- This topic has 5 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 2 months ago by
.
- Posts
Ma’am, in the exam kit for questions in Section B regarding IC deficiencies, sometimes the answers on control recommendations or test of controls contains 2 or 3 points. Since both control recommendation and test of controls both carry a mark each, is it enough to explain one recommendation/test of control or more than one?
Thank you very much!
Short answer – only one
The published answers are more comprehensive than any candiate can reasonably be expected to produce in the exam.
Per the examiner’s report:
“Marks are awarded for identification of deficiencies (½ mark each), explanation of the implication of the deficiency to the audit firm (½ mark each) and an appropriate recommendation to address each deficiency (1 mark each).”
The scenario will always contain more than the required number of deficiencies – so go for the ones that you can explain and write a recommendation for.
Noted ma’am, thank you!
Also when explaining direct controls, should we always state what potential misstatement is being detected/prevented or is just explaining the aim of the control is sufficient?
To detect/prevent IS the aim.
This is what the M/J24 examiner’s report (available at https://www.accaglobal.com/uk/en/student/exam-support-resources/fundamentals-exams-study-resources/f8/examiners-reports1.html)advises:
“Having identified direct controls, candidates then need to explain each control. In considering
this it is important to think about what the AIM of the control is e.g. what potential misstatement
is being prevented or detected. The explanation needs to be specific to each control. It is not
sufficient to state ‘this will prevent fraud and error’ as all controls aim to prevent or detect fraud
and error in some way. A clear understanding of specifically how the control will prevent fraud
and error is needed.”
- The topic ‘Internal controls: Section B’ is closed to new replies.