参加ACCA考试需要带什么东西，速来看看这篇文章！

正确答案：
(iii) Cheese
■ Examine the terms of sales to Abingdon Bank – confirm the bank’s legal title (e.g. if GVF were to cease to trade
and so could not exercise buy-back option).
■ Obtain a direct confirmation from the bank of the cost of inventory sold by GVF to Abingdon Bank and the amount
re-purchased as at 30 September 2005 (the net amount being the outstanding loan).
■ Inspect the cheese as at 30 September 2005 (e.g. during the physical inventory count) paying particular attention
to the factors which indicate the age (and strength) of the cheese (e.g. its location or physical appearance).
■ Observe how the cheese is stored – if on steel shelves discuss with GVF’s management whether its net realisable
value has been reduced below cost.
■ Test check, on a sample basis, the costing records supporting the cost of batches of cheese.
■ Confirm that the cost of inventory sold to the bank is included in inventory as at 30 September 2005 and the
nature of the bank security adequately disclosed.
■ Agree the repurchase of cheese which has reached maturity at cost plus 7% per six months to purchase invoices
(or equivalent contracts) and cash book payments.
■ Test check GVF’s inventory-ageing records to production records. Confirm the carrying amount of inventory as at
30 September 2005 that will not be sold until after 30 September 2006, and agree to the amount disclosed in
the notes to inventory as a ‘non-current’ portion.

正确答案：
(ii) Strategy of the business regarding its treasury policies
Treasury policies are reviewed regularly by the Board. It is group policy to account for all financial instruments as cash
flow hedges. As a result, changes in the fair values of financial instruments are deferred in reserves to the extent the
hedge is effective and released to profit or loss in the time periods in which the hedged item impacts profit or loss.
The Group contracts fixed rate currency swaps and issues floating to fixed rate interest rate swaps to meet the objective
of protecting borrowing costs. The cash flow effects of the interest rate swaps match the cash flows on the underlying
instruments so that there is no net cash flow effect from movements in market interest rates. If the interest rate swaps
had not been transacted there could have been an increase in the annual net interest payable to the Group. The strategy
of the group is to minimise the exposure to interest rate fluctuations.

正确答案：

The Company Directors Disqualification Act (CDDA) 1986 was introduced to control individuals who persistently abused the various privileges that accompany incorporation, most particularly the privilege of limited liability. The Act applies to more than just directors and the court may make an order preventing any person (without leave of the court) from being:
(i) a director of a company;
(ii) a liquidator or administrator of a company;
(iii) a receiver or manager of a company’s property; or
(iv) in any way, whether directly or indirectly, concerned with or taking part in the promotion, formation or management of a company.
The CDDA 1986 identifies three distinct categories of conduct, which may, and in some circumstances must, lead the court to disqualify certain persons from being involved in the management of companies.
(a) General misconduct in connection with companies
This first category involves the following:
(i) A conviction for an indictable offence in connection with the promotion, formation, management or liquidation of a company or with the receivership or management of a company’s property (s.2 of the CDDA 1986). The maximum period for disqualification under s.2 is five years where the order is made by a court of summary jurisdiction, and 15 years in any other case.

(ii) Persistent breaches of companies legislation in relation to provisions which require any return, account or other document to be filed with, or notice of any matter to be given to, the registrar (s.3 of the CDDA 1986). Section 3 provides that a person is conclusively proved to be persistently in default where it is shown that, in the five years ending with the date of the application, he has been adjudged guilty of three or more defaults (s.3(2) of the CDDA 1986). This is without prejudice to proof of persistent default in any other manner. The maximum period of disqualification under this section is five years.
(iii) Fraud in connection with winding up (s.4 of the CDDA 1986). A court may make a disqualification order if, in the course of the winding up of a company, it appears that a person:
(1) has been guilty of an offence for which he is liable under s.993 of the CA 2006, that is, that he has knowingly been a party to the carrying on of the business of the company either with the intention of defrauding the company’s creditors or any other person or for any other fraudulent purpose; or
(2) has otherwise been guilty, while an officer or liquidator of the company or receiver or manager of the property of the company, of any fraud in relation to the company or of any breach of his duty as such officer, liquidator, receiver or manager (s.4(1)(b) of the CDDA 1986).
The maximum period of disqualification under this category is 15 years.(b) Disqualification for unfitness
The second category covers:
(i) disqualification of directors of companies which have become insolvent, who are found by the court to be unfit to be directors (s.6 of the CDDA 1986). Under s. 6, the minimum period of disqualification is two years, up to a maximum of 15 years;
(ii) disqualification after investigation of a company under Pt XIV of the CA 1985 (it should be noted that this part of the previous Act still sets out the procedures for company investigations) (s.8 of the CDDA 1986). Once again, the maximum period of disqualification is 15 years.
Schedule 1 to the CDDA 1986 sets out certain particulars to which the court is to have regard in deciding whether a person’s conduct as a director makes them unfit to be concerned in the management of a company. In addition, the courts have given indications as to what sort of behaviour will render a person liable to be considered unfit to act as a company director. Thus, in Re Lo-Line Electric Motors Ltd (1988), it was stated that:
‘Ordinary commercial misjudgment is in itself not sufficient to justify disqualification. In the normal case, the conduct complained of must display a lack of commercial probity, although . . . in an extreme case of gross negligence or total incompetence, disqualification could be appropriate.’

(c) Other cases for disqualification
This third category relates to:
(i) participation in fraudulent or wrongful trading under s.213 of the Insolvency Act (IA)1986 (s.10 of the CDDA 1986);
(ii) undischarged bankrupts acting as directors (s.11 of the CDDA 1986); and
(iii) failure to pay under a county court administration order (s.12 of the CDDA 1986).
For the purposes of most of the CDDA 1986, the court has discretion to make a disqualification order. Where, however, a person has been found to be an unfit director of an insolvent company, the court has a duty to make a disqualification order (s.6 of the CDDA 1986). Anyone who acts in contravention of a disqualification order is liable:
(i) to imprisonment for up to two years and/or a fine, on conviction on indictment; or
(ii) to imprisonment for up to six months and/or a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum, on conviction summarily (s.13 of the CDDA 1986).

正确答案：

(ii) [Donald’s address] [Firm’s address]
Dear Donald [Date]
I understand that you have incurred a tax loss in your first year of trading. The following options are available in respect
of this loss.
1. The first option is to use the trading loss against other forms of income in the same year. If such a claim is made,
losses are offset against income before personal allowances.
Any excess loss can still be offset against capital gains of the year. However, any offset against capital gains is
before both taper relief and annual exemptions.