3 You are the manager responsible for the audit of Keffler Co, a private limited company engaged in the manufacture ofplastic products. The draft financial statements for the year ended 31 March 2006 show revenue of $47·4 million(2005 – $43·9 million), profit before taxation of $2 million (2005 – $2·4 million) and total assets of $33·8 million(2005 – $25·7 million).The following issues arising during the final audit have been noted on a schedule of points for your attention:(a) In April 2005, Keffler bought the right to use a landfill site for a period of 15 years for $1·1 million. Kefflerexpects that the amount of waste that it will need to dump will increase annually and that the site will becompletely filled after just ten years. Keffler has charged the following amounts to the income statement for theyear to 31 March 2006:– $20,000 licence amortisation calculated on a sum-of-digits basis to increase the charge over the useful lifeof the site; and– $100,000 annual provision for restoring the land in 15 years’ time. (9 marks)Required:For each of the above issues:(i) comment on the matters that you should consider; and(ii) state the audit evidence that you should expect to find,in undertaking your review of the audit working papers and financial statements of Keffler Co for the year ended31 March 2006.NOTE: The mark allocation is shown against each of the three issues.
3 You are the manager responsible for the audit of Keffler Co, a private limited company engaged in the manufacture of
plastic products. The draft financial statements for the year ended 31 March 2006 show revenue of $47·4 million
(2005 – $43·9 million), profit before taxation of $2 million (2005 – $2·4 million) and total assets of $33·8 million
(2005 – $25·7 million).
The following issues arising during the final audit have been noted on a schedule of points for your attention:
(a) In April 2005, Keffler bought the right to use a landfill site for a period of 15 years for $1·1 million. Keffler
expects that the amount of waste that it will need to dump will increase annually and that the site will be
completely filled after just ten years. Keffler has charged the following amounts to the income statement for the
year to 31 March 2006:
– $20,000 licence amortisation calculated on a sum-of-digits basis to increase the charge over the useful life
of the site; and
– $100,000 annual provision for restoring the land in 15 years’ time. (9 marks)
Required:
For each of the above issues:
(i) comment on the matters that you should consider; and
(ii) state the audit evidence that you should expect to find,
in undertaking your review of the audit working papers and financial statements of Keffler Co for the year ended
31 March 2006.
NOTE: The mark allocation is shown against each of the three issues.
相关考题：
4 Ryder, a public limited company, is reviewing certain events which have occurred since its year end of 31 October2005. The financial statements were authorised on 12 December 2005. The following events are relevant to thefinancial statements for the year ended 31 October 2005:(i) Ryder has a good record of ordinary dividend payments and has adopted a recent strategy of increasing itsdividend per share annually. For the last three years the dividend per share has increased by 5% per annum.On 20 November 2005, the board of directors proposed a dividend of 10c per share for the year ended31 October 2005. The shareholders are expected to approve it at a meeting on 10 January 2006, and adividend amount of $20 million will be paid on 20 February 2006 having been provided for in the financialstatements at 31 October 2005. The directors feel that a provision should be made because a ‘valid expectation’has been created through the company’s dividend record. (3 marks)(ii) Ryder disposed of a wholly owned subsidiary, Krup, a public limited company, on 10 December 2005 and madea loss of $9 million on the transaction in the group financial statements. As at 31 October 2005, Ryder had nointention of selling the subsidiary which was material to the group. The directors of Ryder have stated that therewere no significant events which have occurred since 31 October 2005 which could have resulted in a reductionin the value of Krup. The carrying value of the net assets and purchased goodwill of Krup at 31 October 2005were $20 million and $12 million respectively. Krup had made a loss of $2 million in the period 1 November2005 to 10 December 2005. (5 marks)(iii) Ryder acquired a wholly owned subsidiary, Metalic, a public limited company, on 21 January 2004. Theconsideration payable in respect of the acquisition of Metalic was 2 million ordinary shares of $1 of Ryder plusa further 300,000 ordinary shares if the profit of Metalic exceeded $6 million for the year ended 31 October2005. The profit for the year of Metalic was $7 million and the ordinary shares were issued on 12 November2005. The annual profits of Metalic had averaged $7 million over the last few years and, therefore, Ryder hadincluded an estimate of the contingent consideration in the cost of the