快看！2020年ACCA考试注册费用是多少？每年都要交吗？

正确答案：

 

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：

(c) (i) For the secrecy option
Important developments at SHC
This is an exciting time for the management and shareholders of Swan Hill Company. The research and development
staff at SHC have made a groundbreaking discovery (called the ‘sink method’) that will enable your company to produce
its major product at lower cost, in higher volumes and at a much higher quality than our competitors will be able to
using, as they do, the existing production technology. The sink process also produces at a lower rate of environmental
emissions which, as I’m sure shareholders will agree, is a very welcome development.
When considering the options following the discovery, your board decided that we should press ahead with the
investment needed to transform. the production facilities without offering the use of the technology to competitors under
a licensing arrangement. This means that once the new sink production comes on stream, SHC shareholders can, your
board believes, look forward to a significant strengthening of our competitive position.
The business case for this option is overwhelming. By pushing ahead with the investment needed to implement the sink
method, the possibility exists to gain a substantial competitive advantage over all of SHC’s competitors. It will place SHC
in a near monopolist position in the short term and in a dominant position long term. This will, in turn, give the company
pricing power in the industry and the likelihood of superior profits for many years to come. We would expect SHC to
experience substantial ‘overnight’ growth and the returns from this will reward shareholders’ loyalty and significantly
increase the value of the company. Existing shareholders can reasonably expect a significant increase in the value of
their holdings over the very short term and also over the longer term.
Ethical implications of the secrecy option
In addition to the overwhelming business case, however, there is a strong ethical case for the secrecy option. SHC
recognises that it is the moral purpose of SHC to make profits in order to reward those who have risked their own money
to support it over many years. Whilst some companies pursue costly programmes intended to serve multiple stakeholder
interests, SHC recognises that it is required to comply with the demands of its legal owners, its shareholders, and not
to dilute those demands with other concerns that will reduce shareholder returns. This is an important part of the agency
relationship: the SHC board will always serve the best economic interests of its shareholders: its legal owners. The SHC
board believes that any action taken that renders shareholder returns suboptimal is a threat to shareholder value and an
abuse of the agency position. Your board will always seek to maximise shareholder wealth; hence our decision to pursue
the secrecy option in this case. The secrecy option offers the possibility of optimal shareholder value and because
shareholders invest in SHC to maximise returns, that is the only ethical action for the board to pursue. Happily, this
option will also protect the employees’ welfare in SHC’s hometown of Swan Hill and demonstrate its commitment to the
locality. This, in turn, will help to manage two of the key value-adding resources in the company, its employees and its
reputation. This will help in local recruitment and staff retention in future years.
(ii) For the licensing option
Important developments at SHC
Your board was recently faced with a very difficult business and ethical decision. After the discovery by SHC scientists
of the groundbreaking sink production method, we had a choice of keeping the new production technology secret or
sharing the breakthrough under a licensing arrangement with our competitors. After a lengthy discussion, your board
decided that we should pursue the licensing option and I would like to explain our reasons for this on both business and
ethical grounds.
In terms of the business case for licensing, I would like shareholders to understand that although the secrecy option may
have offered SHC the possibility of an unassailable competitive advantage, in reality, it would have incurred a number
of risks. Because of the speed with which we would have needed to have acted, it would have necessitated a large
increase in our borrowing, bringing about a substantial change in our financial structure. This would, in turn, increase
liquidity pressures and make us more vulnerable to rising interest rates. A second risk with the secrecy option would
involve the security of the sink technology ‘secret’. If the sink process was leaked or discovered by competitors and
subsequently copied, our lack of a legally binding patent would mean we would have no legal way to stop them
proceeding with their own version of the sink process.
As well as avoiding the risks, however, the licensing option offers a number of specific business advantages. The royalties
from the licences granted to competitors are expected to be very large indeed. These will be used over the coming years
to extend our existing competitive advantage in the future. Finally, the ‘improvement sharing’ clause in the licensing
contract will ensure that the sink process will be improved and perfected with several manufacturers using the
technology at the same time. SHC’s sink production may, in consequence, improve at a faster rate than would have
been the case were we to have pursued the secrecy option.
Ethical implications of the licensing option
In addition to the business case, there is also a powerful ethical case for the decision we have taken. As a good,
responsible corporate citizen, Swan Hill Company acknowledges its many stakeholders and recognises the impacts that
a business decision has on others. Your board recognises that in addition to external stakeholders having influence over
our operations, our decisions can also affect others. In this case, we have carefully considered the likelihood that keeping
the new technology a secret from our competitors would radically reshape the industry. The superior environmental
performance of the sink process over existing methods will also mean that when fully adopted, the environmental
emissions of the entire industry will be reduced. SHC is very proud of this contribution to this reduction in overall
environmental impact.
There seems little doubt that the secrecy option would have had far-reaching and unfortunate effects upon our industry
and our competitors. The licensing option will allow competitors, and their employees and shareholders, to survive. It
is a compassionate act on our part and shows mercy to the other competitors in the industry. It recognises the number
of impacts that a business decision has and would be the fairest (and most just) option given the number of people
affected.

正确答案：A