(b) Using the unit cost information available and your calculations in (a), prepare a financial analysis of thedecision strategy which TOC may implement with regard to the manufacture of each product. (6 marks)

正确答案：

正确答案：

difference will reduce in the year ending 31 May 2006 due to the projected growth in sales volumes of the Celer Transport
business. The average mail/parcels delivery of mail/parcels per vehicle of the Quicklink Ltd part of the business is budgeted
at 12,764 which is still 30·91% higher than that of the Celer Transport business.
As far as specialist activities are concerned, Quicklink Ltd is budgeted to generate average revenues per vehicle amounting to
￡374,850 whilst Celer Transport is budgeted to earn an average of ￡122,727 from each of the vehicles engaged in delivery
of processed food. It is noticeable that all contracts with major food producers were renewed on 1 June 2005 and it would
appear that there were no increases in the annual value of the contracts with major food producers. This might have been
the result of a strategic decision by the management of the combined entity in order to secure the future of this part of the
business which had been built up previously by the management of Celer Transport.
Each vehicle owned by Quicklink Ltd and Celer Transport is in use for 340 days during each year, which based on a
365 day year would give an in use % of 93%. This appears acceptable given the need for routine maintenance and repairs
due to wear and tear.
During the year ended 31 May 2005 the number of on-time deliveries of mail and parcel and industrial machinery deliveries
were 99·5% and 100% respectively. This compares with ratios of 82% and 97% in respect of mail and parcel and processed
food deliveries made by Celer Transport. In this critical area it is worth noting that Quicklink Ltd achieved their higher on-time
delivery target of 99% in respect of each activity whereas Celer Transport were unable to do so. Moreover, it is worth noting
that Celer Transport missed their target time for delivery of food products on 975 occasions throughout the year 31 May 2005
and this might well cause a high level of customer dissatisfaction and even result in lost business.
It is interesting to note that whilst the businesses operate in the same industry they have a rather different delivery mix in
terms of same day/next day demands by clients. Same day deliveries only comprise 20% of the business of Quicklink Ltd
whereas they comprise 75% of the business of Celer Transport. This may explain why the delivery performance of Celer
Transport with regard to mail and parcel deliveries was not as good as that of Quicklink Ltd.
The fact that 120 items of mail and 25 parcels were lost by the Celer Transport business is most disturbing and could prove
damaging as the safe delivery of such items is the very substance of the business and would almost certainly have resulted
in a loss of customer goodwill. This is an issue which must be addressed as a matter of urgency.
The introduction of the call management system by Quicklink Ltd on 1 June 2004 is now proving its worth with 99% of calls
answered within the target time of 20 seconds. This compares favourably with the Celer Transport business in which only
90% of a much smaller volume of calls were answered within a longer target time of 30 seconds. Future performance in this
area will improve if the call management system is applied to the Celer Transport business. In particular, it is likely that the
number of abandoned calls will be reduced and enhance the ‘image’ of the Celer Transport business.

正确答案：

(ii) As far as annual agreements relating to property work are concerned, HLP had a take up rate of 82·5% whereas MAS
had a take up rate of only 50%. Therefore, HLP has ‘lost out’ to competitor MAS in relative financial terms as regards
the ‘take-up’ of consultations relating to property work. This is because both HLP and MAS received an annual fee from
each property client irrespective of the number of consultations given. MAS should therefore have had a better profit
margin from this area of business than HLP. However, the extent to which HLP has ‘lost out’ cannot be quantified since
we would need to know the variable costs per consultation and this detail is not available. What we do know is that
HLP earned actual revenue per effective consultation amounting to ￡90·90 whereas the budgeted revenue per
consultation amounted to ￡100. MAS earned ￡120 per effective consultation.
The same picture emerges from annual agreements relating to commercial work. HLP had a budgeted take up rate of
50%, however the actual take up rate during the period was 90%. MAS had an actual take up rate of 50%. The actual
revenue per effective consultation earned by HLP amounted to ￡167 whereas the budgeted revenue per consultation
amounted to ￡300. MAS earned ￡250 per effective consultation.
There could possibly be an upside to this situation for HLP in that it might be the case that the uptake of 90% of
consultations without further charge by clients holding annual agreements in respect of commercial work might be
indicative of a high level of customer satisfaction. It could on the other hand be indicative of a mindset which says ‘I
have already paid for these consultations therefore I am going to request them’.
(iii) Budgeted and actual salaries in HLP were ￡50,000 per annum, per advisor. Two additional advisors were employed
during the year in order to provide consultations in respect of commercial work. MAS paid a salary of ￡60,000 to each
advisor which is 20% higher than the salary of ￡50,000 paid to each advisor by HLP. Perhaps this is indicative that
the advisors employed by MAS are more experienced and/or better qualified than those employed by HLP.
HLP paid indemnity insurance of ￡250,000 which is ￡150,000 (150%) more than the amount of ￡100,000 paid by
MAS. This excess cost may well have arisen as a consequence of successful claims against HLP for negligence in
undertaking commercial work. It would be interesting to know whether HLP had been the subject of any successful
claims for negligent work during recent years as premiums invariably reflect the claims history of a business. Rather
worrying is the fact that HLP was subject to three such claims during the year ended 31 May 2007.
Significant subcontract costs were incurred by HLP during the year probably in an attempt to satisfy demand and retain
the goodwill of its clients. HLP incurred subcontract costs in respect of commercial properties which totalled ￡144,000.
These consultations earned revenue amounting to (320 x ￡150) = ￡48,000, hence a loss of ￡96,000 was incurred
in this area of the business.
HLP also paid ￡300,000 for 600 subcontract consultations in respect of litigation work. These consultations earned
revenue amounting to (600 x ￡250) = ￡150,000, hence a loss of ￡150,000 was incurred in this area of the business.
In contrast, MAS paid ￡7,000 for 20 subcontract consultations in respect of commercial work and an identical amount
for 20 subcontract consultations in respect of litigation work. These consultations earned revenue amounting to
20 x (￡150 + ￡200) =￡7,000. Therefore, a loss of only ￡7,000 was incurred in respect of subcontract consultations
by MAS.
Other operating expenses were budgeted at 53·0% of sales revenue. The actual level incurred was 40·7% of sales
revenue. The fixed/variable split of such costs is not given but it may well be the case that the fall in this percentage is
due to good cost control by HLP. However, it might simply be the case that the original budget was flawed. Competitor
MAS would appear to have a slightly superior cost structure to that of HLP since its other operating expenses amounted
to 38·4% of sales revenue. Further information is required in order to draw firmer conclusions regarding cost control
within both businesses.

