6 The explosive growth of investing and raising capital in the global markets has put new emphasis on the developmentof international accounting, auditing and ethical standards. The International Federation of Accountants (IFAC) hasbeen at the forefront o

正确答案：
6 CERTAIN PRACTICES
Tutorial note: The answer which follows is indicative of the range of points which might be made. Other relevant material will
be given suitable credit.
(a) ‘Lowballing’
Explanation of term
‘Lowballing’ is the ‘loss-leading’ practice in which auditors compete for clients by reducing their fees for statutory audits.
Lower audit fees are then compensated by the auditor carrying out more lucrative non-audit work (e.g. consultancy and tax
advice). Audits may even be offered for free.
Such ‘predatory pricing’ may undercut an incumbent auditor to secure an appointment into which higher price consultancy
services may be sold.
Ethical risks
There is a risk of incompetence if the non-audit work does not materialise and the lowballing firm comes under pressure to
cut corners or resort to irregular practices (e.g. the falsification of audit working papers) in order to ‘keep within budget’.
However, a lack of audit quality may only be discovered if the situation arises that the company collapses and the auditors
are charged with negligence.
If, rather than comprise the quality of the audit, an audit firm substantially increases audit fees, a fee dispute could arise. In
this case the client might refuse to pay the higher fee. It could be difficult then for the firm to take the matter to arbitration
if the client was misled. Thus an advocacy threat may arise.
Financial dependence is a direct incentive that threatens independence. A self-interest threat therefore arises when, having
secured the audit, the audit firm needs the client to retain its services in order to recoup any losses initially incurred.
The provision of many other services gives rise to a self-review threat (as well as a self-interest threat).
Sufficiency of current ethical guidance
In current ethical guidance, the fact that an accountancy firm quotes a lower fee than other tendering firms is not improper,
providing that the prospective client is not misled about:
– the precise range of services that the quoted fee is intended to cover; and
– the likely level of fees for any other work undertaken.
This is clearly insufficient to prevent the practice of lowballing.
Legal prohibitions on the provision of many non-audit services (e.g. bookkeeping, financial information systems design and
implementation, valuation services, actuarial services, internal audit (outsourced), human resource services for executive
positions, investment and legal services) should make lowballing a riskier pricing strategy. This may curb the tendency to
lowball.
Lowballing could be eliminated if, for example, auditors were required to act ‘exclusively as auditors’. Although regulatory
environments have moved towards this there is not a total prohibition on non-audit services.

答案：A

解析：

答案：B

解析：

答案：D

解析：

答案：B

解析：

答案：C

解析：

正确答案：
(c) Application of ethical principles to a fraud investigation
IFAC’s Code of Ethics for Professional Accountants applies to all ACCA members involved in professional assignments,
including forensic investigations. There are specific considerations in the application of each of the principles in providing
such a service.
Integrity
The forensic investigator is likely to deal frequently with individuals who lack integrity, are dishonest, and attempt to conceal
the true facts from the investigator. It is imperative that the investigator recognises this, and acts with impeccable integrity
throughout the whole investigation.
Objectivity
As in an audit engagement, the investigator’s objectivity must be beyond question. The report that is the outcome of the
forensic investigation must be perceived as independent, as it forms part of the legal evidence presented at court. The
investigator must adhere to the concept that the overriding objective of court proceedings is to deal with cases fairly and justly.
Any real or perceived threats to objectivity could undermine the credibility of the evidence provided by the investigator.
This issue poses a particular problem where an audit client requests its auditors to conduct a forensic investigation. In this
situation, the audit firm would be exposed to threats to objectivity in terms of advocacy, management involvement and selfreview.
The advocacy threat arises because the audit firm may feel pressured into promoting the interests and point of view
of their client, which would breach the overriding issue of objectivity in court proceedings. Secondly, the investigators could
be perceived to be involved in management decisions regarding the implications of the fraud, especially where the investigator
acts as an expert witness. It is however the self-review threat that would be the most significant threat to objectivity. The selfreview
threat arises because the investigation is likely to involve the estimation of an amount (i.e. the loss), which could be
material to the financial statements.
For the reasons outlined above, The Code states that the firm should evaluate threats and put appropriate safeguards in place,
and if safeguards cannot reduce the threats to an acceptable level, then the firm cannot provide both the audit service and
the forensic investigation.
Professional competence and due care
Forensic investigations will involve very specialist skills, which accountants are unlikely to possess without extensive training.
Such skills would include:
– Detailed knowledge of the relevant legal framework surrounding fraud,
– An understanding of how to gather specialist evidence,
– Skills in the safe custody of evidence, including maintaining a clear ‘chain’ of evidence, and
– Strong personal skills in, for example, interview techniques, presentation of material at court, and tactful dealing with
difficult and stressful situations.
It is therefore essential that forensic work is only ever undertaken by highly skilled individuals, under the direction and
supervision of an experienced fraud investigator. Any doubt over the competence of the investigation team could severely
undermine the credibility of the evidence presented at court.
Confidentiality
Normally accountants should not disclose information without the explicit consent of their client. However, during legal
proceedings arising from a fraud investigation, the court will require the investigator to reveal information discovered during
the investigation. There is an overriding requirement for the investigator to disclose all of the information deemed necessary
by the court.
Outside of the court, the investigator must ensure faultless confidentiality, especially because much of the information they
have access to will be highly sensitive.
Professional behaviour
Fraud investigations can become a matter of public interest, and much media attention is often focused on the work of the
forensic investigator. A highly professional attitude must be displayed at all times, in order to avoid damage to the reputation
of the firm, and of the profession. Any lapse in professional behaviour could also undermine the integrity of the forensic
evidence, and of the credibility of the investigator, especially when acting in the capacity of expert witness.
During legal proceedings, the forensic investigator may be involved in discussions with both sides in the court case, and here
it is essential that a courteous and considerate attitude is presented to all parties.

答案：C

解析：

答案：B

解析：

答案：D

解析：

答案：C

解析：