acquisition at 21 January 2004. The fairvalue used for the ordinary shares of Ryder at this date including the contingent consideration was $10 per share.The fair value of the ordinary shares on 12 November 2005 was $11 per share. Ryder also made a one for fourbonus issue on 13 November 2005 which was applicable to the contingent shares issued. The directors areunsure of the impact of the above on earnings per share and the accounting for the acquisition. (7 marks)(iv) The company acquired a property on 1 November 2004 which it intended to sell. The property was obtainedas a result of a default on a loan agreement by a third party and was valued at $20 million on that date foraccounting purposes which exactly offset the defaulted loan. The property is in a state of disrepair and Ryderintends to complete the repairs before it sells the property. The repairs were completed on 30 November 2005.The property was sold after costs for $27 million on 9 December 2005. The property was classified as ‘held forsale’ at the year end under IFRS5 ‘Non-current Assets Held for Sale and Discontinued Operations’ but shown atthe net sale proceeds of $27 million. Property is depreciated at 5% per annum on the straight-line basis and nodepreciation has been charged in the year. (5 marks)(v) The company granted share appreciation rights (SARs) to its employees on 1 November 2003 based on tenmillion shares. The SARs provide employees at the date the rights are exercised with the right to receive cashequal to the appreciation in the company’s share price since the grant date. The rights vested on 31 October2005 and payment was made on schedule on 1 December 2005. The fair value of the SARs per share at31 October 2004 was $6, at 31 October 2005 was $8 and at 1 December 2005 was $9. The company hasrecognised a liability for the SARs as at 31 October 2004 based upon IFRS2 ‘Share-based Payment’ but theliability was stated at the same amount at 31 October 2005. (5 marks)Required:Discuss the accounting treatment of the above events in the financial statements of the Ryder Group for the yearended 31 October 2005, taking into account the implications of events occurring after the balance sheet date.(The mark allocations are set out after each paragraph above.)(25 marks)
(b) Misson has purchased goods from a foreign supplier for 8 million euros on 31 July 2006. At 31 October 2006,the trade payable was still outstanding and the goods were still held by Misson. Similarly Misson has sold goodsto a foreign customer for 4 million euros on 31 July 2006 and it received payment for the goods in euros on31 October 2006. Additionally Misson had purchased an investment property on 1 November 2005 for28 million euros. At 31 October 2006, the investment property had a fair value of 24 million euros. The companyuses the fair value model in accounting for investment properties.Misson would like advice on how to treat these transactions in the financial statements for the year ended 31October 2006. (7 marks)Required:Discuss the accounting treatment of the above transactions in accordance with the advice required by thedirectors.(Candidates should show detailed workings as well as a discussion of the accounting treatment used.)
(c) Wader is reviewing the accounting treatment of its buildings. The company uses the ‘revaluation model’ for itsbuildings. The buildings had originally cost $10 million on 1 June 2005 and had a useful economic life of20 years. They are being depreciated on a straight line basis to a nil residual value. The buildings were revalueddownwards on 31 May 2006 to $8 million which was the buildings’ recoverable amount. At 31 May 2007 thevalue of the buildings had risen to $11 million which is to be included in the financial statements. The companyis unsure how to treat the above events. (7 marks)Required:Discuss the accounting treatments of the above items in the financial statements for the year ended 31 May2007.Note: a discount rate of 5% should be used where necessary. Candidates should show suitable calculations wherenecessary.
4 (a) Router, a public limited company operates in the entertainment industry. It recently agreed with a televisioncompany to make a film which will be broadcast on the television company’s network. The fee agreed for thefilm was $5 million with a further $100,000 to be paid every time the film is shown on the television company’schannels. It is hoped that it will be shown on four occasions. The film was completed at a cost of $4 million anddelivered to the television company on 1 April 2007. The television company paid the fee of $5 million on30 April 2007 but indicated that the film needed substantial editing before they were prepared to broadcast it,the costs of which would be deducted from any future payments to Router. The directors of Router wish torecognise the anticipated future income of $400,000 in the financial statements for the year ended 31 May2007. (5 marks)Required:Discuss how the above items should be dealt with in the group financial statements of Router for the year ended31 May 2007.
