee
during the lease term. The lease of the land should be separated out from the lease and treated individually. The value of the
land so determined would be taken off the balance sheet in terms of the liability and asset and the lease payments treated
as rentals in the income statement. A prior period adjustment should also be made. The buildings would continue to be
treated as property, plant and equipment (PPE) and the carrying amount not adjusted. However, the remaining useful life of
the building should be revised to reflect the shorter lease term. This will result in the carrying amount being depreciated over
the shorter period. This change to the depreciation policy is applied prospectively not retrospectively.
The lease liability must be assessed for derecognition under IAS39 ‘Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement’,
because of the revision of the lease terms, in order to determine whether the new terms are substantially different from the
old. The purpose of this is to determine whether the change in terms is a modification or an extinguishment. The change
seems to constitute a ‘modification’ because there is little change to the terms. The lease liability is, therefore, amended by
deducting the one off payment ($10 million) from the carrying amount (after adjustment for the lease of land) together with
any transaction costs. The lease liability is then remeasured to the present value of the revised future cash flows, discounted
using the original effective interest rate. Any adjustment made in remeasuring the lease liability will be taken to the income
statement.

正确答案：
(ii) Deema Co
The claim is an event after the balance sheet date. If the accident occurred prior to the year end of 30 September 2007,
the claim gives additional evidence of a year end condition, and thus meets the definition of an adjusting post balance
sheet event. In this case the matter appears to have been properly disclosed in the notes to the financial statements per
IAS 10 Events After the Balance Sheet Date and IAS 37 Provisions, Contingent Liabilities and Contingent Assets. A
provision would only be necessary if the claim was probable to succeed and there is sufficient appropriate evidence that
this is not the case. There is therefore no disagreement, and no limitation on scope.
Therefore the senior is correct to propose an unqualified opinion.
However, it is not necessary for the audit report to contain an emphasis of matter paragraph.
ISA 701 Modifications to the Independent Auditor’s Report states that an emphasis of matter paragraph should be used
to highlight a matter where there is significant uncertainty.
Uncertainties are normally only regarded as significant if they involve a level of concern about the going concern status
of the company or would have an unusually great effect on the financial statements. This is not the case here as there
is enough cash to pay the damages in the unlikely event that the claim goes against Deema Co. This appears to be a
one-off situation with a low risk of the estimate being subject to change and thus there is no significant uncertainty.

正确答案：
