请知悉！2020年6月ACCA考试时间及机考预约流程

正确答案：A

正确答案：
(a) To: John Dixon
From: Change Management consultant
Changes to policing and impact on the city’s quality of life
This is a complex problem involving different stakeholders each of which is looking for different results from the policing
system. The recognition of the need to change is one of the most difficult parts of the change process. There will be
considerable commitment to the current ways of doing things reinforced by the ways in which performance is measured. The
various stakeholders involved will have different perceptions of the problem and the need for change. They will have different
levels of power and influence and different levels of interest in seeing the change happen. Mendelow’s model for mapping
may prove useful in understanding how to handle the expectations of the different groups. The key players would clearly be
the senior officers in charge of the city’s districts who will be responsible for implementing any change in the way the city is
policed. You will have to decide how to convince these officers that a change to the way they currently do things is needed.
One suggestion is that they actually get first-hand experience of the conditions being faced by the city’s residents. Another
group with significant power and interest are the courts because if they refuse to process the cases of antisocial behaviour
then the whole strategy will fail. However, the interest of the mayor and the media in the reputation the city has gained may
be used to counter the reluctance of the courts to take on the extra workload.
One of the most popular models for understanding change and likely resistance to it, is to carry out a forcefield analysis.
Johnson, Scholes and Whittington argue that such an analysis ‘provides an initial view of change problems that need to be
tackled, by identifying forces for and against change’. They ask three key questions:
What aspects of the current situation might aid change in the desired direction, and how might these be reinforced?
What aspects of the current situation would block such a change, and how can these be overcome?
What needs to be introduced or developed to aid change?

Forcefield analysis
Pushing Resisting
Residents’ desire for safer city Police commitment to serious crime
Mayor of city – city’s reputation District focus and not city concern
John Dixon’s desire for change Traditional performance measures
Courts fear of increased workload
Police resources over committed
Forcefield analysis was first developed by Kurt Lewin and linked to his 3-step model of change where to accomplish desired
change it is necessary to get the various stakeholders to recognise the need for change and unfreeze the situation. This will
require you to use some or all of the styles of managing change explained below. One of the real problems is that each
stakeholder will feel that they have an objective view of the situation. Getting a shared view may be very difficult to achieve
and require real leadership on your part.
Once the need to change is agreed there will need to be major changes in the way the city is policed to achieve the desired
goal of eliminating antisocial behaviour and improving the quality-of-life for the city’s residents. Real change will be needed
to the way in which police resources are deployed, the systems used to police on a city rather than on a district basis and
the way results are measured and publicised. There will be a need for ‘quick wins’ to show the potential positive results
achievable with the new strategy.
Finally, rewards and sanctions must be put in place to re-enforce the desired state of affairs and prevent behaviours slipping
back to the previous position. Here you will need to look at how to refreeze the situation and clearly show how the new
position means that the goals of the city and its stakeholders are really shared.
There are many available change models for a programme such as this such as the Gemini 4Rs framework and most will
look to assess the scope of change required and the timeframe. available to achieve it. Undoubtedly, you will require many ofthe skills associated with project management in a major change programme such as this.
Yours,

正确答案：

 

When considering the shortfall
– The family’s expenditure is likely to increase as the children get older, particularly if there is a need for school fees.
– There will be a need for some cash immediately to pay for the cost of the funeral.
– It is assumed that the whole of Jane’s estate has been left to Charles such that there will be no inheritance tax on her
death.
– The shortfall may be reduced by:
(i) State benefits and tax credits.
(ii) Expenditure on non-essential items, e.g. holidays and entertainment included in the annual expenditure of
￡45,500.
(iii) The income generated by Charles if he were to return to work.
– The shortfall may be increased by additional child-care costs due to Charles being a single parent, particularly if he
returns to work full-time.
Further information required
– The level of state benefits and tax credits available to Charles.
– The current level of expenditure on non-essential items.
– The costs of child-care if Charles were to return to work.
– Details of any wills made by Charles or Jane.
– Whether Charles’ investment properties could be sold and the proceeds invested in assets with a higher annual return.
– Whether there is any value in Speak Write Ltd independent of Jane, such that the company could be sold after Jane’s
death.
Other related issues
– The couple should consider making provision for their retirement via pension contributions or some other form. of long
term investment plan.
– The couple should recognise that there would be significant financial problems if Jane were to become seriously ill. In
addition to the family’s income falling as set out above, its expenditure would probably increase.
Protection products
– Term life assurance
A qualifying life policy would pay out a tax-free lump sum on Jane’s death.
– Permanent health insurance
Would provide a regular income if Jane were unable to work due to illness.
– Critical illness insurance
Would provide a capital sum in the event of Jane being diagnosed with an insured illness.