(c) At 1 June 2006, Router held a 25% shareholding in a film distribution company, Wireless, a public limitedcompany. On 1 January 2007, Router sold a 15% holding in Wireless thus reducing its investment to a 10%holding. Router no longer exercises significant influence over Wireless. Before the sale of the shares the net assetvalue of Wireless on 1 January 2007 was $200 million and goodwill relating to the acquisition of Wireless was$5 million. Router received $40 million for its sale of the 15% holding in Wireless. At 1 January 2007, the fairvalue of the remaining investment in Wireless was $23 million and at 31 May 2007 the fair value was$26 million. (6 marks)Required:Discuss how the above items should be dealt with in the group financial statements of Router for the year ended31 May 2007.Required:Discuss how the above items should be dealt with in the group financial statements of Router for the year ended31 May 2007.
3 You are the manager responsible for the audit of Albreda Co, a limited liability company, and its subsidiaries. Thegroup mainly operates a chain of national restaurants and provides vending and other catering services to corporateclients. All restaurants offer ‘eat-in’, ‘take-away’ and ‘home delivery’ services. The draft consolidated financialstatements for the year ended 30 September 2005 show revenue of $42·2 million (2004 – $41·8 million), profitbefore taxation of $1·8 million (2004 – $2·2 million) and total assets of $30·7 million (2004 – $23·4 million).The following issues arising during the final audit have been noted on a schedule of points for your attention:(a) In September 2005 the management board announced plans to cease offering ‘home delivery’ services from theend of the month. These sales amounted to $0·6 million for the year to 30 September 2005 (2004 – $0·8million). A provision of $0·2 million has been made as at 30 September 2005 for the compensation of redundantemployees (mainly drivers). Delivery vehicles have been classified as non-current assets held for sale as at 30September 2005 and measured at fair value less costs to sell, $0·8 million (carrying amount,$0·5 million). (8 marks)Required:For each of the above issues:(i) comment on the matters that you should consider; and(ii) state the audit evidence that you should expect to find,in undertaking your review of the audit working papers and financial statements of Albreda Co for the year ended30 September 2005.NOTE: The mark allocation is shown against each of the three issues.
(b) Historically, all owned premises have been measured at cost depreciated over 10 to 50 years. The managementboard has decided to revalue these premises for the year ended 30 September 2005. At the balance sheet datetwo properties had been revalued by a total of $1·7 million. Another 15 properties have since been revalued by$5·4 million and there remain a further three properties which are expected to be revalued during 2006. Arevaluation surplus of $7·1 million has been credited to equity. (7 marks)Required:For each of the above issues:(i) comment on the matters that you should consider; and(ii) state the audit evidence that you should expect to find,in undertaking your review of the audit working papers and financial statements of Albreda Co for the year ended30 September 2005.NOTE: The mark allocation is shown against each of the three issues.
(c) During the year Albreda paid $0·1 million (2004 – $0·3 million) in fines and penalties relating to breaches ofhealth and safety regulations. These amounts have not been separately disclosed but included in cost of sales.(5 marks)Required:For each of the above issues:(i) comment on the matters that you should consider; and(ii) state the audit evidence that you should expect to find,in undertaking your review of the audit working papers and financial statements of Albreda Co for the year ended30 September 2005.NOTE: The mark allocation is shown against each of the three issues.
3 You are the manager responsible for the audit of Volcan, a long-established limited liability company. Volcan operatesa national supermarket chain of 23 stores, five of which are in the capital city, Urvina. All the stores are managed inthe same way with purchases being made through Volcan’s central buying department and product pricing, marketing,advertising and human resources policies being decided centrally. The draft financial statements for the year ended31 March 2005 show revenue of $303 million (2004 – $282 million), profit before taxation of $9·5 million (2004– $7·3 million) and total assets of $178 million (2004 – $173 million).The following issues arising during the final audit have been noted on a schedule of points for your attention:(a) On 1 May 2005, Volcan announced its intention to downsize one of the stores in Urvina from a supermarket toa ‘City Metro’ in response to a significant decline in the demand for supermarket-style. shopping in the capital.The store will be closed throughout June, re-opening on 1 July 2005. Goodwill of $5·5 million was recognisedthree years ago when this store, together with two others, was bought from a national competitor. It is Volcan’spolicy to write off goodwill over five years. (7 marks)Required:For each of the above issues:(i) comment on the matters that you should consider; and(ii) state the audit evidence that you should expect to find,in undertaking your review of the audit working papers and financial statements of Volcan for the year ended31 March 2005.NOTE: The mark allocation is shown against each of the three issues.
