陕西省考生想知道ACCA的科目F2怎么备考？

发布时间：2020-01-10

学习ACCA，不仅是为了给自己的简历上增添一个拿的出手的证书，更是因为ACCA完整的知识体系，充实自己的大学生活。我认为，每一份努力都会有回报，只要功夫下的多，就没有什么事情做不好。这一份ACCA MA（F2）的备考技巧请大家收藏起来哦~

报考建议

F2的考试一般建议大家在结课之后一个月左右考试，因为F2是一门刷题型的科目，需要留出足够的做题，并且考前也需要模拟考进行练习；但也不宜太晚考，有些需要记忆的知识点容易遗忘。因此，F2最简单也是最直截了当的复习技巧就是题海战术，当然大家可以根据自己的实际情况进行调整，如果备考时间充裕，也可以缩短备考时间，如果碰上了学校的考试周，或者有自己的比较忙的事情，也可以适当拉长。

备考建议 

① 备考初期：F2主要以刷题为主。F2是管理会计，偏计算，但是计算水平要求其实也很低，重要的是细心点，把题看懂。

在ACCA的官网中也有样卷与模考卷可以练习，其中样卷是可以免费进入，进行练习的，模考卷的练习是需要付7英镑的费用。：

② 临考准备：如果大家已经看完网课，也做了一定量的习题了后，这个时候应该要明确自己薄弱的地方在哪里。哪部分知识点比较薄弱，就花费多一点的时间去复习，反之就少花费一点时间。建议大家可以像考试一样，在电脑上认真地花两个小时做一套模拟卷，并且进行批改，看看自己在考试中会遇到什么问题。

如果觉得两个小时的时间不够，做不完，说明做题的速度不够，需要提高做题速度。那么再做一遍题库，或者找其他的练习册再进行题海战略是必要的。

如果发现某个知识点的题目都需要花特别多的时间，或错误率非常高，那么说明对这部分的知识掌握的并不是很好，需要再次反复去巩固这部分的知识点，这部分有关的网课以及习题是需要再重新回顾1-2遍的。

如果觉得用电脑看题自己非常不适应，会非常影响自己的思路和速度，那么平时就不要在纸质的练习册上做题了，应该多练练，比如可以在电脑上做电子版的练习册或题库，使自己更适应机考。

总之大家可以通过模拟考的形式明确自己的弱点，进行加强后再在考试前练习一次，这样考试前就不会太紧张。但考试紧张也是会在所难的，所以就要要求大家及时调整心态，快速找回考试状态。

F2知识点总结

1. Data and information:

Unprocessed --->data; Processed --->information

2. Quality of good information

“ACCURATE”

3. Mission statement(abstract) ---> Objective(SMART) --->Strategy(Possible course of action)

4. Planning (establishing the objectives& selecting appropriate strategies)

5. Control(compare plans with actual results, reviewed and made changes)

6. The relationship between planning, decision making and control

7. Management   information Strategic information

幻想一步成功者突遭失败，会觉得浪费了时间，付出了精力，却认为没有任何收获；在失败面前，懦弱者痛苦迷茫，彷徨畏缩；而强者却坚持不懈，紧追不舍。各位ACCAer们加油，期待听到你们3月份考试成功的好消息~

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。

5 You are an audit manager in Dedza, a firm of Chartered Certified Accountants. Recently, you have been assigned

specific responsibility for undertaking annual reviews of existing clients. The following situations have arisen in

connection with three client companies:

(a) Dedza was appointed auditor and tax advisor to Kora Co, a limited liability company, last year and has recently

issued an unmodified opinion on the financial statements for the year ended 30 June 2005. To your surprise,

the tax authority has just launched an investigation into the affairs of Kora on suspicion of underdeclaring income.

(7 marks)

Required:

Identify and comment on the ethical and other professional issues raised by each of these matters and state what

action, if any, Dedza should now take.

