必读!2020年12月ACCA考试时间安排以及考试规则

发布时间:2020-04-29


今天为大家分享2020ACCA考试时间信息,希望各位参加202012ACCA考试的学员,尽早准备,合理安排ACCA复习时间。现在一起来看看吧。

考试规则:

考生在到达考场并进行签到后,如因特殊原因需要离场,请主动联系监考人员,请勿擅自离开。

可接受的证件类型包括有效期内的护照、驾照和身份证。过期证件、学生证等非国家官方发布的证件不属于有效证件。

请勿携带贵重物品前往考场。

入场前请提前将手机及其它电子产品关闭,包括闹钟及任何提示音,并放在指定区域,请勿随身携带。如考试期间发现随身携带有手机及其他智能电子产品,将被视为违规行为。

任何书籍、笔记、或者其他与考试相关材料都需存放在指定区域,不可带入考试座位。如在考试期间发现随身携带任何此类相关材料,将被视为违规行为。

考试中可以使用不具备编程功能、无线通讯功能和文字存储功能的科学计算器,有其他额外功能的计算器不允许使用,监考人员有权暂时收走不符合要求的计算器。计算器请提前准备好,现场没有备用计算器提供,考试期间也不能互相借用。

入场后请根据监考指示,按照座位上的号码对号入座,并将身份证件和准考证放在桌角,以便监考进行二次核对。

考生入座后切勿随意触碰键盘鼠标等考试物品,以免影响考试正常开始。

考试开始之后,监考会给每位考生发放一张草稿纸,考试结束后会收回。如果考试期间需要更多的草稿纸,请举手向监考申请。请勿在草稿纸以外的区域书写,比如在准考证或者其他纸张上打草稿等。

以上就是今天分享的全部内容了,各位备考12ACCA考试的小伙伴要坚持每日学习,制定学习计划,预祝各位顺利通过考试,如需了解更多ACCA考试的相关内容,请继续关注51题库考试学习网!


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。

(c) Issue of bond

The club proposes to issue a 7% bond with a face value of $50 million on 1 January 2007 at a discount of 5%

that will be secured on income from future ticket sales and corporate hospitality receipts, which are approximately

$20 million per annum. Under the agreement the club cannot use the first $6 million received from corporate

hospitality sales and reserved tickets (season tickets) as this will be used to repay the bond. The money from the

bond will be used to pay for ground improvements and to pay the wages of players.

The bond will be repayable, both capital and interest, over 15 years with the first payment of $6 million due on

31 December 2007. It has an effective interest rate of 7·7%. There will be no active market for the bond and

the company does not wish to use valuation models to value the bond. (6 marks)

Required:

Discuss how the above proposals would be dealt with in the financial statements of Seejoy for the year ending

31 December 2007, setting out their accounting treatment and appropriateness in helping the football club’s

cash flow problems.

(Candidates do not need knowledge of the football finance sector to answer this question.)

正确答案:

(c) Issue of bond
This form. of financing a football club’s operations is known as ‘securitisation’. Often in these cases a special purpose vehicle
is set up to administer the income stream or assets involved. In this case, a special purpose vehicle has not been set up. The
benefit of securitisation of the future corporate hospitality sales and season ticket receipts is that there will be a capital
injection into the club and it is likely that the effective interest rate is lower because of the security provided by the income
from the receipts. The main problem with the planned raising of capital is the way in which the money is to be used. The
use of the bond for ground improvements can be commended as long term cash should be used for long term investment but
using the bond for players’ wages will cause liquidity problems for the club.
This type of securitisation is often called a ‘future flow’ securitisation. There is no existing asset transferred to a special purpose
vehicle in this type of transaction and, therefore, there is no off balance sheet effect. The bond is shown as a long term liability
and is accounted for under IAS39 ‘Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement’. There are no issues of
derecognition of assets as there can be in other securitisation transactions. In some jurisdictions there are legal issues in
assigning future receivables as they constitute an unidentifiable debt which does not exist at present and because of this
uncertainty often the bond holders will require additional security such as a charge on the football stadium.
The bond will be a financial liability and it will be classified in one of two ways:
(i) Financial liabilities at fair value through profit or loss include financial liabilities that the entity either has incurred for
trading purposes and, where permitted, has designated to the category at inception. Derivative liabilities are always
treated as held for trading unless they are designated and effective as hedging instruments. An example of a liability held
for trading is an issued debt instrument that the entity intends to repurchase in the near term to make a gain from shortterm
movements in interest rates. It is unlikely that the bond will be classified in this category.
(ii) The second category is financial liabilities measured at amortised cost. It is the default category for financial liabilities
that do not meet the criteria for financial liabilities at fair value through profit or loss. In most entities, most financial
liabilities will fall into this category. Examples of financial liabilities that generally would be classified in this category are
account payables, note payables, issued debt instruments, and deposits from customers. Thus the bond is likely to be
classified under this heading. When a financial liability is recognised initially in the balance sheet, the liability is
measured at fair value. Fair value is the amount for which a liability can be settled between knowledgeable, willing
parties in an arm’s length transaction. Since fair value is a market transaction price, on initial recognition fair value will
usually equal the amount of consideration received for the financial liability. Subsequent to initial recognition financial
liabilities are measured using amortised cost or fair value. In this case the company does not wish to use valuation
models nor is there an active market for the bond and, therefore, amortised cost will be used to measure the bond.
The bond will be shown initially at $50 million × 95%, i.e. $47·5 million as this is the consideration received. Subsequentlyat 31 December 2007, the bond will be shown as follows:


(iii) Can audit teams cross sell services to their clients? (4 marks)

Required:

For EACH of the three FAQs, explain the threats to objectivity that may arise and the safeguards that should

be available to manage them to an acceptable level.