(c) In October 2004, Volcan commenced the development of a site in a valley of ‘outstanding natural beauty’ onwhich to build a retail ‘megastore’ and warehouse in late 2005. Local government planning permission for thedevelopment, which was received in April 2005, requires that three 100-year-old trees within the valley bepreserved and the surrounding valley be restored in 2006. Additions to property, plant and equipment duringthe year include $4·4 million for the estimated cost of site restoration. This estimate includes a provision of$0·4 million for the relocation of the 100-year-old trees.In March 2005 the trees were chopped down to make way for a car park. A fine of $20,000 per tree was paidto the local government in May 2005. (7 marks)Required:For each of the above issues:(i) comment on the matters that you should consider; and(ii) state the audit evidence that you should expect to find,in undertaking your review of the audit working papers and financial statements of Volcan for the year ended31 March 2005.NOTE: The mark allocation is shown against each of the three issues.
(b) You are an audit manager with specific responsibility for reviewing other information in documents containingaudited financial statements before your firm’s auditor’s report is signed. The financial statements of Hegas, aprivately-owned civil engineering company, show total assets of $120 million, revenue of $261 million, and profitbefore tax of $9·2 million for the year ended 31 March 2005. Your review of the Annual Report has revealedthe following:(i) The statement of changes in equity includes $4·5 million under a separate heading of ‘miscellaneous item’which is described as ‘other difference not recognized in income’. There is no further reference to thisamount or ‘other difference’ elsewhere in the financial statements. However, the Management Report, whichis required by statute, is not audited. It discloses that ‘changes in shareholders’ equity not recognized inincome includes $4·5 million arising on the revaluation of investment properties’.The notes to the financial statements state that the company has implemented IAS 40 ‘Investment Property’for the first time in the year to 31 March 2005 and also that ‘the adoption of this standard did not have asignificant impact on Hegas’s financial position or its results of operations during 2005’.(ii) The chairman’s statement asserts ‘Hegas has now achieved a position as one of the world’s largestgenerators of hydro-electricity, with a dedicated commitment to accountable ethical professionalism’. Auditworking papers show that 14% of revenue was derived from hydro-electricity (2004: 12%). Publiclyavailable information shows that there are seven international suppliers of hydro-electricity in Africa alone,which are all at least three times the size of Hegas in terms of both annual turnover and population supplied.Required:Identify and comment on the implications of the above matters for the auditor’s report on the financialstatements of Hegas for the year ended 31 March 2005. (10 marks)
(b) A sale of industrial equipment to Deakin Co in May 2005 resulted in a loss on disposal of $0·3 million that hasbeen separately disclosed on the face of the income statement. The equipment cost $1·2 million when it waspurchased in April 1996 and was being depreciated on a straight-line basis over 20 years. (6 marks)Required:For each of the above issues:(i) comment on the matters that you should consider; and(ii) state the audit evidence that you should expect to find,in undertaking your review of the audit working papers and financial statements of Keffler Co for the year ended31 March 2006.NOTE: The mark allocation is shown against each of the three issues.
(c) In April 2006, Keffler was banned by the local government from emptying waste water into a river because thewater did not meet minimum standards of cleanliness. Keffler has made a provision of $0·9 million for thetechnological upgrading of its water purifying process and included $45,000 for the penalties imposed in ‘otherprovisions’. (5 marks)Required:For each of the above issues:(i) comment on the matters that you should consider; and(ii) state the audit evidence that you should expect to find,in undertaking your review of the audit working papers and financial statements of Keffler Co for the year ended31 March 2006.NOTE: The mark allocation is shown against each of the three issues.