正确答案：

 

正确答案：
(b) The advantage of Hira Ltd not claiming any capital allowances
In the year ending 31 March 2007 Hira Ltd expects to make a tax adjusted trading loss, before deduction of capital
allowances, of ￡55,000 and to surrender the maximum amount possible of trading losses to Belgrove Ltd and Dovedale Ltd.
For the first nine months of the year from 1 April 2006 to 31 December 2006 Hira Ltd is in a loss relief group with Belgrove
Ltd. The maximum surrender to Belgrove Ltd for this period is the lower of:
– the available loss of ￡41,250 (￡55,000 x 9/12); and
– the profits chargeable to corporation tax of Belgrove of ￡28,500 (￡38,000 x 9/12).
i.e. ￡28,500. This leaves losses of ￡12,750 (￡41,250 – ￡28,500) unrelieved.
For the remaining three months from 1 January 2007 to 31 March 2007 Hira Ltd is a consortium company because at least
75% of its share capital is owned by companies, each of which own at least 5%. It can surrender ￡8,938 (￡55,000 x 3/12
x 65%) to Dovedale Ltd and ￡4,812 (￡55,000 x 3/12 x 35%) to Belgrove Ltd as both companies have sufficient taxable
profits to offset the losses. Accordingly, there are no losses remaining from the three-month period.
The unrelieved losses from the first nine months must be carried forward as Hira Ltd has no income or gains in that year or
the previous year. However, the losses cannot be carried forward beyond 1 January 2007 (the date of the change of
ownership of Hira Ltd) if there is a major change in the nature or conduct of the trade of Hira Ltd. Even if the losses can be
carried forward, the earliest year in which they can be relieved is the year ending 31 March 2009 as Hira Ltd is expected to
make a trading loss in the year ending 31 March 2008.
Any capital allowances claimed by Hira Ltd in the year ending 31 March 2007 would increase the tax adjusted trading loss
for that year and consequently the unrelieved losses arising in the first nine months.
If the capital allowances are not claimed, the whole of the tax written down value brought forward of ￡96,000 would be
carried forward to the year ending 31 March 2008 thus increasing the capital allowances and the tax adjusted trading loss,
for that year. By not claiming any capital allowances, Hira Ltd can effectively transfer a current period trading loss, which
would be created by capital allowances, of ￡24,000 (25% x ￡96,000) from the year ending 31 March 2007 to the following
year where it can be surrendered to the two consortium members.

正确答案：
(c) Tax implications of there being a loan from Flores Ltd to Banda
Flores Ltd should have paid tax to HMRC equal to 25% of the loan, i.e. ￡5,250. The tax should have been paid on the
company’s normal due date for corporation tax in respect of the accounting period in which the loan was made, i.e. 1 April
following the end of the accounting period.
The tax is due because Flores Ltd is a close company that has made a loan to a participator and that loan is not in the ordinary
course of the company’s business.
HMRC will repay the tax when the loan is either repaid or written off.
Flores Ltd should have included the loan on Banda’s Form. P11D in order to report it to HMRC.
Banda should have paid income tax on an annual benefit equal to 5% of the amount of loan outstanding during each tax
year. Accordingly, for each full year for which the loan was outstanding, Banda should have paid income tax of ￡231
(￡21,000 x 5% x 22%).
Interest and penalties may be charged in respect of the tax underpaid by both Flores Ltd and Banda and in respect of the
incorrect returns made to HMRC
Willingness to act for Banda
We would not wish to be associated with a client who has engaged in deliberate tax evasion as this poses a threat to the
fundamental principles of integrity and professional behaviour. Accordingly, we should refuse to act for Banda unless she is
willing to disclose the details regarding the loan to HMRC and pay the ensuing tax liabilities. Even if full disclosure is made,
we should consider whether the loan was deliberately hidden from HMRC or Banda’s previous tax adviser.
In addition, companies are prohibited from making loans to directors under the Companies Act. We should advise Banda to
seek legal advice on her own position and that of Flores Ltd.

