Forum Replies Created
- Posts
Passed!!! The last exam. Practice recorded, Ethic module done, Why the affiliate message was not sent to me? Any ideas?
pfostiras wrote:I think that i remember risk management and something about to improve it, and i read three times the question, it seems that i got it wrong.
It could be a different question for different countries. I didn’t have “outsourcing slides and press release” for sure
Re the risks- it seems they didt ask about the mitigation actions, just to explain the risks and why they will occure. I listed strategic, operation, legacy risk, workforce, and something else
arm2250 wrote:I really felt that info in this paper was really lacking. Exhibit one and 2 should be swapped around. It didn’t give you no where enough information on the company so could barely Answer press release question. Also, q3 just felt it was there to trick us, especially when asking about the production process.
Yes, NED to be appointed to scrutinise the management decisions, etc.
Agree 100%. I was sitting the December SBl, and I can compare. Even taking into account that I was prepared better, today even the scenario was twice shorter. I spent on the reading just 30 minutes against 70 minutes in December. Fingers crossed, but the feeling is much better today.
@cjacko said:
Passed with 57%! I am so relieved that I have now finished and am an affiliate! This has been a tough journey, fitting in studying around working and three lovely children (plus a husband!). I feel like I have my life back, my family are as relieved as I am.Congrats to all those who have passed and to those who haven’t this time, keep going it’s all part of the process and you’ll get there in the end if you are determined enough.
Thank you Open Tuition, I really, really, couldn’t have done this without your excellent lectures and succinct notes, helping to make sense of the heavy going study books.
I’m going to celebrate with one of many box sets I missed out on!
Congratulate you! Although I have a few exams due to take yet, but I can fully understand you! Full-time job+3 lovely children+husband XXXXX
66% passed. First attempt. i was doubt a lot because of my English not well, but I did it. I managed to collect the maximum of easy marks, just put strict deadline for every question. Therefore I was able to say the most obvious and right few sentence for every question. And I paid very big attention to Ethics.. Lots of marks were around ethics..
@raoul7370 said:
In the Sep/Dec 2019 sample questions published by ACCA, both Q1 and Q2 begin with the sentence telling you today is 1 July 20X5. It is not in Q3 (but then there are no dates at all in Q3, so today’s date has no relevance to the answer).I imagine they have done the same for the December paper on all questions where there are dates in the story.
Regarding intangibles, you cannot internally generate a patent – you have to buy one. You can internally generate a new product or invention (Development Costs would be capitalised as the asset), and then apply to patent your idea (which, if granted, should help protect the future revenue stream and hence the value of the development cost asset).
I was hoping they would have published this but it looks like the sample questions for Sep/Dec are all September and no December questions at all!
Yes, I said about ” internally generate a new product or invention (Development Costs would be capitalised as the asset), and then apply to patent your idea ”
Sorry, my English is not enough well to explain… This is my big limitation ….@Fidget said:
Yes, disappointing that no questions from Dec have been published. Q1 did say “Today’s date is 01 July 20X5”. It was the first sentence of the question.Thank you very much. I did not catch it. From my work experience – the audit never start before year end ( if it is not Interim Audit). Great that I did not see this sentence in Exam. I would lost time and attitude. Generally the risks the same. Just more “If.. ” in answers needed.
@raoul7370 said:
Just seen the sample questions on ACCA website. Q1 is the September Q1, but I note the first few words say that today is 1 July 20X5, and I presume the same will be done every sitting. So I presume the first sentence of December’s Q1 also said this.Regarding the Due Diligence question, well they have not published it in the Sep/Dec sample so I cannot see it, but I would say the following:
– no need to write actual questions, just describe the questions you would ask
– I would be interested in both intangibles on the SFP, and intangibles that might have value to purchaser but not qualify as intangibles under IAS38 (e.g. R+D, internal brands and goodwill)
– for patents I guess I would want to know how long they have left, is there a possibility to renew/extend, recent sales from the items patented
– for licences, similar to patents
– for brands, how much they spend on advertising, recent sales figures, any reputation issues such as legal cases
– for R+D, what items are they working on, what stage reached, estimated launch dates, market research re potential sales, any legal issues, how tied in are the R+D staffYou mentioned procedures – I guess the questions I am asking above are things I would otherwise check with alternative audit tests if I were the auditor of the target company, so a similar idea.
Not sure what alternative use any intangible asset could have to be honest!
Thank you. Alternative use I proposed was for internally generated Patent. Whether it could be sold and this will give rise to extra cash inflow.
And I also required Forecast with cope of documents, that corroborate main assumptions of the Forecast.
Regarding the rest, the question was about two described in Q2 Intangible Assets. Not for any IA.Regarding the 01.07.2015- Has anybody seen in Q1 – Today is 01.07.2015?
Thank you.
@raoul7370 said:
Yes. Source is the ACCA examining team, who informed all tutors of this in early 2019.. So your tutor should have told you, and the past exam questions in your question bank should all have dates that say 20X4, 20X5 etc instead of real dates, and every question should tell you to assume today’s date is 1 July 20X5.ACCA themselves will not update past Q+A on accaglobal so those questions will still have the original dates in them (which were real dates – i.e. a planning question in December 2016 paper would probably say the year end is 31 December 2016, and therefore 3-4 weeks in the future).