(b) You are the audit manager of Johnston Co, a private company. The draft consolidated financial statements forthe year ended 31 March 2006 show profit before taxation of $10·5 million (2005 – $9·4 million) and totalassets of $55·2 million (2005 – $50·7 million).Your firm was appointed auditor of Tiltman Co when Johnston Co acquired all the shares of Tiltman Co in March2006. Tiltman’s draft financial statements for the year ended 31 March 2006 show profit before taxation of$0·7 million (2005 – $1·7 million) and total assets of $16·1 million (2005 – $16·6 million). The auditor’sreport on the financial statements for the year ended 31 March 2005 was unmodified.You are currently reviewing two matters that have been left for your attention on the audit working paper files forthe year ended 31 March 2006:(i) In December 2004 Tiltman installed a new computer system that properly quantified an overvaluation ofinventory amounting to $2·7 million. This is being written off over three years.(ii) In May 2006, Tiltman’s head office was relocated to Johnston’s premises as part of a restructuring.Provisions for the resulting redundancies and non-cancellable lease payments amounting to $2·3 millionhave been made in the financial statements of Tiltman for the year ended 31 March 2006.Required:Identify and comment on the implications of these two matters for your auditor’s reports on the financialstatements of Johnston Co and Tiltman Co for the year ended 31 March 2006. (10 marks)
3 You are the manager responsible for the audit of Seymour Co. The company offers information, proprietary foods andmedical innovations designed to improve the quality of life. (Proprietary foods are marketed under and protected byregistered names.) The draft consolidated financial statements for the year ended 30 September 2006 show revenueof $74·4 million (2005 – $69·2 million), profit before taxation of $13·2 million (2005 – $15·8 million) and totalassets of $53·3 million (2005 – $40·5 million).The following issues arising during the final audit have been noted on a schedule of points for your attention:(a) In 2001, Seymour had been awarded a 20-year patent on a new drug, Tournose, that was also approved forfood use. The drug had been developed at a cost of $4 million which is being amortised over the life of thepatent. The patent cost $11,600. In September 2006 a competitor announced the successful completion ofpreliminary trials on an alternative drug with the same beneficial properties as Tournose. The alternative drug isexpected to be readily available in two years time. (7 marks)Required:For each of the above issues:(i) comment on the matters that you should consider; and(ii) state the audit evidence that you should expect to find,in undertaking your review of the audit working papers and financial statements of Seymour Co for the year ended30 September 2006.NOTE: The mark allocation is shown against each of the three issues.
(b) Seymour offers health-related information services through a wholly-owned subsidiary, Aragon Co. Goodwill of$1·8 million recognised on the purchase of Aragon in October 2004 is not amortised but included at cost in theconsolidated balance sheet. At 30 September 2006 Seymour’s investment in Aragon is shown at cost,$4·5 million, in its separate financial statements.Aragon’s draft financial statements for the year ended 30 September 2006 show a loss before taxation of$0·6 million (2005 – $0·5 million loss) and total assets of $4·9 million (2005 – $5·7 million). The notes toAragon’s financial statements disclose that they have been prepared on a going concern basis that assumes thatSeymour will continue to provide financial support. (7 marks)Required:For each of the above issues:(i) comment on the matters that you should consider; and(ii) state the audit evidence that you should expect to find,in undertaking your review of the audit working papers and financial statements of Seymour Co for the year ended30 September 2006.NOTE: The mark allocation is shown against each of the three issues.
(c) In November 2006 Seymour announced the recall and discontinuation of a range of petcare products. Theproduct recall was prompted by the high level of customer returns due to claims of poor quality. For the year to30 September 2006, the product range represented $8·9 million of consolidated revenue (2005 – $9·6 million)and $1·3 million loss before tax (2005 – $0·4 million profit before tax). The results of the ‘petcare’ operationsare disclosed separately on the face of the income statement. (6 marks)Required:For each of the above issues:(i) comment on the matters that you should consider; and(ii) state the audit evidence that you should expect to find,in undertaking your review of the audit working papers and financial statements of Seymour Co for the year ended30 September 2006.NOTE: The mark allocation is shown against each of the three issues.
3 You are the manager responsible for the audit of Lamont Co. The company’s principal activity is wholesaling frozenfish. The draft consolidated financial statements for the year ended 31 March 2007 show revenue of $67·0 million(2006 – $62·3 million), profit before taxation of $11·9 million (2006 – $14·2 million) and total assets of$48·0 million (2006 – $36·4 million).The following issues arising during the final audit have been noted on a schedule of points for your attention:(a) In early 2007 a chemical leakage from refrigeration units owned by Lamont caused contamination of some of itsproperty. Lamont has incurred $0·3 million in clean up costs, $0·6 million in modernisation of the units toprevent future leakage and a $30,000 fine to a regulatory agency. Apart from the fine, which has been expensed,these costs have been capitalised as improvements. (7 marks)Required:For each of the above issues:(i) comment on the matters that you should consider; and(ii) state the audit evidence that you should expect to find,in undertaking your review of the audit working papers and financial statements of Lamont Co for the year ended31 March 2007.NOTE: The mark allocation is shown against each of the three issues.
