51题库考试学习网告诉你：参加ACCA考试什么时候都不算晚

正确答案：
(d) The benefits that might accrue from the successful implementation of a Total quality management programme by the
management of the combined entity include the following:
– There will be an increased awareness of all personnel within Quicklink Ltd of the need to establish a ‘quality culture’
within the company which will provide a basis of improved performance throughout the organisation.
– The successful adoption of a TQM philosophy would ensure that there is a real commitment to ‘continuous improvement’
in all processes.
– It would place a greater focus on customer satisfaction since at the heart of any TQM programme is a deep-seated
commitment to the satisfaction of every customer.
– There would be a greater emphasis upon teamwork which would be used in a number of forms e.g. quality circles which
could be established with a view to improving performance within every area of the business. The fostering of team spirit
will also improve communication within Quicklink Ltd.
– A major characteristic of a TQM programme is process-redesign which is used to simplify processes, systems,
procedures and the organisation itself. In this respect the adoption of a TQM philosophy will be invaluable since the
integration of the Quicklink Ltd and Celer Transport businesses will require, of necessity, a detailed review of those
processes currently employed.
– The adoption of a TQM philosophy will necessitate the monitoring of quality costs in order to measure whether the
objective of continuous improvement is being achieved. In this respect the aim will be to eliminate internal failure costs
such as late deliveries and lost items which are clearly detrimental to a business which operates in the transport and
haulage industry.

正确答案：

(b) (i) Appropriateness of audit opinion given
Tutorial note: The answer points suggested by the marking scheme are listed in roughly the order in which they might
be extracted from the information presented in the question. The suggested answer groups together some of these
points under headings to give the analysis of the situation a possible structure.
Heading
■ The opinion paragraph is not properly headed. It does not state the form. of the opinion that has been given nor
the grounds for qualification.
■ The opinion ‘the financial statements do not give a true and fair view’ is an ‘adverse’ opinion.
■ That ‘provision should be made’, but has not, is a matter of disagreement that should be clearly stated as noncompliance
with IAS 36. The title of IAS 36 Impairment of Assets should be given in full.
■ The opinion should be headed ‘Disagreement on Accounting Policies – Inappropriate Accounting Method – Adverse
Opinion’.
1 ISA 250 does not specify with whom agreement should be reached but presumably with those charged with corporate governance (e.g audit committee or
2 other supervisory board).
20
6D–INTBA
Paper 3.1INT
Content
■ It is appropriate that the opinion paragraph should refer to the note(s) in the financial statements where the matter
giving rise to the modification is more fully explained. However, this is not an excuse for the audit opinion being
‘light’ on detail. For example, the reason for impairment could be summarised in the auditor’s report.
■ The effects have not been quantified, but they should be quantifiable. The maximum possible loss would be the
carrying amount of the non-current assets identified as impaired.
■ It is not clear why the directors have been ‘unable to quantify the amounts’. Since impairments should be
quantifiable any ‘inability’ suggest a limitation in scope of the audit, in which case the opinion should be disclaimed
(or ‘except for’) on grounds of lack of evidence rather than disagreement.
■ The wording is confusing. ‘Failure to provide’ suggests disagreement. However, there must be sufficient evidence
to support any disagreement. Although the directors cannot quantify the amounts it seems the auditors must have
been able to (estimate at least) in order to form. an opinion that the amounts involved are sufficiently material to
warrant a qualification.
■ The first paragraph refers to ‘non-current assets’. The second paragraph specifies ‘tangible and intangible assets’.
There is no explanation why or how both tangible and intangible assets are impaired.
■ The first paragraph refers to ‘profit or loss’ and the second and third paragraphs to ‘loss’. It may be clearer if the
first paragraph were to refer to recognition in the income statement.
■ It is not clear why the failure to recognise impairment warrants an adverse opinion rather than ‘except for’. The
effects of non-compliance with IAS 36 are to overstate the carrying amount(s) of non-current assets (that can be
specified) and to understate the loss. The matter does not appear to be pervasive and so an adverse opinion looks
unsuitable as the financial statements as a whole are not incomplete or misleading. A loss is already being reported
so it is not that a reported profit would be turned into a loss (which is sometimes judged to be ‘pervasive’).
Prior year
■ As the 2005 auditor’s report, as previously issued, included an adverse opinion and the matter that gave rise to
the modification:
– is unresolved; and
– results in a modification of the 2006 auditor’s report,
the 2006 auditor’s report should also be modified regarding the corresponding figures (ISA 710 Comparatives).
■ The 2006 auditor’s report does not refer to the prior period modification nor highlight that the matter resulting in
the current period modification is not new. For example, the report could say ‘As previously reported and as more
fully explained in notes ….’ and state ‘increase the loss by $x (2005 – $y)’.

正确答案：D
3,980 – 270 – 180 – 3,200 = 330 : difference 100