想知道会计学硕士能免考几门ACCA吗？速看！

正确答案：
(ii) Implications for audit opinion on consolidated financial statements of Cleeves
■ If the potential adjustments to non-current asset carrying amounts and loss are not material to the consolidated
financial statements there will be no implication. However, as Howard is material to Cleeves and the modification
appears to be ‘so material’ (giving rise to adverse opinion) this seems unlikely.
Tutorial note: The question clearly states that Howard is material to Cleeves, thus there is no call for speculation
on this.
■ As Howard is wholly-owned the management of Cleeves must be able to request that Howard’s financial statements
are adjusted to reflect the impairment of the assets. The auditor’s report on Cleeves will then be unmodified
(assuming that any impairment of the investment in Howard is properly accounted for in the separate financial
statements of Cleeves).
■ If the impairment losses are not recognised in Howard’s financial statements they can nevertheless be adjusted on
consolidation of Cleeves and its subsidiaries (by writing down assets to recoverable amounts). The audit opinion
on Cleeves should then be unmodified in this respect.
■ If there is no adjustment of Howard’s asset values (either in Howard’s financial statements or on consolidation) it
is most likely that the audit opinion on Cleeves’s consolidated financial statements would be ‘except for’. (It should
not be adverse as it is doubtful whether even the opinion on Howard’s financial statements should be adverse.)
Tutorial note: There is currently no requirement in ISA 600 to disclose that components have been audited by another
auditor unless the principal auditor is permitted to base their opinion solely upon the report of another auditor.

正确答案：
(b) The use of residual income as a basis for the management incentive plan operated by NCL plc would have the following
advantages:
Divisional management would be more willing to accept a project with a positive residual income and this would contribute
to the improved performance of NCL plc. Also, the disincentive to accept a project with a positive residual income but a return
on investment regarded by divisional management as not being in their best interests would be removed, because divisional
management would be rewarded.
The use of annuity depreciation may improve performance appraisal by removing the effect of straight-line depreciation which
tends to distort project returns especially in the early years of a project’s life when invested capital remains relatively high due
to the constant depreciation charge. The residual income approach using annuity depreciation will only match the NPV if the
annual cashflows of a project are constant. Hence the method when applied to the North or South projects would produce
an NPV which does not exactly match that previously calculated. By way of contrast it is forecast that the East project will
have constant cashflows and in this instance the NPV and residual income based approach when discounted, will produce
the same result.

正确答案：
(c) Threatened legal action
Ethical and professional issues
■ An advocacy threat has arisen as Bartolome and Pinzon are in opposition concerning the fee note for the 2004 audit.
■ If Pinzon’s allegations are true this may cast serious doubt on the integrity of Bartolome. Pinzon should be advised to
take their claims first to ACCA’s Disciplinary Committee.
■ If Bartolome has indeed charged full air fares when substantial discounts had been obtained this could be due to:
– Bartolome incorrectly believing this to be an acceptable industry practice; or
– a billing error/oversight.
In either case Bartolome should issue a credit note, although this may be insufficient to make amends and salvage the
auditor-client relationship.
■ Bartolome may have legitimately claimed for full airfares if this was agreed in its contract (i.e. the terms of engagement)
with Pinzon.
Implications for continuation with assignment
Unless the threat of legal action is amicably resolved very quickly (which is perhaps unlikely) Pinzon and Bartolome are in
conflict. Bartolome cannot therefore be seen to be independent and so should tender their resignation as auditor for the year
ending 31 December 2005 (assuming they were re-appointed and have not already been removed from office).

正确答案：
6 REQUIREMENTS IN GROUP AUDITS
Tutorial note: The answer which follows is indicative of the range of points which might be made. Other relevant material will be
given suitable credit.
(a) Significant issues
Tutorial note: The objective of the IAASB’s project on the audit of group financial statements (‘group audits’) was to deal
with special considerations in group audits and, in particular, the involvement of other auditors. The re-exposure of ISA 600
(Revised and Redrafted) in March 2006 (following initial publication of a proposed revised ISA in December 2003 and an
exposure draft in March 2005) reflects the significance of the issues that the IAASB has sought to address.
Sole vs divided responsibility
The IAASB has concluded that the group auditor has sole responsibility for the group audit opinion. Thus the exposure drafts
eliminate the distinction between sole and divided responsibility. Therefore no reference to another auditor (e.g. of significant
components) should be made in the group auditor’s report. The practice of referring to another auditor may, arguably, be more
transparent to users of group financial statements. However, it may also mislead users to believe that the group auditor does
not have sole responsibility.
Definition of group auditor
The group auditor is the auditor who signs the auditor’s report on the group financial statements. The project has sought to
clarify whether, for example, an auditor from another office of the group engagement partner’s firm is a member of the group
engagement team or an ‘other auditor’.
‘Related’ vs ‘unrelated’ auditors
IAASB recognises that the nature, timing and extent of procedures performed by the group auditor, including the review of
the other auditor’s audit documentation, are affected by the group auditor’s relationship with the other audit. (For example,
if the other auditor operates under the quality control policies and procedures of the group auditor.) However, IAASB
acknowledges that a consistent distinction between ‘related’ and ‘unrelated’ auditors cannot be made due to the varying
structures of audit firms and their networks. Consequently, the only distinction that is made is between the ‘group’ and ‘other’
auditors.
Acceptance/continuance as group auditor
A group auditor should only accept or continue an engagement if sufficient appropriate evidence is expected to be obtained
on which to base the group audit opinion. Acceptance and continuance as group auditors therefore requires an assessment
of the risk of misstatement in components. IAASB has therefore proposed guidance on the benchmarks that might be used
in identifying significant components.
Access to information
IAASB has concluded that a group audit engagement should be refused (or resigned from) if the group engagement partner
concludes that it will not be possible to obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence, the result of which would be a disclaimer.
However, if the group engagement partner is prohibited from refusing or resigning an engagement, the group audit opinion
must be disclaimed.
Aggregation of components
Sufficient appropriate audit evidence must be obtained in respect of components that are not individually significant (but
significant in aggregate). This requires that components be selected for audit procedures (e.g. on specified account balances).
Analytical procedures are required to be performed on components that are not selected. IAASB has therefore identified factors
to be considered in selecting components that are not individually significant.
Responsibilities of other auditors
Historically, other auditors, knowing the context in which their work will be used by the group auditor, have been required to
cooperate with the group auditor. However, the project did not address guidance for other auditors. Therefore, in providing
guidance on the group audit, the IAASB requires the group auditor to obtain an understanding of the requirements for other
auditors to cooperate with the group auditor and provide access to relevant documentation.