我是宁波的，想考ACCA，需要在那里买书？

正确答案：
(b) (i) Matters to consider
Materiality
The receivable represents only 0·2% (25,000/12 million x 100) of total assets so is immaterial in monetary terms.
However, the details of the transaction could make it material by nature.
The amount is outstanding from a company under the control of Pulp Co’s chairman. Readers of the financial statements
would be interested to know the details of this transaction, which currently is not disclosed. Elements of the transaction
could be subject to bias, specifically the repayment terms, which appear to be beyond normal commercial credit terms.
Paul Sheffield may have used his influence over the two companies to ‘engineer’ the transaction. Disclosure is necessary
due to the nature of the transaction, the monetary value is irrelevant.
A further matter to consider is whether this is a one-off transaction, or indicative of further transactions between the two
companies.
Relevant accounting standard
The definitions in IAS 24 must be carefully considered to establish whether this actually constitutes a related party
transaction. The standard specifically states that two entities are not necessarily related parties just because they have
a director or other member of key management in common. The audit senior states that Jarvis Co is controlled by Peter
Sheffield, who is also the chairman of Pulp Co. It seems that Peter Sheffield is in a position of control/significant influence
over the two companies (though this would have to be clarified through further audit procedures), and thus the two
companies are likely to be perceived as related.
IAS 24 requires full disclosure of the following in respect of related party transactions:
– the nature of the related party relationship,
– the amount of the transaction,
– the amount of any balances outstanding including terms and conditions, details of security offered, and the nature
of consideration to be provided in settlement,
– any allowances for receivables and associated expense.
There is currently a breach of IAS 24 as no disclosure has been made in the notes to the financial statements. If not
amended, the audit opinion on the financial statements should be qualified with an ‘except for’ disagreement. In
addition, if practicable, the auditor’s report should include the information that would have been included in the financial
statements had the requirements of IAS 24 been adhered to.
Valuation and classification of the receivable
A receivable should only be recognised if it will give rise to future economic benefit, i.e. a future cash inflow. It appears
that the receivable is long outstanding – if the amount is unlikely to be recovered then it should be written off as a bad
debt and the associated expense recognised. It is possible that assets and profits are overstated.
Although a representation has been received indicating that the amount will be paid to Pulp Co, the auditor should be
sceptical of this claim given that the same representation was given last year, and the amount was not subsequently
recovered. The $25,000 could be recoverable in the long term, in which case the receivable should be reclassified as
a non-current asset. The amount advanced to Jarvis Co could effectively be an investment rather than a short term
receivable. Correct classification on the statement of financial position (balance sheet) is crucial for the financial
statements to properly show the liquidity position of the company at the year end.
Tutorial note: Digressions into management imposing a limitation in scope by withholding evidence are irrelevant in this
case, as the scenario states that the only evidence that the auditors have asked for is a management representation.
There is no indication in the scenario that the auditors have asked for, and been refused any evidence.

正确答案：
(d) The dividend growth model calculates the ex div share price from knowledge of the cost of equity capital, the expected growth
rate in dividends and the current dividend per share (or next year’s dividend per share). Using the formula given in the
formulae sheet, the dividend growth rate expected by the company of 8% per year and the decreased dividend of 7·5p per
share:
Share price = (7·5 x 1·08)/(0·11 – 0·08) = 270p or ￡2·70
This is the same as the share price prior to the announcement (￡2·70) and so if dividend growth of 8% per year is achieved,
the dividend growth model forecasts zero share price growth. The share price growth claim made by the company regarding
expansion into the retail camera market cannot therefore be substantiated.
In fact, a lower future share price of ￡2·49 was predicted by applying the current price-earnings ratio to the earnings per
share resulting from the proposed expansion. If this estimate is correct, a fall in share price of 7% can be expected.
The share price predicted by the dividend growth model of ￡2·70 would require an after-tax return on the proposed expansion
of 11·66%, which is more than the 9% predicted by the Board. The current return on shareholders’ funds is 7·5% (4·5/60),
but in 2005 it was 12·8% (7·3/57), so 11·66% may be achievable, but looks unlikely.
Since the market price fell from ￡2·70 to ￡2·45 following the announcement, it appears that the market does not believe
that the forecast dividend growth can be achieved.

正确答案：
(a) The main reasons why the three accounting standards boards have decided to come together in a joint project regarding a
single performance statement are as follows:
(i) there are many different formats and classifications used for financial statements and different time periods used for
comparative data in different countries.
(ii) there are no common definitions as regards the key elements of financial performance and no agreement on the standard
definitions of the key ratios which would then determine the nature of the information that financial statements should
provide. There has been an increase in the reporting of alternative and often inconsistent financial performance
measures that has led to confusion and often has misled users.
(iii) there has been an increase in the use of pro-forma reporting which would tend to suggest that the existing totals and
sub totals in financial statements are not being used or relied upon as much as in the past.
(iv) there are benefits in separating transactions and events that are recorded at historical cost from those recorded at fair
value. Also, the differentiation between trading and holding gains gives useful information. This ‘mixed attribute’ model
is causing concern over the effects on reported performance.
(v) there is often insufficient disaggregation of data which prevents effective financial analysis of performance.
(vi) there has been an inconsistency in the use of ‘recycling ‘in financial statements of different jurisdictions which has led
to issues of reporting gains and losses twice.
(vii) the reporting of gains and losses on financial instruments required consideration. The gains and losses may currently be
reported under several headings dependent upon the nature of the instrument.
(viii) there are many relevant items excluded from the performance statements and inappropriate items included. For example
the reporting of foreign currency gains/losses on the retranslation of the net investment in foreign operations is normally
recognised in equity in many countries and dividends proposed shown on the face of the income statement when it does
not meet the definition of a liability and is a transaction with the owners of the business and not third parties.
(ix) Information is inconsistently classified within and outside totals and subtotals.