正确答案：
1 ISLAND CO
(a) Briefing Notes
Subject: Principal Audit Risks – Island Co
Revenue Recognition – timing
Island Co raises sales invoices in three stages. There is potential for breach of IAS 18 Revenue, which states that revenue
should only be recognised once the seller has the right to receive it, in other words the seller has performed its contractual
obligations. This right does not necessarily correspond to amounts falling due for payment in accordance with an invoice
schedule agreed with a customer as part of a contract. Island Co appears to receive payment from its customers in advance
of performing any obligation, as the stage one invoice is raised when an order is confirmed i.e. before any work has actually
taken place. This creates the potential for revenue to be recognised too early, in advance of any performance of contractual
obligation. When a payment is received in advance of performance, a liability should be recognised equal to the amount
received, representing the obligation under the contract. Therefore a significant risk is that revenue is overstated and liabilities
understated.
Tutorial note: Equivalent guidance is also provided in IAS 11 Construction Contracts and credit will be awarded where
candidates discuss revenue recognition under IAS 11 as Island Co is providing a single substantial asset for a customer
under the terms of a contract.
Disputed receivable
The amount owed from Jacks Mine Co is highly material as it represents 50·9% of profit before tax, 2·3% of revenue, and
3% of total assets. The risk is that the receivable is overstated if no impairment of the disputed receivable is recognised.
Legal claim
The claim should be investigated seriously by Island Co. The chief executive officer’s (CEO) opinion that the claim will not
result in any financial consequence for Island Co is na?ve and flippant. Damages could be awarded against Island Co if it is
found that the machinery is faulty. The recurring high level of warranty provision implies that machinery faults are fairly
common and therefore the accident could be the result of a defective machine being supplied to Sawyer Co. The risk is that
no provision is created for the potential damages under IAS 37 Provisions, Contingent Liabilities and Contingent Assets, if the
likelihood of paying damages is considered probable. Alternatively, if the likelihood of damages being paid to Sawyer Co is
considered a possibility then a disclosure note should be made in the financial statements describing the nature and possible
financial effect of the contingent liability. As discussed below, the CEO, Kate Shannon, has an incentive not to make a
provision or disclose a contingent liability due to the planned share sale post year end.
A further risk is that any legal fees associated with the claim have not been accrued within the financial statements. As the
claim has arisen during the year, the expense must be included in this year’s income statement, even if the claim is still ongoing
at the year end.
The fact that the legal claim is effectively being ignored may cast doubts on the overall integrity of senior management, and
on the integrity of the financial statements. Management representations should be approached with a degree of professional
scepticism during the audit.
Sawyer Co has cancelled two orders. If the amounts are still outstanding at the year end then it is highly likely that Sawyer
Co will not pay the invoiced amounts, and thus receivables are overstated. If the stage one payments have already been made,
then Sawyer Co may claim a refund, in which case a provision should be made to repay the amount, or a contingent liability
disclosed in a note to the financial statements.
Sawyer Co is one of only five major customers, and losing this customer could have future going concern implications for
Island Co if a new source of revenue cannot be found to replace the lost income stream from Sawyer Co. If the legal claim
becomes public knowledge, and if Island Co is found to have supplied faulty machinery, then it will be difficult to attract new
customers.
A case of this nature could bring bad publicity to Island Co, a potential going concern issue if it results in any of the five key
customers terminating orders with Island Co. The auditors should plan to extend the going concern work programme to
incorporate the issues noted above.
Inventories
Work in progress is material to the financial statements, representing 8·9% of total assets. The inventory count was held two
weeks prior to the year end. There is an inherent risk that the valuation has not been correctly rolled forward to a year end
position.
The key risk is the estimation of the stage of completion of work in progress. This is subjective, and knowledge appears to
be confined to the chief engineer. Inventory could be overvalued if the machines are assessed to be more complete than they