正确答案：
(b) Principal additional information
■ Any service contracts with the directors or other members of the management team (e.g. the quantity surveyor). These
may contain ‘exit’ or other settlement terms in the event that their services are no longer required after a takeover/buyout.
■ Prior period financial statements (to 30 June 2005) disclosing significant accounting policies and the key assumptions
concerning the future (and other key sources of estimation uncertainty) that have a significant risk of causing a material
adjustment to the carrying amounts of assets and liabilities in the year to 30 June 2006.
For example, concerning:
– the outcome on the Sarwar dispute;
– estimates for guarantees/claims for rectification;
– assumptions made in estimating costs to completion (e.g. for increases in costs of materials or labour).
Tutorial note: Under IAS 1 ‘Presentation of Financial Statements’ the judgements made by management that have the
most significant effect on amounts recognised in financial statements (other than those involving estimations) should
also be disclosed.
■ The most recent management accounts and cash flow forecasts to assess the quality of management information being
used for decision-making and control. In particular, in providing Robson with the means of keeping its cash flows within
its overdraft limit.
Tutorial note: Note that Prescott has substantial cash resources. Therefore Robson’s lack of finance might be a reason
why its management are interested in selling the business.
■ A copy of the signed bank agreement for the overdraft facility (and any other agreements with finance providers). Any
breaches in debt covenants might result in penalties of contingent liabilities that Prescott would have to bear if it acquired
Robson.
■ The standard terms of contracts with customers for construction works. In particular, for:
– guarantees given (e.g. for rectification under warranty);
– penalty clauses (e.g. in the event of overruns or non-completion);
– disclaimers (including conditions for invoking force majeure).
Prescott will want to make some allowance for settlement of liabilities arising on contracts already completed/in-progress
when offering a price for Robson.
Tutorial note: A takeover might excuse Robson from fulfilling a contract.
■ Legal/correspondence files dealing with matters such as the claims of the residents of the housing development and
Robson’s claim against Sarwar Services Co. Also, fee notes rendered by Robson’s legal advisers showing the costs
incurred on matters referred to them.
■ Robson’s insurer’s ‘cover note’ to determine Robson’s exposure to claims for rectification work, damages, injuries to
employees, etc.
■ The quantity surveyor’s working papers for the last quarterly count (presumably at 31 March 2006) and the latest
available rolling budgets. Particular attention should be given to loss-making contracts and contracts that have not been
started. (Prescott might seek to settle rather than fulfil them.) The pattern of taking profits on contracts will be of
interest, for example, to determine the accuracy of the quantity surveyor’s estimates.
Tutorial note: A regular pattern of taking too much profit too soon might be due to underestimating costs to completion
or be evidence of cost overruns due to rectification.
■ Type and frequency of constructions undertaken. Prescott is interested in the building and refurbishment of hotels and
leisure facilities. Robson’s experience in this area may not be extensive.
■ Non-current asset register showing location of plant and equipment so that some test checking on physical existence
might be undertaken (if an agreed-upon-procedure).

正确答案：
(b) Goodwill
(i) Matters
■ Cost of goodwill, $1·8 million, represents 3·4% consolidated total assets and is therefore material.
Tutorial note: Any assessments of materiality of goodwill against amounts in Aragon’s financial statements are
meaningless since goodwill only exists in the consolidated financial statements of Seymour.
■ It is correct that the goodwill is not being amortised (IFRS 3 Business Combinations). However, it should be tested
at least annually for impairment, by management.
■ Aragon has incurred losses amounting to $1·1 million since it was acquired (two years ago). The write-off of this
amount against goodwill in the consolidated financial statements would be material (being 61% cost of goodwill,
8·3% PBT and 2·1% total assets).
■ The cost of the investment ($4·5 million) in Seymour’s separate financial statements will also be material and
should be tested for impairment.
■ The fair value of net assets acquired was only $2·7 million ($4·5 million less $1·8 million). Therefore the fair
value less costs to sell of Aragon on other than a going concern basis will be less than the carrying amount of the
investment (i.e. the investment is impaired by at least the amount of goodwill recognised on acquisition).
■ In assessing recoverable amount, value in use (rather than fair value less costs to sell) is only relevant if the going
concern assumption is appropriate for Aragon.
■ Supporting Aragon financially may result in Seymour being exposed to actual and/or contingent liabilities that
should be provided for/disclosed in Seymour’s financial statements in accordance with IAS 37 Provisions,
Contingent Liabilities and Contingent Assets.
(ii) Audit evidence
■ Carrying values of cost of investment and goodwill arising on acquisition to prior year audit working papers and
financial statements.
■ A copy of Aragon’s draft financial statements for the year ended 30 September 2006 showing loss for year.
■ Management’s impairment test of Seymour’s investment in Aragon and of the goodwill arising on consolidation at
30 September 2006. That is a comparison of the present value of the future cash flows expected to be generated
by Aragon (a cash-generating unit) compared with the cost of the investment (in Seymour’s separate financial
statements).
■ Results of any impairment tests on Aragon’s assets extracted from Aragon’s working paper files.
■ Analytical procedures on future cash flows to confirm their reasonableness (e.g. by comparison with cash flows for
the last two years).
■ Bank report for audit purposes for any guarantees supporting Aragon’s loan facilities.
■ A copy of Seymour’s ‘comfort letter’ confirming continuing financial support of Aragon for the foreseeable future.