(b) While the refrigeration units were undergoing modernisation Lamont outsourced all its cold storage requirementsto Hogg Warehousing Services. At 31 March 2007 it was not possible to physically inspect Lamont’s inventoryheld by Hogg due to health and safety requirements preventing unauthorised access to cold storage areas.Lamont’s management has provided written representation that inventory held at 31 March 2007 was$10·1 million (2006 – $6·7 million). This amount has been agreed to a costing of Hogg’s monthly return ofquantities held at 31 March 2007. (7 marks)Required:For each of the above issues:(i) comment on the matters that you should consider; and(ii) state the audit evidence that you should expect to find,in undertaking your review of the audit working papers and financial statements of Lamont Co for the year ended31 March 2007.NOTE: The mark allocation is shown against each of the three issues.
(b) You are the audit manager of Petrie Co, a private company, that retails kitchen utensils. The draft financialstatements for the year ended 31 March 2007 show revenue $42·2 million (2006 – $41·8 million), profit beforetaxation of $1·8 million (2006 – $2·2 million) and total assets of $30·7 million (2006 – $23·4 million).You are currently reviewing two matters that have been left for your attention on Petrie’s audit working paper filefor the year ended 31 March 2007:(i) Petrie’s management board decided to revalue properties for the year ended 31 March 2007 that hadpreviously all been measured at depreciated cost. At the balance sheet date three properties had beenrevalued by a total of $1·7 million. Another nine properties have since been revalued by $5·4 million. Theremaining three properties are expected to be revalued later in 2007. (5 marks)Required:Identify and comment on the implications of these two matters for your auditor’s report on the financialstatements of Petrie Co for the year ended 31 March 2007.NOTE: The mark allocation is shown against each of the matters above.
(ii) On 1 July 2006 Petrie introduced a 10-year warranty on all sales of its entire range of stainless steelcookware. Sales of stainless steel cookware for the year ended 31 March 2007 totalled $18·2 million. Thenotes to the financial statements disclose the following:‘Since 1 July 2006, the company’s stainless steel cookware is guaranteed to be free from defects inmaterials and workmanship under normal household use within a 10-year guarantee period. No provisionhas been recognised as the amount of the obligation cannot be measured with sufficient reliability.’(4 marks)Your auditor’s report on the financial statements for the year ended 31 March 2006 was unmodified.Required:Identify and comment on the implications of these two matters for your auditor’s report on the financialstatements of Petrie Co for the year ended 31 March 2007.NOTE: The mark allocation is shown against each of the matters above.
