preparing p7

“is it appropriate to ask to get an idea about the topics more to be focused on” – I suppose it’s appropriate but you’re not going to get a lot of help from this quarter!

Opentuition have taken the decision not to become involved in publishing guesses about forthcoming exams. Given that we don’t know what topics came up in half the exams since the move to 4 exams per year, it would be an exercise carried out without full relevant knowledge being available to us

So we no longer do it

My best advice would be to look at the examiner’s tried and tested formula for the format of the exams

There is often a response to a partner’s email that your received shortly after the partner had a meeting with the client

There’s a “What evidence would you expect to find ….” or “What further audit procedures would you ….”

There’s often a report to comment on

There’s often …….

Well, you can find out for yourself what there is often 🙂

No worries – if you had asked openly – it would still have been ethical. there’s nothing unethical about the site – I believe that we’re totally transparent

Keep posting if you come across a problem

Your examiners are well on top of what’s still current and what has now disappeared.

You answer according to current editions (so long as they’re included within the syllabus) and IFRS 15 is certainly IN and IAS 11 is certainly OUT

IFRS 15 IS applicable now for the June 2016 exam and will be applicable for the foreseeable future

What ISN’T applicable is IAS 11 and IAS 18

It would do you no harm to read them again. Have you ever noticed that when you read a novel for the second time you see a lot more of the detail that you could very well have missed on the first time through?

Read the technical articles again just to be certain

You could be asked anything at all from across the entire syllabus and I’m certainly not going to start trying to predict what may or may not come up next month

However, you sound like you’ve gone through the past exams pretty thoroughly and you’re aware of the sort of questions that you may expect.

It sounds to me that you are well prepared

I’ve always said that there are essentially two types of student doing these exams and those two types are almost totally coincidental with the two genders.

The first type is the student that scores 90%+ in exams and focusses on the fact that they didn’t know enough – the proof is there! They dropped 10 marks. They know before the exam all those topics that they are not totally confident with and they worry about them

The second type is the student that scores 50% (maybe as many as 55%!) and has no idea how they managed that! They have no idea about many topics and therefore are not aware of just how much they don’t know. They’re just so happy to get 50%+ and maybe a bit disappointed that those marks above 50 represent excessive effort spent by them

“should i focus more as current issues..” – just keep it ticking over. Nothing too strenuous. Read current issues (are there any?) and re-read the technical articles

Are you the student that realises just how much you don’t know (10%) and you’re worried?

Or are you the student that has no idea how much you don’t know so you don’t worry?

I know which one I believe you are 🙂

P1 examiner bases many of his 50 mark question 1s on recent historical events (Fukushima, BP Deepwater Horizon, Zeebrugge Ferry disaster, …..)

There’s no reason to think that the P7 examiner doesn’t also do the same

At this stage just read anything at all that is audit related …. or even not audit related.

When you hear a news item on the radio or watch a programme on the television, be aware of underlying ethics, morality, corruption, controls, risks, safeguards ……

It’s at this stage that life starts to be really interesting as you begin sub-consciously to apply principles learned during your ACCA journey to events that are happening around you

Buy a watch!

Do a bit of research on the P1 and P7 pages where I have spelt out how to discipline yourself to stick to time allocation. You won’t have to go far back in time to find long posts from me to explain how to maximise the time within the exam room

Come back to me if you need to

“the point of confusion is above that in the UK its prohibited.in an exam question we would apply ISAs which explains certain circumstances external auditors can take direct assistance considering their competence and objectivity, so for uk businesses we need to take into account that FRC prohibits that use !!” – I see no question here for me to answer

Performance materiality is a level established to address the issue that a number of errors / adjustments to be made in aggregate exceed the overall financial statement materiality level

If materiality level is set at $7,000 and the auditor finds 2 errors of $5,000, in aggregate that could represent a $10,000 error (or $zero!)

So performance materiality could be, for example, $3,000

Two of those? Still below the overall level of $7,000

But 3 such errors could be an aggregate of $9,000

OK?

I don’t think it’s an issue, is it?

If you’re attempting the P7 International stream, you’ll apply ISAs and if you’re attempting the P7 UK stream you’ll apply UK standards

As to the question “Why” – I have no idea, sorry

You’re welcome

“tipping off” is when someone, who is aware that Geoffrey is the subject of an investigation into his share dealings, tells Geoffrey that his share dealing activities are being scrutinised

That gives Geoffrey the opportunity to disappear, think of excuses, or take some sort of action to put himself out of reach or to paint himself as totally innocent

“..sir i want to ask that if the member of the audit team has a direct financial interest in client ..is it a related party ?”

simply, that can’t happen! And employee of the audit firm must exclude themselves from the audit and (with only extremely rare exceptions) either divest themselves of that financial interest or leave the audit firm

“..can u please write audit procedures for holiday pay accrual ..”

You’re a P7 student, for Heaven’s sake! You’re within a few days of becoming equally as well qualified to audit the holiday pay accrual of Microsoft as the World senior audit partners of all the Big 4 firms added together!

Let me ask you …. how would YOU begin to think about confirming the accuracy, completeness, legality, presentation, validity of ANY figure in the statement of financial position?

No, I really do not want to do this! It will finish up with me insulting you!

First of all, check the figure given to you by management for materiality. Measure it against profits and against net assets

It’s most likely to be immaterial in which case, I need go no further

But, if it IS material:

– obtain a schedule from the client supporting their calculation

– re-perform a selection of those calculations to confirm arithmetical accuracy

– add up the schedule to confirm that it is correctly cast

– compare the employee names on the schedule with names on the payroll to confirm that these employees are not fictitious

– obtain a copy of the client’s standard employment contract

– consider the contents of this standard contract with any statutory elements concerning levels and entitlements of holiday pay and confirm legality of client’s terms

– compare this copy with the copy obtained in previous years held on the permanent file and note any changes particularly in the area of holiday pay entitlements

– confirm that the entitlements shown on the schedule are consistent with the contractual entitlements

– confirm that any lapsed entitlements are correctly excluded from the schedule

– determine by review whether there is any directors’ board minute that may be relevant to the topic of holiday pay (there should be proper authority for any amendments to employee entitlements)

– discuss with management individual cases of unusual entitlements to determine the reason why those employees have been allowed to build up such long periods

– consider whether the fact that an employee appears not to have taken their entitlement could indicate the possibility that that represents an increased risk for that employee to perpetrate a fraud (no rotation of responsibilities, no internal check)

– compare this year’s schedule with the equivalent schedule from last year to determine reasonable comparability and enquire of management about reasons for large variation

(much quicker and easier to decide early on that the amounts involved are immaterial)