正确答案：
(a)MaximisinggroupprofitDivisionLhasenoughcapacitytosupplybothDivisionManditsexternalcustomerswithcomponentL.Therefore,incrementalcostofDivisionMbuyingexternallyisasfollows:CostperunitofcomponentLwhenboughtfromexternalsupplier:$37CostperunitforDivisionLofmakingcomponentL:$20.ThereforeincrementalcosttogroupofeachunitofcomponentLbeingboughtinbyDivisionMratherthantransferredinternally:$17($37–20).Fromthegroup’spointofview,themostprofitablecourseofactionisthereforethatall120,000unitsofcomponentLshouldbetransferredinternally.(b)CalculatingtotalgroupprofitTotalgroupprofitswillbeasfollows:DivisionL:Contributionearnedpertransferredcomponent=$40–$20=$20Profitearnedpercomponentsoldexternally=$40–$24=$16(c)ProblemswithcurrenttransferpriceandsuggestedalternativeTheproblemisthatthecurrenttransferpriceof$40perunitisnowtoohigh.Whilstthishasnotbeenaproblembeforesinceexternalsupplierswerecharging$42perunit,itisaproblemnowthatDivisionMhasbeenofferedcomponentLfor$37perunit.IfDivisionMnowactsinitsowninterestsratherthantheinterestsofthegroupasawhole,itwillbuycomponentLfromtheexternalsupplierratherthanfromDivisionL.ThiswillmeanthattheprofitsofthegroupwillfallsubstantiallyandDivisionLwillhavesignificantunusedcapacity.Consequently,DivisionLneedstoreduceitsprice.Thecurrentpricedoesnotreflectthefactthattherearenosellinganddistributioncostsassociatedwithtransferringinternally,i.e.thecostofsellinginternallyis$4lessforDivisionLthansellingexternally.So,itcouldreducethepriceto$36andstillmakethesameprofitonthesesalesasonitsexternalsales.ThiswouldthereforebethesuggestedtransferpricesothatDivisionMisstillsaving$1perunitcomparedtotheexternalprice.Atransferpriceof$37wouldalsopresumablybeacceptabletoDivisionMsincethisisthesameastheexternalsupplierisoffering.

正确答案：
(b) Risk management strategies and Chen Products
Risk transference strategy
This would involve the company accepting a portion of the risk and seeking to transfer a part to a third party. Although an
unlikely possibility given the state of existing claims, insurance against future claims would serve to limit Chen’s potential
losses and place a limit on its losses. Outsourcing manufacture may be a way of transferring risk if the ourtsourcee can be
persuaded to accept some of the product liability.
Risk avoidance strategy
An avoidance strategy involves discontinuing the activity that is exposing the company to risk. In the case of Chen this would
involve ceasing production of Product 2. This would be pursued if the impact (hazard) and probability of incurring an
acceptable level of liability were both considered to be unacceptably high and there were no options for transference or
reduction.
Risk reduction strategy
A risk reduction strategy involves seeking to retain a component of the risk (in order to enjoy the return assumed to be
associated with that risk) but to reduce it and thereby limit its ability to create liability. Chen produces four products and it
could reconfigure its production capacity to produce proportionately more of Products 1, 3 and 4 and proportionately less of
Product 2. This would reduce Product 2 in the overall portfolio and therefore Chen’s exposure to its risks. This would need
to be associated with instructions to other departments (e.g. sales and marketing) to similarly reconfigure activities to sell
more of the other products and less of Product 2.
Risk acceptance strategy
A risk acceptance strategy involves taking limited or no action to reduce the exposure to risk and would be taken if the returns
expected from bearing the risk were expected to be greater than the potential liabilities. The case mentions that Product 2 is
highly profitable and it may be that the returns attainable by maintaining and even increasing Product 2’s sales are worth the
liabilities incurred by compensation claims. This is a risk acceptance strategy.

正确答案：

正确答案：
(c) Ways in which each of the problems might be overcome are as follows:
Meeting only the lowest targets
– To overcome the problem there must be some additional incentive. This could be through a change in the basis of bonus
payment which currently only provides an incentive to achieve the 100,000 tonnes of output.
Using more resources than necessary
– Overcoming the problem may require a change in the bonus system which currently does not provide benefit from any
output in excess of 100,000 tonnes. This may not be perceived as sufficiently focused in order to achieve action. It may
be that engendering a culture of continuous improvement would help ensure that employees actively sought ways of
reducing idle time levels.
Making the bonus – whatever it takes
– It is likely that efforts to change the ‘work ethos’ at all levels is required, while not necessarily removing the concept of
a bonus payable to all employees for achievement of targets. This may require the fostering of a culture for success within
the company. Dissemination of information to all staff relating to trends in performance, meeting targets, etc may help
to improve focus on continuous improvement.
Competing against other divisions, business units and departments
– The problem may need some input from the directors of TRG. For example, could a ‘dual-cost’ transfer pricing system
be explained to management at both the Bettamould division and also the Division with spare capacity in order to
overcome resistance to problems on transfer pricing and its impact on divisional budgets and reported results? In this
way it may be possible for the Bettamould division to source some of its input materials at a lower cost (particularly from
TRG’s viewpoint) and yet be acceptable to the management at the supplying division.
Ensuring that what is in the budget is spent
– In order to overcome the problem it may be necessary to educate management into acceptance of aspects of budgeting
such as the need to consider the committed, engineered and discretionary aspects of costs. For example, it may be
possible to reduce the number of salaried staff involved in the current quality checking of 25% of throughput on a daily
basis.
Providing inaccurate forecasts
– In order to overcome this problem there must be an integrated approach to the budget setting process. This may be
achieved to some extent through all aspects of the budget having to be agreed by all functions involved. For example,
engineers as well as production line management in reaching the agreed link between percentage process losses and
the falling efficiency of machinery due to age. In addition, TRC may insist an independent audit of aspects of budget
revisions by group staff.
Meeting the target but not beating it
– To overcome the problem may require that the bonus system should be altered to reflect any failure to control costs per
tonne at the budget level.
Avoiding risks
– In order to overcome such problems, TRC would have to provide some guarantees to Bettamould management that the
supply would be available during the budget period at the initially agreed price and that the quality would be maintained
at the required level. This would remove the risk element that the management of the Bettamould division may consider
currently exists.