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

正确答案：
5 DEDZA CO
(a) Tax investigation
■ Kora is a relatively new client. Before accepting the assignment(s) Dedza should have carried out customer due
diligence (CDD). Dedza should therefore have a sufficient knowledge and understanding of Kora to be aware of any
suspicions that the tax authority might have.
■ As the investigation has come as a surprise it is possible that, for example:
– the tax authority’s suspicions are unfounded;
– Dedza has failed to recognise suspicious circumstances.
Tutorial note: In either case, Dedza should seek clarification on the period of suspicion and review relevant procedures.
■ Dedza should review any communication from the predecessor auditor obtained in response to its ‘professional inquiry’
(for any professional reasons why the appointment should not have been accepted).
■ A quality control for new audits is that the audit opinion should be subject to a second partner review before it is issued.
It should be considered now whether or not such a review took place. If it did, then it should be sufficiently well
documented to evidence that the review was thorough and not a mere formality.
■ Criminal property includes the proceeds of tax evasion. If Kora is found to be guilty of under-declaring income that is a
money laundering offence.
■ Dedza’s reputational risk will be increased if implicated because it knew (or ought to have known) about Kora’s activities.
(Dedza may also be liable if found to have been negligent in failing to detect any material misstatement arising in the
2004/05 financial statements as a result.)
■ Kora’s audit working paper files and tax returns should be reviewed for any suspicion of fraud being committed by Kora
or error overlooked by Dedza. Tax advisory work should have been undertaken and/or reviewed by a manager/partner
not involved in the audit work.
■ As tax advisor, Dedza could soon be making disclosures of misstatements to the tax authority on behalf of Kora. Dedza
should encourage Kora to make necessary disclosure voluntarily.
■ Dedza will not be in breach of its duty of confidentiality to Kora if Kora gives Dedza permission to disclose information
to the tax authority (or Dedza is legally required to do so).
■ If Dedza finds reasonable grounds to know or suspect that potential disclosures to the tax authority relate to criminal
conduct, then a suspicious transaction report (STR) should be made to the financial intelligence unit (FIU) also.
Tutorial note: Though not the main issue credit will be awarded for other ethical issues such as the potential selfinterest/
self-review threat arising from the provision of other services.

Moonstar Co is a property development company which is planning to undertake a $200 million commercial property development. Moonstar Co has had some difficulties over the last few years, with some developments not generating the expected returns and the company has at times struggled to pay its finance costs. As a result Moonstar Co’s credit rating has been lowered, affecting the terms it can obtain for bank finance. Although Moonstar Co is listed on its local stock exchange, 75% of the share capital is held by members of the family who founded the company. The family members who are shareholders do not wish to subscribe for a rights issue and are unwilling to dilute their control over the company by authorising a new issue of equity shares. Moonstar Co’s board is therefore considering other methods of financing the development, which the directors believe will generate higher returns than other recent investments, as the country where Moonstar Co is based appears to be emerging from recession.

Securitisation proposals

One of the non-executive directors of Moonstar Co has proposed that it should raise funds by means of a securitisation process, transferring the rights to the rental income from the commercial property development to a special purpose vehicle. Her proposals assume that the leases will generate an income of 11% per annum to Moonstar Co over a ten-year period. She proposes that Moonstar Co should use 90% of the value of the investment for a collateralised loan obligation which should be structured as follows:

– 60% of the collateral value to support a tranche of A-rated floating rate loan notes offering investors LIBOR plus 150 basis points

– 15% of the collateral value to support a tranche of B-rated fixed rate loan notes offering investors 12%

– 15% of the collateral value to support a tranche of C-rated fixed rate loan notes offering investors 13%

– 10% of the collateral value to support a tranche as subordinated certificates, with the return being the excess of receipts over payments from the securitisation process

The non-executive director believes that there will be sufficient demand for all tranches of the loan notes from investors. Investors will expect that the income stream from the development to be low risk, as they will expect the property market to improve with the recession coming to an end and enough potential lessees to be attracted by the new development.

The non-executive director predicts that there would be annual costs of $200,000 in administering the loan. She acknowledges that there would be interest rate risks associated with the proposal, and proposes a fixed for variable interest rate swap on the A-rated floating rate notes, exchanging LIBOR for 9·5%.

However the finance director believes that the prediction of the income from the development that the non-executive director has made is over-optimistic. He believes that it is most likely that the total value of the rental income will be 5% lower than the non-executive director has forecast. He believes that there is some risk that the returns could be so low as to jeopardise the income for the C-rated fixed rate loan note holders.

Islamic finance

Moonstar Co’s chief executive has wondered whether Sukuk finance would be a better way of funding the development than the securitisation.

Moonstar Co’s chairman has pointed out that a major bank in the country where Moonstar Co is located has begun to offer a range of Islamic financial products. The chairman has suggested that a Mudaraba contract would be the most appropriate method of providing the funds required for the investment.

Required:

(a) Calculate the amounts in $ which each of the tranches can expect to receive from the securitisation arrangement proposed by the non-executive director and discuss how the variability in rental income affects the returns from the securitisation. (11 marks)

(b) Discuss the benefits and risks for Moonstar Co associated with the securitisation arrangement that the non-executive director has proposed. (6 marks)

(c) (i) Discuss the suitability of Sukuk finance to fund the investment, including an assessment of its appeal to potential investors. (4 marks)

(ii) Discuss whether a Mudaraba contract would be an appropriate method of financing the investment and discuss why the bank may have concerns about providing finance by this method. (4 marks)

正确答案：

(a) An annual cash flow account compares the estimated cash flows receivable from the property against the liabilities within the securitisation process. The swap introduces leverage into the arrangement.

