*** ACCA P7 March 2017 Exam was.. Instant Poll and comments ***

Hi. I question no. 5. I wrote 5a I and ii and wrote the answer together as I was running out of time. Like even if I mixed the two, will I be given credit?
For Q2, I couldn’t understand the question much so I just calculated materialities? Will I be awarded marks and how much?

Looks like everyone has done Q4 and Q5 … what was Q3? Some sort of matters and evidence / accounting issues and audit work question?

Does anyone know if paper p7 is marked very strict or you could score marks for vague answers? It is very hard to make answers resemble that of the examiner’s answers. what do you guys think?

I did self study on P7 exam. can anyone tell me if it is necessary to state the specific number and description of the related standards-IAS/ISA/IFRS etc..in answering/discussing your answers?

one can mention control risk as well since i was a big group people and system will struggle to catch up with the volume of transactions. listing reuqiremnt that the company fals within the scope of IAS 33 Earnings Per Share and IFRS 3 Business Combination. Management bias as well since it is listed that might manipulate the financial statements.

@evelang said:
I did self study on P7 exam. can anyone tell me if it is necessary to state the specific number and description of the related standards-IAS/ISA/IFRS etc..in answering/discussing your answers?

i think yes. if u reviewed the answers the examiner did mention numbers.

I do actually remember any i scribbled in this exams. my lack of exam technique

@mschembri said:
for part q1b i said the follwing:

revenue generated per every associate and sub
revenue generated per product
obtain a copy of the bank loan that is going to be used to acquire the company
a schedule of all the intangible asset
a schedule of all the products that are in the research phase

can I have some feedback on this pls.

@mschembri said:
i think yes. if u reviewed the answers the examiner did mention numbers.

Examiner answers will mention actual standard numbers and names. Student answers do not earn ANY marks by doing this so it is a waste of time. As a marker, I am more persuaded of a student’s quality if you write “Under IAS 38, research costs should be expensed not capitalized”, but from my experience those students who write out entire standard names as well as the numbers tend to know a lot but often fail to pass because their studies have focused on memorizing a textbook instead of quality of explanations in answers.

@david1988 said:
I think from reading examiners reports etc the main importance is referring back to the scenario with every point you make.

Not sure how it works when the answers we give are not in the suggested solution. I think if you make a well explained point with reference to the scenario you get the mark. Very much depends on the markers opinion though.

Markers are given an agreed marking plan, with what points are considered relevant and also guidance on what points are NOT acceptable and why. However, when it comes to how these points are explained, we see a lot of variety – things can usually be explained in many different ways. As long as the marker understands the point you are making, and the point is relevant and explained not just stated, all will be well.

As for vague, we have a “VAGUE” button on the marking software and it gets used an awful lot to justify why we have awarded no marks to a particular sentence or paragraph…

Vagueness/lack of clarity is, in my opinion, the biggest reason students fail this paper. Most student answers cover the same set of points – it is HOW you cover them that makes the difference.

@Handsome said:
I have restart my ACCA after a gap and it was my second attempt of P7. I found this paper difficult as compare to the Dec 2016 in which i was failed by 1 mark

Q1 was easy:

Risk of MM:

– Forex exchange risk (company operates in 100 countries)
– Subsideries and associates (complex group structure)
– Continous research (risk of capitalization
– PPE was increased (Risk of overstatement)
– PPE (useful life estimation can be wrong)
– Good will (not immpaired)
– Brand (risk of understatement)
– Development (Risk of overstatement, they may not be qualify for capitilization)
– Finance cost (no change)
– Tax rate (Same tax in both year with different profit)
– Revenue (overstate because it was not consistent with OPM)
– Loan (no interest was charged, disclosure missing etc)

b) additional information:
– additional information elated brand impairment test
– useful life of PPE change, more information about estimates
– finance and Tax not change, more information
– details about loan taken from bank, interest rate and other term etc
– impairment test of all brands, why not impairing?
– information about revenue growth
– information about GW whether impairment test has conduct or not
– previous year FS to verify the impairment test of brands and are they content etc.

I dont know if these are right or wrong by LSBF lecturer said to ask for information regarding to everything.

C) Subsidiary audit procedure and impairment audit procedure. I think it was easy. I have written about 10 audit test in each.. lolz

Q2 was a tricky question

A) we was auditing group and subsidiary, the sub has made mistake but it was corrected. I did not found any professional issue here so i have written about self review threat as we will not check it again because we have done its audit
B) new subsidiary, audit partner rely on local audit working paper. I have written about lack of quality control. Assets were material, risk of FV not calculated, wrong Good will etc
C) audit manager rely on audit firm and did not perform audit. Later there was going concern issue. So, i have written about quality control. Fine the manager, lack of training, he dont know his duty etc

in the end i have written that can rely on audit firm work but still need to perform sample work on their work etc

Q4) I found it easy but did read correctly that first two companies were listed so my actions is not going to get any marks I think as i said we can provide services by putting safeguard there. Third company was fine as it was no public but still need to have safeguard etc.

Q5) It was going concern.

a) not enough audit evidence was collected and out firm mostly rely on client’s generate evidence
b) i have suggested some audit procedures and conclude that company is not going concern
c) client mentioned materiality uncertainty. So i said i will still mention this issue in KAM and give adverse opinion. I know my answer was wrong. I think emphasis paragraph would be better option/

I did mention in question 2 part (a) about related party transactions that should be eliminated even tough it was done correctly. However from the scenario, if I recall the auditors did not perform any reconciliation and the only test of controls were performed. Substantives test has to be performed and the auditor must reconcile as well the transaction between the companies. as audit procedures, I mentioned that the auditors must obtain the sales agreement btw companies to check for the profit margin, review the working papers, reconcile the transaction between companies.

Everyone provide general additional information
But according to my thinking examiner asked about the additional information which is required for the detail performing of Analytical Procedures
Anyone have resemblence

Question 2 was also tricky, as the mark allocations among different verbs in the question was not clear.