正确答案：
(iii) If no new products are available then CTC must look to boost revenues obtained from its existing product portolio whilst
seeking to reduce product specific fixed overheads and the company’s other fixed overheads. In order to do this attention
should be focused on the marketing activities currently undertaken.
CTC should consider selling all of its products in ‘multi product’ packages as it might well be the case that the increased
contribution achieved from increased sales volumes would outweigh the diminution in contribution arising from
reductions in the selling price per unit of each product.
CTC could also apply target costing principles in order to reduce costs and thereby increase the margins on each of its
products. Value analysis should be undertaken in order to evaluate the value-added features of each product. For
example, the use of non-combustible materials in manufacture would be a valued added feature of such products
whereas the use of pins and metal fastenings which are potentially harmful to children would obviously not comprise
value added features. CTC should focus on delivering ‘value’ to the customer and in attempting to do so should seek to
identify all non-value activities in order that they may be eliminated and hence margins improved.

正确答案：

(iii) The effect of the restructuring on the group’s ability to recover its input tax
Prior to the restructuring
Rapier Ltd and Switch Ltd make wholly standard rated supplies and are in a position to recover all of their input tax
other than that which is specifically blocked. Dirk Ltd and Flick Ltd are unable to register for VAT as they do not make
taxable supplies. Accordingly, they cannot recover any of their input tax.
Following the restructuring
Rapier Ltd will be carrying on four separate trades, two of which involve the making of exempt supplies such that it will
be a partially exempt trader. Its recoverable input tax will be calculated as follows.
– Input tax in respect of inputs wholly attributable to taxable supplies is recoverable.
– Input tax in respect of inputs wholly attributable to exempt supplies cannot be recovered (subject to the de minimis
limits below).
– A proportion of the company’s residual input tax, i.e. input tax in respect of inputs which cannot be directly
attributed to particular supplies, is recoverable. The proportion is taxable supplies (VAT exclusive) divided by total
supplies (VAT exclusive). This proportion is rounded up to the nearest whole percentage where total residual input
tax is no more than ￡400,000 per quarter.
The balance of the residual input tax cannot be recovered (subject to the de minimis limits below).
– If the de minimis limits are satisfied, Rapier Ltd will be able to recover all of its input tax (other than that which is
specifically blocked) including that which relates to exempt supplies. The de minimis limits are satisfied where the
irrecoverable input tax:
– is less than or equal to ￡625 per month on average; and
– is less than or equal to 50% of total input tax.
The impact of the restructuring on the group’s ability to recover its input tax will depend on the level of supplies made
by the different businesses and the amounts of input tax involved. The restructuring could result in the group being able
to recover all of its input tax (if the de minimis limits are satisfied). Alternatively the amount of irrecoverable input tax
may be more or less than the amounts which cannot be recovered by Dirk Ltd and Flick Ltd under the existing group
structure.