actually are at the year end. Absorption of labour costs and overheads into each machine is a complex calculation and must
be done consistently with previous years.
It will also be important that consumable inventories not yet utilised on a machine, e.g. screws, nuts and bolts, are correctly
valued and included as inventories of raw materials within current assets.
Overseas supplier
As the supplier is new, controls may not yet have been established over the recording of foreign currency transactions.
Inherent risk is high as the trade payable should be retranslated using the year end exchange rate per IAS 21 The Effects of
Changes in Foreign Exchange Rates. If the retranslation is not performed at the year end, the trade payable could be
significantly over or under valued, depending on the movement of the dollar to euro exchange rate between the purchase date
and the year end. The components should remain at historic cost within inventory valuation and should not be retranslated
at the year end.
Warranty provision
The warranty provision is material at 2·6% of total assets (2006 – 2·7%). The provision has increased by only $100,000,
an increase of 4·2%, compared to a revenue increase of 21·4%. This could indicate an underprovision as the percentage
change in revenue would be expected to be in line with the percentage change in the warranty provision, unless significant
improvements had been made to the quality of machines installed for customers during the year. This appears unlikely given
the legal claim by Sawyer Co, and the machines installed at Jacks Mine Co operating inefficiently. The basis of the estimate
could be understated to avoid charging the increase in the provision as an expense through the income statement. This is of
special concern given that it is the CEO and majority shareholder who estimates the warranty provision.
Majority shareholder
Kate Shannon exerts control over Island Co via a majority shareholding, and by holding the position of CEO. This greatly
increases the inherent risk that the financial statements could be deliberately misstated, i.e. overvaluation of assets,
undervaluation of liabilities, and thus overstatement of profits. The risk is severe at this year end as Kate Shannon is hoping
to sell some Island Co shares post year end. As the price that she receives for these shares will be to a large extent influenced
by the balance sheet position of the company at 30 November 2007, she has a definite interest in manipulating the financial
statements for her own personal benefit. For example:
– Not recognising a provision or contingent liability for the legal claim from Sawyer Co
– Not providing for the potentially irrecoverable receivable from Jacks Mines Co
– Not increasing the warranty provision
– Recognising revenue earlier than permitted by IAS 18 Revenue.
Related party transactions
Kate Shannon controls Island Co and also controls Pacific Co. Transactions between the two companies should be disclosed
per IAS 24 Related Party Disclosures. There is risk that not all transactions have been disclosed, or that a transaction has
been disclosed at an inappropriate value. Details of the lease contract between the two companies should be disclosed within
a note to the financial statements, in particular, any amounts owed from Island Co to Pacific Co at 30 November 2007 should
be disclosed.
Other issues
– Kate Shannon wants the audit to be completed as soon as possible, which brings forward the deadline for completion
of the audit. The audit team may not have time to complete all necessary procedures, or there may not be time for
adequate reviews to be carried out on the work performed. Detection risk, and thus audit risk is increased, and the
overall quality of the audit could be jeopardised.
– This is especially important given that this is the first year audit and therefore the audit team will be working with a
steep learning curve. Audit procedures may take longer than originally planned, yet there is little time to extend
procedures where necessary.
– Kate Shannon may also exert considerable influence on the members of the audit team to ensure that the financial
statements show the best possible position of Island Co in view of her share sale. It is crucial that the audit team
members adhere strictly to ethical guidelines and that independence is beyond question.
– Due to the seriousness of the matters noted above, a final matter to be considered at the planning stage is that a second
partner review (Engagement Quality Control Review) should be considered for the audit this year end. A suitable
independent reviewer should be indentified, and time planned and budgeted for at the end of the assignment.
Conclusion
From the range of issues discussed in these briefing notes, it can be seen that the audit of Island Co will be a relatively high
risk engagement.