(b)(i)Price/earningsratiomethodEarningspershareofNGN=80cpersharePrice/earningsratioofKFPCo=8SharepriceofNGN=80x8=640cor$6·40NumberofordinarysharesofNGN=5/0·5=10millionsharesValueofNGN=6·40x10m=$64millionHowever,itcanbearguedthatareductionintheappliedprice/earningsratioisneededasNGNisunlistedandthereforeitssharesaremoredifficulttobuyandsellthanthoseofalistedcompanysuchasKFPCo.Ifwereducetheappliedprice/earningsratioby10%(othersimilarpercentagereductionswouldbeacceptable),itbecomes7·2timesandthevalueofNGNwouldbe(80/100)x7·2x10m=$57·6million(ii)DividendgrowthmodelDividendpershareofNGN=80cx0·45=36cpershareSincethepayoutratiohasbeenmaintainedforseveralyears,recentearningsgrowthisthesameasrecentdividendgrowth,i.e.4·5%.Assumingthatthisdividendgrowthcontinuesinthefuture,thefuturedividendgrowthratewillbe4·5%.Sharepricefromdividendgrowthmodel=(36x1·045)/(0·12–0·045)=502cor$5·02ValueofNGN=5·02x10m=$50·2million(c)Adiscussionofcapitalstructurecouldstartfromrecognisingthatequityismoreexpensivethandebtbecauseoftherelativeriskofthetwosourcesoffinance.Equityisriskierthandebtandsoequityismoreexpensivethandebt.Thisdoesnotdependonthetaxefficiencyofdebt,sincewecanassumethatnotaxesexist.Wecanalsoassumethatasacompanygearsup,itreplacesequitywithdebt.Thismeansthatthecompany’scapitalbaseremainsconstantanditsweightedaveragecostofcapital(WACC)isnotaffectedbyincreasinginvestment.Thetraditionalviewofcapitalstructureassumesanon-linearrelationshipbetweenthecostofequityandfinancialrisk.Asacompanygearsup,thereisinitiallyverylittleincreaseinthecostofequityandtheWACCdecreasesbecausethecostofdebtislessthanthecostofequity.Apointisreached,however,wherethecostofequityrisesataratethatexceedsthereductioneffectofcheaperdebtandtheWACCstartstoincrease.Inthetraditionalview,therefore,aminimumWACCexistsand,asaresult,amaximumvalueofthecompanyarises.ModiglianiandMillerassumedaperfectcapitalmarketandalinearrelationshipbetweenthecostofequityandfinancialrisk.Theyarguedthat,asacompanygearedup,thecostofequityincreasedataratethatexactlycancelledoutthereductioneffectofcheaperdebt.WACCwasthereforeconstantatalllevelsofgearingandnooptimalcapitalstructure,wherethevalueofthecompanywasatamaximum,couldbefound.Itwasarguedthattheno-taxassumptionmadebyModiglianiandMillerwasunrealistic,sinceintherealworldinterestpaymentswereanallowableexpenseincalculatingtaxableprofitandsotheeffectivecostofdebtwasreducedbyitstaxefficiency.Theyrevisedtheirmodeltoincludethistaxeffectandshowedthat,asaresult,theWACCdecreasedinalinearfashionasacompanygearedup.Thevalueofthecompanyincreasedbythevalueofthe‘taxshield’andanoptimalcapitalstructurewouldresultbygearingupasmuchaspossible.Itwaspointedoutthatmarketimperfectionsassociatedwithhighlevelsofgearing,suchasbankruptcyriskandagencycosts,wouldlimittheextenttowhichacompanycouldgearup.Inpractice,therefore,itappearsthatcompaniescanreducetheirWACCbyincreasinggearing,whileavoidingthefinancialdistressthatcanariseathighlevelsofgearing.Ithasfurtherbeensuggestedthatcompanieschoosethesourceoffinancewhich,foronereasonoranother,iseasiestforthemtoaccess(peckingordertheory).Thisresultsinaninitialpreferenceforretainedearnings,followedbyapreferencefordebtbeforeturningtoequity.TheviewsuggeststhatcompaniesmaynotinpracticeseektominimisetheirWACC(andconsequentlymaximisecompanyvalueandshareholderwealth).TurningtothesuggestionthatdebtcouldbeusedtofinanceacashbidforNGN,thecurrentandpostacquisitioncapitalstructuresandtheirrelativegearinglevelsshouldbeconsidered,aswellastheamountofdebtfinancethatwouldbeneeded.Earliercalculationssuggestthatatleast$58mwouldbeneeded,ignoringanypremiumpaidtopersuadetargetcompanyshareholderstoselltheirshares.Thecurrentdebt/equityratioofKFPCois60%(15m/25m).Thedebtofthecompanywouldincreaseby$58minordertofinancethebidandbyafurther$20maftertheacquisition,duetotakingontheexistingdebtofNGN,givingatotalof$93m.Ignoringotherfactors,thegearingwouldincreaseto372%(93m/25m).KFPCowouldneedtoconsiderhowitcouldservicethisdangerouslyhighlevelofgearinganddealwiththesignificantriskofbankruptcythatitmightcreate.ItwouldalsoneedtoconsiderwhetherthebenefitsarisingfromtheacquisitionofNGNwouldcompensateforthesignificantincreaseinfinancialriskandbankruptcyriskresultingfromusingdebtfinance.