Forum Replies Created
- Posts
Q1 Group company
Scenario: Newly appointed component auditor.
1(a) Audit risks. (Impairment is specifically to be excluded) (24m)
(b) Evaluate the implications regarding impairment of a subsidiary. (8m)
(c) Audit procedures for the restructuring provision on sale of Far Co (Subsidiary with impairment indications) (6m)
(d) Component auditor implications ( Decreased substantive testing and planned to not waste too much time and rely on ICS of client and audit data analytics procedures) (8m)The audit risks are really so hard to be identified, I even had no choice but to separate the new component auditor to 2 risks to new component auditor and they minimize substantive procedures. Asset held for sales was weird, planned to be sold in August but it was still included in the management’s account for September (Not sure is this a wrong recognition answer, or indicating the group failed to sell the subsi in August).
Impairment is specifically to be excluded which is bad as the risks identified are so less. Spent almost an hour on 1(a) and had to rush for other questions.
2
(a) (9m)
(i) Purposes of Due Diligence (DD)
(ii) Evaluation of benefits of DD
(b) Procedures for DD (10m)
(i) For new equipment acquired and claimed by CEO that will improve productivity and reduce production cost
(ii) Can’t recall for what specific item.
(c) Ethical and professional issues for client wanting us to recruit his son as employee and offered us to remain as audit client and offer future DD assignments. (6m)This is probably the worst question, the question was really long providing us the history of the company but at the end of the question only asks us for purpose and benefits of DD. Wasted a lot of my time reading thru the question.
Ethics question was weird as the son is recruited in the DD department so the usual ethical implications on audit may not be the right answer.
3
(a) (5m)
(i) Difference between TCWG and Management
(ii) Difference in reporting to management and TCWG(b) Report to TCWG on the implications (20m)
(i) Investment property (Change of accounting policy and the opening balance is not amended) (8m)
(ii) Revenue subscription (System changed and last year treatment is wrong, this year had to do adjustment, mgmt refuses to adjust and audit firm wants to request to charge for higher fee as the testing done on this is extensive.) (6m)
(iii) Internal control weakness (No control on refund and cancellation process and anyone able to access to the system can do the refund.) (6m)Strange for this one, the adjustments done by auditor are given and I only wrote implications on the audit report and the weakness of ICS and the adjustment is quite complicated as well but I was running out of time so I did not read it in detail.
Had no choice but to squeeze in materiality and report implications even though question was report to TCWG. Not sure is this the right answer.
Overall, this is the worst paper as I have practiced a lot of past years and this is probably the question I identified the least audit risks but the marks are high at 24 marks. Had to take remote exam due to cancellation of centre exam, waited for 1 hour to check in and I was mentally exhausted from waiting. Really hope ACCA/ Pearson can improve on the check in process as it was tiring.
Fingers crossed for this paper. 🙁
Anyone has also find the financial & operations performance question weird whereas the F/S for 20X1 & 20X2 has such a small difference?
I only wrote like small increase in debtors and creditors which should be monitored and the gearing ratio which the amount of the loan is relatively too high compared with the share capital but somehow the gearing ratio is maintained but at a risky level so I suggested directors inject more capital or find a venture capitalist since LEP is a limited company?(Hope I am not wrong on this.)
Kinda felt this paper was somehow weird as the exhibits have given a lot of information to us but needed some time to think whether the information can help us on answering the requirements. Spent too much time on Q1 as well and left with 1.5 hours for the last 3 questions and luckily managed to finish them but wrote lesser points in the last question.
Fingers crossed and hoping can pass this paper. Good luck everyone!
Hi there, just a little bit of a heads up, I took the INT variant and do not expect Q1 and Q2 to come out as the same as past year exams. Our sitting has increased the difficulty of both of these 2 questions so much and incorporates way too much other accounting standards in both of these questions rather than purely just conso F/S or cash flow and ethical implications of account managers trying to manipulate figures to get bonus.
Try to cover and understand all of the accounting standards and read all the relevant technical articles in the ACCA website as I can tell you that our study text does not cover some of the current issues which is tested in SBR exam.
You can check the previous comments of what came out in the Dec exam but it differs with UK and INT variants.
I just kinda felt that the examiner is trying to test a variety of accounting standards in the most complex way possible to test the candidates but somehow got out of the question structure range especially in Q1 and Q2.
Anyhow, let’s just hope for the best for this paper 😀
Thanks for the insight! I simply wrote shares were issued to finance the purchase without any journal entries so I did not include any amounts as well which I think could be wrong as I probably missed out on the share price of the company.
Can only say that all tutors and ACCA should inform there is a change in the question structure on Q1 of SBR.
Even the official ACCA video on SBR stated Q1 is based on financial statements of group entities and a minor part based on financial reporting issues which this sitting paper does not follow at all which only 5 marks for goodwill for acquisition. Others are basically based on other standards and a small part on asset acquisition and not business combination.
I even practiced almost all the SBR past year papers and can see a huge difference on Q1 with past year papers where past years are mostly focused on business combination or cash flows. This sitting basically proves Q1 is more than just merely group statements lol.
Q1 had something to do with issuing shares to purchase land and buildings (if i’m not mistaken). Does anyone think the shares issued as financial instruments are held at FVTPL as it is to finance the purchase to eliminate the accounting mismatch?
This part and the recognition of investment property is worth 10 marks in Q1 which totally screwed me up as I always thought Q1 is always based on group F/S or cash flows.
The question structure has changed in my opinion. Q1 relating to group accounts is only worth 5 marks which is goodwill calculations. Who knew that other standards will take such a big portion of marks in Q1.
Overall, this paper was a disaster. Ethics question even had a small part of calculation and IFRS 9 (If I am not mistaken again) and the ethical implications only worth 10 marks without even any related IFRSs.
Pretty sure gonna prepare to re-sit for this paper