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

正确答案:
(iii) Cross selling services
The practice of cross selling is intended to give incentives to members of audit teams to concentrate their efforts on the
selling of non-audit services to audit clients.
It is not inappropriate for an audit firm to cross sell or for members of the audit team to recognise on an ongoing basis
the need of a client to have non audit services. However it should not be an aim of the audit team member to seek out
such opportunities.
Boleyn should have policies and procedures to ensure that, in relation to each audit client:
■ the objectives of the members of the audit team do not include selling of non-audit services to the audit client;
■ the criteria for evaluating the performance of members of the audit team do not include success in selling nonaudit
services to the audit client;
■ no specific element of remuneration of a member of the audit team and no decision concerning promotion within
the audit firm is based on his or her success in selling non-audit services to the audit client; and
■ the ethics partner being available for consultation when needed.
Therefore objectives such as the following are inappropriate:
■ to meet a quota of opportunities;
■ to specifically make time to discuss with clients which non-audit services they should consider;
■ to develop identified selling opportunities.
An audit engagement partner’s performance should be judged on the quality and integrity of the audit only. There are
no restrictions on normal partnership profit-sharing arrangements.

4 When a prominent football club, whose shares were listed, announced that it was to build a new stadium on land

near to its old stadium, opinion was divided. Many of the club’s fans thought it a good idea because it would be more

comfortable for them when watching games. A number of problems arose, however, when it was pointed out that the

construction of the new stadium and its car parking would have a number of local implications. The local government

authority said that building the stadium would involve diverting roads and changing local traffic flow, but that it would

grant permission to build the stadium if those issues could be successfully addressed. A number of nearby residents

complained that the new stadium would be too near their homes and that it would destroy the view from their gardens.

Helen Yusri, who spoke on behalf of the local residents, said that the residents would fight the planning application

through legal means if necessary. A nearby local inner-city wildlife reservation centre said that the stadium’s

construction might impact on local water levels and therefore upset the delicate balance of animals and plants in the

wildlife centre. A local school, whose pupils often visited the wildlife centre, joined in the opposition, saying that whilst

the school supported the building of a new stadium in principle, it had concerns about disruption to the wildlife centre.

The football club’s board was alarmed by the opposition to its planned new stadium as it had assumed that it would

be welcomed because the club had always considered itself a part of the local community. The club chairman said

that he wanted to maintain good relations with all local people if possible, but at the same time he owed it to the fans

and the club’s investors to proceed with the building of the new stadium despite local concerns.

Required:

(a) Define ‘stakeholder’ and explain the importance of identifying all the stakeholders in the stadium project.

(10 marks)

正确答案:
4 (a) Stakeholders
Definition
There are a number of definitions of a stakeholder. Freeman (1984), for example, defined a stakeholder in terms of any
organisation or person that can affect or be affected by the policies or activities of an entity. Hence stakeholding can result
from one of two directions: being able to affect and possibly influence an organisation or, conversely, being influenced by it.
Any engagement with an organisation in whom a stake is held may be voluntary or involuntary in nature.
Tutorial note: any definition of a stakeholder that identifies bi-directional influence will be equally valid.
Importance of identifying all stakeholders
Knowledge of the stakeholders in the stadium project is important for a number of reasons. This will involve surveying
stakeholders that can either affect or be affected by the building of the stadium. In some cases, stakeholders will be
bi-directional in their stakeholding (claim) upon the stadium project. Stakeholders in the stadium project include the local
government authority, the local residents, the wildlife centre, the local school and the football club’s fans.
Stakeholder identification is necessary to gain an understanding of the sources of risks and disruption. Some external
stakeholders, such as the local government authority, offer a risk to the project and knowledge of the nature of the claim made
upon the football club by the stakeholder will be important in risk assessment.
Stakeholder identification is important in terms of assessing the sources of influence over the objectives and outcomes for the
project (such as identified in the Mendelow model). In strategic analysis, stakeholder influence is assessed in terms of each
stakeholder’s power and interest, with higher power and higher interest combining to generate the highest influence. In the
case, it is likely that the fans are more influential on the club’s objectives than, say, the local wildlife centre, as they have
more economic power over the club.
It is necessary in order to identify areas of conflict and tension between stakeholders, especially relevant when it is likely that
stakeholders of influence will be in disagreement over the outcomes for the project. In this case, for example, the claims of
the football club board and the local residents are in conflict.
There is a moral case for knowledge of how decisions affect people both inside the organisation or (as is the case with the
stadium project) externally.

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。