正确答案：
(b) Financial statement risks
Assets
■ There is a very high risk that inventory could be materially overstated in the balance sheet (thereby overstating profit)
because:
? there is a high volume of metals (hence material);
? valuable metals are made more portable;
? subsidy gives an incentive to overstate purchases (and hence inventory);
? inventory may not exist due to lack of physical controls (e.g. aluminium can blow away);
? scrap metal in the stockyard may have zero net realisable value (e.g. iron is rusty and slow-moving);
? quantities per counts not attended by an auditor have increased by a third.
■ Inventory could be otherwise misstated (over or under) due to:
? the weighbridge being inaccurate;
? metal qualities being estimated;
? different metals being mixed up; and
? the lack of an independent expert to identify/measure/value metals.
■ Tangible non-current assets are understated as the parts of the furnaces that require replacement (the linings) are not
capitalised (and depreciated) as separate items but treated as repairs/maintenance/renewals and expensed.
■ Cash may be understated due to incomplete recording of sales.
■ Recorded cash will be overstated if it does not exist (e.g. if it has been stolen).
■ Trade receivables may be understated if cash receipts from credit customers have been misappropriated.
Liabilities
■ The provision for the replacement of the furnace linings is overstated by the amount provided in the current and previous
year (i.e. in its entirety).
Tutorial note: Last replacement was two years ago.
Income statement
■ Revenue will be understated in respect of unrecorded cash sales of salvaged metals and ‘clinker’.
■ Scrap metal purchases (for cash) are at risk of overstatement:
? to inflate the 15% subsidy;
? to conceal misappropriated cash.
■ The income subsidy will be overstated if quantities purchased are overstated and/or overvalued (on the quarterly returns)
to obtain the amount of the subsidy.
■ Cash receipts/payments that were recorded only in the cash book in November are at risk of being unrecorded (in the
absence of cash book postings for November), especially if they are of a ‘one-off’ nature.
Tutorial note: Cash purchases of scrap and sales of salvaged metal should be recorded elsewhere (i.e. in the manual
inventory records). However, a one-off expense (of a capital or revenue nature) could be omitted in the absence of
another record.
■ Expenditure is overstated in respect of the 25% provision for replacing the furnace linings. However, as depreciation
will be similarly understated (as the furnace linings have not been capitalised) there is no risk of material misstatement
to the income statement overall.
Disclosure risk
■ A going concern (‘failure’) risk may arise through the loss of:
? sales revenue (e.g. through misappropriation of salvaged metals and/or cash);
? the subsidy (e.g. if returns are prepared fraudulently);
? cash (e.g. if material amounts stolen).
Any significant doubts about going concern must be suitably disclosed in the notes to the financial statements.
Disclosure risk arises if the requirements of IAS 1 ‘Presentation of Financial Statements’ are not met.
■ Disclosure risk arises if contingent liabilities in connection with the dumping of ‘clinker’ (e.g. for fines and penalties) are
not adequately disclosed in accordance with IAS 37 ‘Provisions, Contingent Liabilities and Contingent Assets’.
Appropriate audit approach
Tutorial note: In explaining why AN audit approach is appropriate for Indigo it can be relevant to comment on the
unsuitability of other approaches.
■ A risk-based approach is suitable because:
? inherent risk is high at the entity and financial assertion levels;
? material errors are likely to arise in inventory where a high degree of subjectivity will be involved (regarding quality
of metals, quantities, net realisable value, etc);
? it directs the audit effort to inventory, purchases, income (sales and subsidy) and other risk areas (e.g. contingent
liabilities).
■ A systems-based/compliance approach is not suited to the risk areas identified because controls are lacking/ineffective
(e.g. over inventory and cash). Also, as the audit appointment was not more than three months ago and no interim
audit has been conducted (and the balance sheet date is only three weeks away) testing controls is likely to be less
efficient than a substantive approach.
■ A detailed substantive/balance sheet approach would be suitable to direct audit effort to the appropriate valuation of
assets (and liabilities) existing at balance sheet date. Principal audit work would include:
? attendance at a full physical inventory count at 31 December 2005;
? verifying cash at bank (through bank confirmation and reconciliation) and in hand (through physical count);
? confirming the accuracy of the quarterly returns to the local authority.
■ A cyclical approach/directional testing is unlikely to be suitable as cycles are incomplete. For example the purchases
cycle for metals is ‘purchase/cash’ rather than ‘purchase/payable/cash’ and there is no independent third party evidence
to compensate for that which would be available if there were trade payables (i.e. suppliers’ statements). Also the cycles
are inextricably inter-related to cash and inventory – amounts of which are subject to high inherent risk.
■ Analytical procedures may be of limited use for substantive purposes. Factors restricting the use of substantive analytical
procedures include:
? fluctuating margins (e.g. as many factors will influence the price at which scrap is purchased and subsequently
sold, when salvaged, sometime later);
? a lack of reliable/historic information on which to make comparisons.

正确答案：
(b) Sale of industrial equipment
(i) Matters
■ The industrial equipment was in use for nine years (from April 1996) and would have had a carrying value of
$660,000 at 31 March 2005 (11/20 × $1·2m – assuming nil residual value and a full year’s depreciation charge
in the year of acquisition and none in the year of disposal). Disposal proceeds were therefore only $360,000.
■ The $0·3m loss represents 15% of PBT (for the year to 31 March 2006) and is therefore material. The equipment
was material to the balance sheet at 31 March 2005 representing 2·6% of total assets ($0·66/$25·7 × 100).
■ Separate disclosure, of a material loss on disposal, on the face of the income statement is in accordance with
IAS 16 ‘Property, Plant and Equipment’. However, in accordance with IAS 1 ‘Presentation of Financial Statements’,
it should not be captioned in any way that might suggest that it is not part of normal operating activities (i.e. not
‘extraordinary’, ‘exceptional’, etc).
Tutorial note: However, note that if there is a prior period error to be accounted for (see later), there would be
no impact on the current period income statement requiring consideration of any disclosure.
■ The reason for the sale. For example, whether the equipment was:
– surplus to operating requirements (i.e. not being replaced); or
– being replaced with newer equipment (thereby contributing to the $8·1m increase (33·8 – 25·7) in total
assets).
■ The reason for the loss on sale. For example, whether:
– the sale was at an under-value (e.g. to a related party);
– the equipment had a bad maintenance history (or was otherwise impaired);
– the useful life of the equipment is less than 20 years;
– there is any deferred consideration not yet recorded;
– any non-cash disposal proceeds have been overlooked (e.g. if another asset was acquired in a part-exchange).
■ If the useful life was less than 20 years, tangible non-current assets may be materially overstated in respect of other
items of equipment that are still in use and being depreciated on the same basis.
■ If the sale was to a related party then additional disclosure should be required in a note to the financial statements
for the year to 31 March 2006 (IAS 24 ‘Related Party Disclosures’).
Tutorial note: Since there are no specific pointers to a related party transaction (RPT), this point is not expanded
on.
■ Whether the sale was identified in the prior year audit’s post balance sheet event review. If so:
– the disclosure made in the prior year’s financial statements (IAS 10 ‘Events After the Balance Sheet Date’);
– whether an impairment loss was recognised at 31 March 2005.
■ If not, and the equipment was impaired at 31 March 2005, a prior period error should be accounted for (IAS 8
‘Accounting Policies, Changes in Accounting Estimates and Errors’). An impairment loss of $0·3m would have
been material to prior year profit (12·5%).
Tutorial note: Unless this was a RPT or the impairment arose after 31 March 2005 a prior period adjustment
should be made.
■ Failure to account for a prior period error (if any) would result in modification of the audit opinion ‘except for’ noncompliance
with IAS 8 (in the current year) and IAS 36 (in the prior period).
(ii) Audit evidence
■ Carrying amount ($0·66m as above) agreed to the non-current asset register balances at 31 March 2005 and
recalculation of the loss on disposal.
■ Cost and accumulated depreciation removed from the asset register in the year to 31 March 2006.
■ Receipt of proceeds per cash book agreed to bank statement.
■ Sales invoice transferring title to Deakin.
■ A review of maintenance expenses and records (e.g. to confirm reason for loss on sale).
■ Post balance sheet event review on prior year audit working papers file.
■ Management representation confirming that Deakin is not a related party (provided that there is no evidence to
suggest otherwise).