I was prepared myself, without tutor. I examined whole Study Book and Revision Kit from BPP ( relevant for December 2019 Exam), and I did not see this information. I have read ACCA notes for ACCA- not fully, but mainly. Nothing. Is it fair to do so?
@raoul7370 said:
There is no need to “catch” that information.The entire AAA exam is set based on today’s date being 1 July 20X5 (a rule that came in from the Sep19 sitting), so you should have walked into the exam hall with info already “caught”!!!
Do you have any source of this information? Thanks!!
@dimention999 said:
Can anyone remember the requirement of Question 3 part (a)-1 & 2. Is there a procedure for intangible assets on Due diligence report in Part (a) -1 and Additional Information for financing arrangement?As much I remember- regarding IA in Q3 (a) was ” What queries will you send to the target company management in order to evaluate IA”
@raoul7370 said:
Is the following close to correct everyone?Q1
Business risks for 10 marks
Audit risks for 20 marks
Audit procedures on IFRS5 and IFRS2 for 10 marks
Reliance on internal audit for 6 marks
Prof Marks = 4 (for Briefing notes)Q2
Matters to consider, and Impact on Audit Report for 3 separate scenarios (17 marks):
– PPE
– Hedging
– Legal Claimanyone know the marks split on the above?
Ethics and Prof Issues for 8 marks
Q3
Intangible assets and the financing of those, additional info required from discussion with management = 14 marks
Ethics and Prof Issues for 11 marks
I think yes. Or almost the same.
@raoul7370 said:
If audit risk is worth 20 marks and there is no requirement to do analytical calcs, my experience as a marker is that there will be 2 materiality calcs marks (for items that you believe are audit risks). I have seen this stretch to 3 on occasion, but would always presume 2 and therefore be aiming for 9x2m risks and 18m overall.But … and this is important … 6 reasonably explained risks at an average of 1.5 marks, plus 2 materiality calcs, is 11/20 and a pass on that part. If the procedures part of Q1 asked for tests on IFRS5 and IFRS2, then there are two of your audit risks immediately (otherwise you would not be asked for procedures on them), so if you can find another 4 audit risks welcome to Safetyville, Population = you :).
Great! Thank you! Can you please explain about DD request. The question was ” Within DD work, Auditor must assess target company (specifically Intangible Assets) Which enquirers will you send to the Target Company”s management?”
I wrote several sentences, every of which was beginning from ” Kindly, provide us with the following…” and then I listed:
Licence Agreement with details,
opening balance figures,
calculation of amortization,
Confirmation letter regarding alternative use of that intangible assets.I have never seen such requirements in Past Papers….
Thanks in Advance!
Lets discuss a bit Ethic queries. Did you discuss in Q2 that the client is Listed and preparing documents and Taxes is inappropriate under the Code? Since no safeguards can reduce to an acceptable level?
And DD procedures I discussed as ” Kindly provide us with documents- and list of them”
Is it correctly? It looks like a procedures……, but in the form of question…@Fidget said:
I considered this from both angles. Remember that the date was 1 July 20×5, and the year end was 30 Sept 20×5, so there was still time for the announcement which would require a provision if announcement made, or no provision if no announcement made. There was a risk that a provision would be created when it shouldn’t’ve been, or vice versa depending upon the position at 30 Sept.I did not catch that the date of Risk assessment is 01/07/2015. But i caught that there is NO word “announcement”, just “reminder was not made”. And I briefly discussed this point. But definitely you are right that they have time to make announcement.
@ezehrobinson said:
The 150 employees that would be affected have not been identified and communicated, hence no constructive obligationHence no Provision for restructuring, and now I think even assets held for sale (machinery) is a question. They are ready to sell it? Whether the working process was stooped at the reporting date? If no, they are working at that machinery…
Absolutely clear that the machinery must be recognized at FV due to indicator of impairment. Since in any case they would be not in Entity use next year. And value in use not actual.@syeduzairnaqvi said:
Was it 2.5 FV at grant date or 1.7?and no of employees to taken were 1000.at granting date 1.7.
@syeduzairnaqvi said:
Management has started to implement that plan by appoiting surveyor and negotiating with buyer so provision for redundancy could be recorded.IFRS 37
a provision for restructuring costs is recognised only when the entity has a constructive obligation because the main features of the detailed restructuring plan have been announced to those affected by it.@sal2222 said:
I divided by 3 years but after I worked out full cost of scheme.Yes, of course. (1000*1.7*(1000-150))/3 Yes?
The Ethic was rather tricky. In Q2 I remember it was a listed audit client, and the issue with Tax Computation was. The Code prohibited to do Tax for Listed Audit client.
And there are lots times Auditors were assuming management responsibility. In Q2 and Q3 also ( when where “on behalf of client” and meeting with customers. Although in Q3 non-listed client, to Act “on behalf of client” prohibited – such significant threat to assume management responsibility.Kindly comment this, who write the same? Or why it is wrong?
@hashir61 said:
What was the treatment for share based payment plan in Q1? Mine was 1000/2/1.7 = 294 * 850 employees ( 1000-150 ) = $250,000 expense (material to profit and loss) should be recognised over the vesting period and calculation should be based on the fair value of share options at grant date so there might be a material misstatement that management does not take at grant date resulting in misstatement.You divided by 2 year? I divided by 3 year. It was still material in any case. Anybody divided by 3?