(b) You are the manager responsible for the audit of Poppy Co, a manufacturing company with a year ended31 October 2008. In the last year, several investment properties have been purchased to utilise surplus fundsand to provide rental income. The properties have been revalued at the year end in accordance with IAS 40Investment Property, they are recognised on the statement of financial position at a fair value of $8 million, andthe total assets of Poppy Co are $160 million at 31 October 2008. An external valuer has been used to providethe fair value for each property.Required:(i) Recommend the enquiries to be made in respect of the external valuer, before placing any reliance on theirwork, and explain the reason for the enquiries; (7 marks)
You are an audit manager responsible for providing hot reviews on selected audit clients within your firm of CharteredCertified Accountants. You are currently reviewing the audit working papers for Pulp Co, a long standing audit client,for the year ended 31 January 2008. The draft statement of financial position (balance sheet) of Pulp Co shows totalassets of $12 million (2007 – $11·5 million).The audit senior has made the following comment in a summary ofissues for your review:‘Pulp Co’s statement of financial position (balance sheet) shows a receivable classified as a current asset with a valueof $25,000. The only audit evidence we have requested and obtained is a management representation stating thefollowing:(1) that the amount is owed to Pulp Co from Jarvis Co,(2) that Jarvis Co is controlled by Pulp Co’s chairman, Peter Sheffield, and(3) that the balance is likely to be received six months after Pulp Co’s year end.The receivable was also outstanding at the last year end when an identical management representation was provided,and our working papers noted that because the balance was immaterial no further work was considered necessary.No disclosure has been made in the financial statements regarding the balance. Jarvis Co is not audited by our firmand we have verified that Pulp Co does not own any shares in Jarvis Co.’Required:(b) In relation to the receivable recognised on the statement of financial position (balance sheet) of Pulp Co asat 31 January 2008:(i) Comment on the matters you should consider. (5 marks)
5 You are the manager responsible for the audit of Blod Co, a listed company, for the year ended 31 March 2008. Yourfirm was appointed as auditors of Blod Co in September 2007. The audit work has been completed, and you arereviewing the working papers in order to draft a report to those charged with governance. The statement of financialposition (balance sheet) shows total assets of $78 million (2007 – $66 million). The main business activity of BlodCo is the manufacture of farm machinery.During the audit of property, plant and equipment it was discovered that controls over capital expenditure transactionshad deteriorated during the year. Authorisation had not been gained for the purchase of office equipment with a costof $225,000. No material errors in the financial statements were revealed by audit procedures performed on property,plant and equipment.An internally generated brand name has been included in the statement of financial position (balance sheet) at a fairvalue of $10 million. Audit working papers show that the matter was discussed with the financial controller, whostated that the $10 million represents the present value of future cash flows estimated to be generated by the brandname. The member of the audit team who completed the work programme on intangible assets has noted that thistreatment appears to be in breach of IAS 38 Intangible Assets, and that the management refuses to derecognise theasset.Problems were experienced in the audit of inventories. Due to an oversight by the internal auditors of Blod Co, theexternal audit team did not receive a copy of inventory counting procedures prior to attending the count. This causeda delay at the beginning of the inventory count, when the audit team had to quickly familiarise themselves with theprocedures. In addition, on the final audit, when the audit senior requested documentation to support the finalinventory valuation, it took two weeks for the information to be received because the accountant who had preparedthe schedules had mislaid them.Required:(a) (i) Identify the main purpose of including ‘findings from the audit’ (management letter points) in a reportto those charged with governance. (2 marks)
You are the audit supervisor of Maple Co and are currently planning the audit of an existing client, Sycamore Science Co (Sycamore), whose year end was 30 April 2015. Sycamore is a pharmaceutical company, which manufactures and supplies a wide range of medical supplies. The draft financial statements show revenue of $35·6 million and profit before tax of $5·9 million.Sycamore’s previous finance director left the company in December 2014 after it was discovered that he had been claiming fraudulent expenses from the company for a significant period of time. A new finance director was appointed in January 2015 who was previously a financial controller of a bank, and she has expressed surprise that Maple Co had not uncovered the fraud during last year’s audit.During the year Sycamore has spent $1·8 million on developing several new products. These projects are at different stages of development and the draft financial statements show the full amount of $1·8 million within intangible assets. In order to fund this development, $2·0 million was borrowed from the bank and is due for repayment over a ten-year period. The bank has attached minimum profit targets as part of the loan covenants.The new finance director has informed the audit partner that since the year end there has been an increased number of sales returns and that in the month of May over $0·5 million of goods sold in April were returned.Maple Co attended the year-end inventory count at Sycamore’s warehouse. The auditor present raised concerns that during the count there were movements of goods in and out the warehouse and this process did not seem well controlled.During the year, a review of plant and equipment in the factory was undertaken and surplus plant was sold, resulting in a profit on disposal of $210,000.Required:(a) State Maples Co’s responsibilities in relation to the prevention and detection of fraud and error. (4 marks)(b) Describe SIX audit risks, and explain the auditor’s response to each risk, in planning the audit of Sycamore Science Co. (12 marks)(c) Sycamore’s new finance director has read about review engagements and is interested in the possibility of Maple Co undertaking these in the future. However, she is unsure how these engagements differ from an external audit and how much assurance would be gained from this type of engagement.Required:(i) Explain the purpose of review engagements and how these differ from external audits; and (2 marks)(ii) Describe the level of assurance provided by external audits and review engagements. (2 marks)