正确答案：

This question requires candidates to consider the law relating to terms in contracts. It specifically requires the candidates to distinguish between terms and mere representations and then to establish the difference between express and implied terms in contracts.
(a) As the parties to a contract will be bound to perform. any promise they have contracted to undertake, it is important to distinguish between such statements that will be considered part of the contract, i.e. terms, and those other pre-contractual statements which are not considered to be part of the contract, i.e. mere representations. The reason for distinguishing between them is that there are different legal remedies available if either statement turns out to be incorrect.
A representation is a statement that induces a contract but does not become a term of the contract. In practice it is sometimes difficult to distinguish between the two, but in attempting to do so the courts will focus on when the statement was made in relation to the eventual contract, the importance of the statement in relation to the contract and whether or not the party making the statement had specialist knowledge on which the other party relied (Oscar Chess v Williams (1957) and Dick
Bentley v Arnold Smith Motors (1965)).
(b) Express terms are statements actually made by one of the parties with the intention that they become part of the contract and
thus binding and enforceable through court action if necessary. It is this intention that distinguishes the contractual term from
the mere representation, which, although it may induce the contractual agreement, does not become a term of the contract.
Failure to comply with the former gives rise to an action for breach of contract, whilst failure to comply with the latter only gives rise to an action for misrepresentation.

Such express statements may be made by word of mouth or in writing as long as they are sufficiently clear for them to be enforceable. Thus in Scammel v Ouston (1941) Ouston had ordered a van from the claimant on the understanding that the balance of the purchase price was to be paid ‘on hire purchase terms over two years’. When Scammel failed to deliver the van Ouston sued for breach of contract without success, the court holding that the supposed terms of the contract were too
uncertain to be enforceable. There was no doubt that Ouston wanted the van on hire purchase but his difficulty was that
Scammel operated a range of hire purchase terms and the precise conditions of his proposed hire purchase agreement were
never sufficiently determined.
Implied terms, however, are not actually stated or expressly included in the contract, but are introduced into the contract by implication. In other words the exact meaning and thus the terms of the contract are inferred from its context. Implied terms can be divided into three types.
Terms implied by statute
In this instance a particular piece of legislation states that certain terms have to be taken as constituting part of an agreement, even where the contractual agreement between the parties is itself silent as to that particular provision. For example, under s.5 of the Partnership Act 1890, every member of an ordinary partnership has the implied power to bind the partnership in a contract within its usual sphere of business. That particular implied power can be removed or reduced by the partnership agreement and any such removal or reduction of authority would be effective as long as the other party was aware of it. Some implied terms, however, are completely prescriptive and cannot be removed.
Terms implied by custom or usage
An agreement may be subject to terms that are customarily found in such contracts within a particular market, trade or locality. Once again this is the case even where it is not actually specified by the parties. For example, in Hutton v Warren (1836), it was held that customary usage permitted a farm tenant to claim an allowance for seed and labour on quitting his tenancy. It should be noted, however, that custom cannot override the express terms of an agreement (Les Affreteurs Reunnis SA v Walford (1919)).
Terms implied by the courts Generally, it is a matter for the parties concerned to decide the terms of a contract, but on occasion the court will presume that the parties intended to include a term which is not expressly stated. They will do so where it is necessary to give business efficacy to the contract.

Whether a term may be implied can be decided on the basis of the officious bystander test. Imagine two parties, A and B, negotiating a contract, when a third party, C, interrupts to suggest a particular provision. A and B reply that that particular term is understood. In just such a way, the court will decide that a term should be implied into a contract.
In The Moorcock (1889), the appellants, owners of a wharf, contracted with the respondents to permit them to discharge their ship at the wharf. It was apparent to both parties that when the tide was out the ship would rest on the riverbed. When the tide was out, the ship sustained damage by settling on a ridge. It was held that there was an implied warranty in the contract that the place of anchorage should be safe for the ship. As a consequence, the ship owner was entitled to damages for breach of that term.
Alternatively the courts will imply certain terms into unspecific contracts where the parties have not reduced the general agreement into specific details. Thus in contracts of employment the courts have asserted the existence of implied terms to impose duties on both employers and employees, although such implied terms can be overridden by express contractual provision to the contrary.