The holders of the certificates are expected to receive $3·17million on $18 million, giving them a return of 17·6%. If the cash flows are 5% lower than the non-executive director has predicted, annual revenue received will fall to $20·90 million, reducing the balance available for the subordinated certificates to $2·07 million, giving a return of 11·5% on the subordinated certificates, which is below the returns offered on the B and C-rated loan notes. The point at which the holders of the certificates will receive nothing and below which the holders of the C-rated loan notes will not receive their full income will be an annual income of $18·83 million (a return of 9·4%), which is 14·4% less than the income that the non-executive director has forecast.

(b) Benefits

The finance costs of the securitisation may be lower than the finance costs of ordinary loan capital. The cash flows from the commercial property development may be regarded as lower risk than Moonstar Co’s other revenue streams. This will impact upon the rates that Moonstar Co is able to offer borrowers.

The securitisation matches the assets of the future cash flows to the liabilities to loan note holders. The non-executive director is assuming a steady stream of lease income over the next 10 years, with the development probably being close to being fully occupied over that period.

The securitisation means that Moonstar Co is no longer concerned with the risk that the level of earnings from the properties will be insufficient to pay the finance costs. Risks have effectively been transferred to the loan note holders.

Risks

Not all of the tranches may appeal to investors. The risk-return relationship on the subordinated certificates does not look very appealing, with the return quite likely to be below what is received on the C-rated loan notes. Even the C-rated loan note holders may question the relationship between the risk and return if there is continued uncertainty in the property sector.

If Moonstar Co seeks funding from other sources for other developments, transferring out a lower risk income stream means that the residual risks associated with the rest of Moonstar Co’s portfolio will be higher. This may affect the availability and terms of other borrowing.

It appears that the size of the securitisation should be large enough for the costs to be bearable. However Moonstar Co may face unforeseen costs, possibly unexpected management or legal expenses.

(c) (i) Sukuk finance could be appropriate for the securitisation of the leasing portfolio. An asset-backed Sukuk would be the same kind of arrangement as the securitisation, where assets are transferred to a special purpose vehicle and the returns and repayments are directly financed by the income from the assets. The Sukuk holders would bear the risks and returns of the relationship.

The other type of Sukuk would be more like a sale and leaseback of the development. Here the Sukuk holders would be guaranteed a rental, so it would seem less appropriate for Moonstar Co if there is significant uncertainty about the returns from the development.

The main issue with the asset-backed Sukuk finance is whether it would be as appealing as certainly the A-tranche of the securitisation arrangement which the non-executive director has proposed. The safer income that the securitisation offers A-tranche investors may be more appealing to investors than a marginally better return from the Sukuk. There will also be costs involved in establishing and gaining approval for the Sukuk, although these costs may be less than for the securitisation arrangement described above.

(ii) A Mudaraba contract would involve the bank providing capital for Moonstar Co to invest in the development. Moonstar Co would manage the investment which the capital funded. Profits from the investment would be shared with the bank, but losses would be solely borne by the bank. A Mudaraba contract is essentially an equity partnership, so Moonstar Co might not face the threat to its credit rating which it would if it obtained ordinary loan finance for the development. A Mudaraba contract would also represent a diversification of sources of finance. It would not require the commitment to pay interest that loan finance would involve.

Moonstar Co would maintain control over the running of the project. A Mudaraba contract would offer a method of obtaining equity funding without the dilution of control which an issue of shares to external shareholders would bring. This is likely to make it appealing to Moonstar Co’s directors, given their desire to maintain a dominant influence over the business.

The bank would be concerned about the uncertainties regarding the rental income from the development. Although the lack of involvement by the bank might appeal to Moonstar Co's directors, the bank might not find it so attractive. The bank might be concerned about information asymmetry – that Moonstar Co’s management might be reluctant to supply the bank with the information it needs to judge how well its investment is performing.

(ii) Describe the basis for the calculation of the provision for deferred taxation on first time adoption of IFRS

including the provision in the opening IFRS balance sheet. (4 marks)

正确答案：
(ii) A company has to apply IAS12 to the temporary differences between the carrying amount of the assets and liabilities in
its opening IFRS balance sheet (1 November 2003) and their tax bases (IFRS1 ‘First time adoption of IFRS’). The
deferred tax provision will be calculated using tax rates that have been enacted or substantially enacted by the balance
sheet date. The carrying values of the assets and liabilities at the opening balance sheet date will be determined by
reference to IFRS1 and will use the applicable IFRS in the first IFRS financial statements. Any adjustments required to
the deferred tax balance will be recognised directly in retained earnings.
Subsequent balance sheets (at 31 October 2004 and 31 October 2005) will be drawn up using the IFRS used in the
financial statements to 31 October 2005. The deferred tax provision will be adjusted as at 31 October 2004 and thenas at 31 October 2005 to reflect the temporary differences arising at those dates.

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。

站内搜索
热门标签