You are an audit manager at Rockwell Co, a firm of Chartered Certified Accountants. You are responsible for the audit of the Hopper Group, a listed audit client which supplies ingredients to the food and beverage industry worldwide.The audit work for the year ended 30 June 2015 is nearly complete, and you are reviewing the draft audit report which has been prepared by the audit senior. During the year the Hopper Group purchased a new subsidiary company, Seurat Sweeteners Co, which has expertise in the research and design of sugar alternatives. The draft financial statements of the Hopper Group for the year ended 30 June 2015 recognise profit before tax of $495 million (2014 – $462 million) and total assets of $4,617 million (2014: $4,751 million). An extract from the draft audit report is shown below:Basis of modified opinion (extract)In their calculation of goodwill on the acquisition of the new subsidiary, the directors have failed to recognise consideration which is contingent upon meeting certain development targets. The directors believe that it is unlikely that these targets will be met by the subsidiary company and, therefore, have not recorded the contingent consideration in the cost of the acquisition. They have disclosed this contingent liability fully in the notes to the financial statements. We do not feel that the directors’ treatment of the contingent consideration is correct and, therefore, do not believe that the criteria of the relevant standard have been met. If this is the case, it would be appropriate to adjust the goodwill balance in the statement of financial position.We believe that any required adjustment may materially affect the goodwill balance in the statement of financial position. Therefore, in our opinion, the financial statements do not give a true and fair view of the financial position of the Hopper Group and of the Hopper Group’s financial performance and cash flows for the year then ended in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards.Emphasis of Matter ParagraphWe draw attention to the note to the financial statements which describes the uncertainty relating to the contingent consideration described above. The note provides further information necessary to understand the potential implications of the contingency.Required:(a) Critically appraise the draft audit report of the Hopper Group for the year ended 30 June 2015, prepared by the audit senior.Note: You are NOT required to re-draft the extracts from the audit report. (10 marks)(b) The audit of the new subsidiary, Seurat Sweeteners Co, was performed by a different firm of auditors, Fish Associates. During your review of the communication from Fish Associates, you note that they were unable to obtain sufficient appropriate evidence with regard to the breakdown of research expenses. The total of research costs expensed by Seurat Sweeteners Co during the year was $1·2 million. Fish Associates has issued a qualified audit opinion on the financial statements of Seurat Sweeteners Co due to this inability to obtain sufficient appropriate evidence.Required:Comment on the actions which Rockwell Co should take as the auditor of the Hopper Group, and the implications for the auditor’s report on the Hopper Group financial statements. (6 marks)(c) Discuss the quality control procedures which should be carried out by Rockwell Co prior to the audit report on the Hopper Group being issued. (4 marks)
You are the audit manager of Chestnut Co and are reviewing the key issues identified in the files of two audit clients.Palm Industries Co (Palm)Palm’s year end was 31 March 2015 and the draft financial statements show revenue of $28·2 million, receivables of $5·6 million and profit before tax of $4·8 million. The fieldwork stage for this audit has been completed.A customer of Palm owed an amount of $350,000 at the year end. Testing of receivables in April highlighted that no amounts had been paid to Palm from this customer as they were disputing the quality of certain goods received from Palm. The finance director is confident the issue will be resolved and no allowance for receivables was made with regards to this balance.Ash Trading Co (Ash)Ash is a new client of Chestnut Co, its year end was 31 January 2015 and the firm was only appointed auditors in February 2015, as the previous auditors were suddenly unable to undertake the audit. The fieldwork stage for this audit is currently ongoing.The inventory count at Ash’s warehouse was undertaken on 31 January 2015 and was overseen by the company’s internal audit department. Neither Chestnut Co nor the previous auditors attended the count. Detailed inventory records were maintained but it was not possible to undertake another full inventory count subsequent to the year end.The draft financial statements show a profit before tax of $2·4 million, revenue of $10·1 million and inventory of $510,000.Required:For each of the two issues:(i) Discuss the issue, including an assessment of whether it is material;(ii) Recommend ONE procedure the audit team should undertake to try to resolve the issue; and(iii) Describe the impact on the audit report if the issue remains UNRESOLVED.Notes:1 The total marks will be split equally between each of the two issues.2 Audit report extracts are NOT required.