正确答案：
AchievementofcorporateobjectivesJJGCohasshareholderwealthmaximisationasanobjective.Thewealthofshareholdersisincreasedbydividendsreceivedandcapitalgainsonsharesowned.Totalshareholderreturncomparesthesumofthedividendreceivedandthecapitalgainwiththeopeningshareprice.TheshareholdersofJJGCohadareturnof58%in2008,comparedwithareturnpredictedbythecapitalassetpricingmodelof14%.Thelowestreturnshareholdershavereceivedwas21%andthehighestreturnwas82%.Onthisbasis,theshareholdersofthecompanyhaveexperiencedasignificantincreaseinwealth.Itisdebatablewhetherthishasbeenasaresultoftheactionsofthecompany,however.Sharepricesmayincreaseirrespectiveoftheactionsanddecisionsofmanagers,orevendespitethem.Infact,lookingatthedividendpersharehistoryofthecompany,therewasoneyear(2006)wheredividendswereconstant,eventhoughearningspershareincreased.Itisalsodifficulttoknowwhenwealthhasbeenmaximised.Anotherobjectiveofthecompanywastoachieveacontinuousincreaseinearningspershare.Analysisshowsthatearningspershareincreasedeveryyear,withanaverageincreaseof14·9%.Thisobjectiveappearstohavebeenachieved.CommentonfinancialperformanceReturnoncapitalemployed(ROCE)hasbeengrowingtowardsthesectoraverageof25%onayear-by-yearbasisfrom22%in2005.Thissteadygrowthintheprimaryaccountingratiocanbecontrastedwithirregulargrowthinturnover,thereasonsforwhichareunknown.Returnonshareholders’fundshasbeenconsistentlyhigherthantheaverageforthesector.ThismaybeduemoretothecapitalstructureofJJGCothantogoodperformancebythecompany,however,inthesensethatshareholders’fundsaresmalleronabookvaluebasisthanthelong-termdebtcapital.Ineverypreviousyearbut2008thegearingofthecompanywashigherthanthesectoraverage.(b)CalculationoftheoreticalexrightspershareCurrentshareprice=$8·64pershareCurrentnumberofshares=5·5millionsharesFinancetoberaised=$15mRightsissueprice=$7·50pershareNumberofsharesissued=15m/7·50=2millionsharesTheoreticalexrightspricepershare=((5·5mx8·64)+(2mx7·50))/7·5m=$8·34pershareThesharepricewouldfallfrom$8·64to$8·34pershareHowever,therewouldbenoeffectonshareholderwealthEffectofrightsissueonearningspershareCurrentEPS=100centspershareRevisedEPS=100x5·5m/7·5m=73centspershareTheEPSwouldfallfrom100centspershareto73centspershareHowever,asmentionedearlier,therewouldbenoeffectonshareholderwealthEffectofrightsissueonthedebt/equityratioCurrentdebt/equityratio=100x20/47·5=42%Revisedmarketvalueofequity=7·5mx8·34=$62·55millionReviseddebt/equityratio=100x20/62·55=32%Thedebt/equityratiowouldfallfrom42%to32%,whichiswellbelowthesectoraveragevalueandwouldsignalareductioninfinancialrisk(c)Thecurrentdebt/equityratioofJJGCois42%(20/47·5).Althoughthisislessthanthesectoraveragevalueof50%,itismoreusefulfromafinancialriskperspectivetolookattheextenttowhichinterestpaymentsarecoveredbyprofits.Theinterestonthebondissueis$1·6million(8%of$20m),givinganinterestcoverageratioof6·1times.IfJJGCohasoverdraftfinance,theinterestcoverageratiowillbelowerthanthis,butthereisinsufficientinformationtodetermineifanoverdraftexists.Theinterestcoverageratioisnotonlybelowthesectoraverage,itisalsolowenoughtobeacauseforconcern.Whiletheratioshowsanupwardtrendovertheperiodunderconsideration,itstillindicatesthatanissueoffurtherdebtwouldbeunwise.Aplacing,oranyissueofnewsharessuchasarightsissueorapublicoffer,woulddecreasegearing.Iftheexpansionofbusinessresultsinanincreaseinprofitbeforeinterestandtax,theinterestcoverageratiowillincreaseandfinancialriskwillfall.GiventhecurrentfinancialpositionofJJGCo,adecreaseinfinancialriskiscertainlypreferabletoanincrease.Aplacingwilldiluteownershipandcontrol,providingthenewequityissueistakenupbynewinstitutionalshareholders,whilearightsissuewillnotdiluteownershipandcontrol,providingexistingshareholderstakeuptheirrights.Abondissuedoesnothaveownershipandcontrolimplications,althoughrestrictiveornegativecovenantsinbondissuedocumentscanlimittheactionsofacompanyanditsmanagers.Allthreefinancingchoicesarelong-termsourcesoffinanceandsoareappropriateforalong-terminvestmentsuchastheproposedexpansionofexistingbusiness.Equityissuessuchasaplacingandarightsissuedonotrequiresecurity.Noinformationisprovidedonthenon-currentassetsofJJGCo,butitislikelythattheexistingbondissueissecured.Ifanewbondissuewasbeingconsidered,JJGCowouldneedtoconsiderwhetherithadsufficientnon-currentassetstoofferassecurity,althoughitislikelythatnewnon-currentassetswouldbeboughtaspartofthebusinessexpansion.