2010年12月ACCA考試考官報(bào)告(P2)(3)

　　問(wèn)題三是關(guān)于企業(yè)財(cái)務(wù)報(bào)表的?？荚囋嚲矸磻?yīng)財(cái)務(wù)報(bào)表的真實(shí)情況是很重要的，這樣考生們就可以把他們所學(xué)的知識(shí)運(yùn)用到這些真實(shí)的例子里。考生需要先討論預(yù)計(jì)負(fù)債和或有負(fù)債的性質(zhì)，雖然許多考生至終下了錯(cuò)誤的結(jié)論，但總體上還是答得很好。問(wèn)題四考生們普遍發(fā)揮得不錯(cuò)。

Question Three
This question dealt with real world scenarios taken from corporate financial statements.It is important that the exam paper reflects actual issues in financial statements and those candidates can apply their knowledge to these scenarios.

A public limited company which developed and operated airports was involved in litigation over an accident at one of the airports and the issues was whether a provision or contingent liability should be provided for.In this case it was important for candidates to justify their conclusion by discussing the nature of a provision and contingency.This part of the question was well answered although many candidates came to the incorrect conclusion.

In part b,candidates had to determine the relationship between an entity and a company that it had invested in.There was a need to discuss the relationship between the two entities in order to determine what the relationship constituted.Many candidates did not again use the scenario and in this question it was critical to discuss the facts in the question.However the question was well answered.

In part c the entity issued shares for the acquisition of franchise rights at a local airport and
showed irredeemable preference shares as equity instruments in its statement of financial position.Candidates had to determine the correct accounting treatment for these items.This part of the question was not well answered with candidates not understanding how to account for the irredeemable preference shares.Understanding the nature of equity and liability is a key element of the syllabus.
Overall the question was well answered.

Question Four
In part a,candidates had to comment on the different approaches which could have been taken by the International Accounting Standards Board in developing the ‘IFRS for Small and Medium-sized Entities’ explaining the approach finally taken by the IASB.Additionally candidates had to discuss the main differences and modifications to IFRS which the IASB made to reduce the burden of reporting for SME’s.Specific examples had to be given and also a discussion of how the Board had dealt with the problem of defining an SME.This part of the question was very well answered.The subject had been very topical and been the subject of articles in the accountancy press.

In part b candidates had to discuss how the certain transactions should be dealt with in the financial statements of an entity with reference to the ‘IFRS for Small and Medium-sized Entities’.The answers to this part of the question were quite variable.The three topic areas chosen were defined benefit,the purchase of an entity and research and development expenditure.Candidates were generally unclear about how to account for the transactions and many used full IFRS.The main issue was that candidates automatically assumed that the corridor approach would be used for defined benefit schemes which was incorrect.

This question was generally well answered.