(ii) On 1 July 2006 Petrie introduced a 10-year warranty on all sales of its entire range of stainless steel
cookware. Sales of stainless steel cookware for the year ended 31 March 2007 totalled $18·2 million. The
notes to the financial statements disclose the following:
‘Since 1 July 2006, the company’s stainless steel cookware is guaranteed to be free from defects in
materials and workmanship under normal household use within a 10-year guarantee period. No provision
has 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 financial
statements of Petrie Co for the year ended 31 March 2007.
NOTE: The mark allocation is shown against each of the matters above.
(c) In October 2004, Volcan commenced the development of a site in a valley of ‘outstanding natural beauty’ on
which to build a retail ‘megastore’ and warehouse in late 2005. Local government planning permission for the
development, which was received in April 2005, requires that three 100-year-old trees within the valley be
preserved and the surrounding valley be restored in 2006. Additions to property, plant and equipment during
the 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 paid
to 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 ended
31 March 2005.
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 for
the year ended 31 March 2006 show profit before taxation of $10·5 million (2005 – $9·4 million) and total
assets 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 March
2006. 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’s
report 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 for
the year ended 31 March 2006:
(i) In December 2004 Tiltman installed a new computer system that properly quantified an overvaluation of
inventory 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 million
have 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 financial
statements of Johnston Co and Tiltman Co for the year ended 31 March 2006. (10 marks)
(i) Making a provision for a constructive obligation of $400,000; this being the sales value of goods expected to be returned by retail customers after the year end under the company’s advertised 30-day returns policy
(ii) Based on past experience, a $200,000 provision for unforeseen liabilities arising after the year end
(iii) The partial reversal (as a credit to the statement of profit or loss) of the accumulated depreciation provision on an item of plant because the estimate of its remaining useful life has been increased by three years
(iv) Providing $1 million for deferred tax at 25% relating to a $4 million revaluation of property during March 2015 even though Cumla has no intention of selling the property in the near future
Which of the above suggested treatments of provisions is/are permitted by IFRS?
A.(i) only
B.(i) and (ii)
C.(ii) and (iii)
D.(iv)
(b) You are an audit manager with specific responsibility for reviewing other information in documents containing
audited financial statements before your firm’s auditor’s report is signed. The financial statements of Hegas, a
privately-owned civil engineering company, show total assets of $120 million, revenue of $261 million, and profit
before tax of $9·2 million for the year ended 31 March 2005. Your review of the Annual Report has revealed
the 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 this
amount or ‘other difference’ elsewhere in the financial statements. However, the Management Report, which
is required by statute, is not audited. It discloses that ‘changes in shareholders’ equity not recognized in
income 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 a
significant 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 largest
generators of hydro-electricity, with a dedicated commitment to accountable ethical professionalism’. Audit
working papers show that 14% of revenue was derived from hydro-electricity (2004: 12%). Publicly
available 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 financial
statements of Hegas for the year ended 31 March 2005. (10 marks)
capital of Hira Ltd from Belgrove Ltd. Belgrove Ltd currently owns 100% of the share capital of Hira Ltd and has no
other subsidiaries. All three companies have their head offices in the UK and are UK resident.
Hira Ltd had trading losses brought forward, as at 1 April 2006, of £18,600 and no income or gains against which
to offset losses in the year ended 31 March 2006. In the year ending 31 March 2007 the company expects to make
further tax adjusted trading losses of £55,000 before deduction of capital allowances, and to have no other income
or gains. The tax written down value of Hira Ltd’s plant and machinery as at 31 March 2006 was £96,000 and
there will be no fixed asset additions or disposals in the year ending 31 March 2007. In the year ending 31 March
2008 a small tax adjusted trading loss is anticipated. Hira Ltd will surrender the maximum possible trading losses
to Belgrove Ltd and Dovedale Ltd.
The tax adjusted trading profit of Dovedale Ltd for the year ending 31 March 2007 is expected to be £875,000 and
to continue at this level in the future. The profits chargeable to corporation tax of Belgrove Ltd are expected to be
£38,000 for the year ending 31 March 2007 and to increase in the future.
On 1 February 2007 Dovedale Ltd will sell a small office building to Hira Ltd for its market value of £234,000.
Dovedale Ltd purchased the building in March 2005 for £210,000. In October 2004 Dovedale Ltd sold a factory
for £277,450 making a capital gain of £84,217. A claim was made to roll over the gain on the sale of the factory
against the acquisition cost of the office building.
On 1 April 2007 Dovedale Ltd intends to acquire the whole of the ordinary share capital of Atapo Inc, an unquoted
company resident in the country of Morovia. Atapo Inc sells components to Dovedale Ltd as well as to other
companies in Morovia and around the world.
It is estimated that Atapo Inc will make a profit before tax of £160,000 in the year ending 31 March 2008 and will
pay a dividend to Dovedale Ltd of £105,000. It can be assumed that Atapo Inc’s taxable profits are equal to its profit
before tax. The rate of corporation tax in Morovia is 9%. There is a withholding tax of 3% on dividends paid to
non-Morovian resident shareholders. There is no double tax agreement between the UK and Morovia.
Required:
(a) Advise Belgrove Ltd of any capital gains that may arise as a result of the sale of the shares in Hira Ltd. You
are not required to calculate any capital gains in this part of the question. (4 marks)
The word "offset" in the 2nd paragraph could properly replaced by
A.set up
B.make up for
C.slip up
D.catch up with
(a) The objective of IAS 10 Events after the Reporting Period is to prescribe the treatment of events that occur after an entity’s reporting period has ended.
Required:
Define the period to which IAS 10 relates and distinguish between adjusting and non-adjusting events.
(5 marks)
(b) Waxwork’s current year end is 31 March 2009. Its financial statements were authorised for issue by its directors on 6 May 2009 and the AGM (annual general meeting) will be held on 3 June 2009. The following matters have been brought to your attention:
(i) On 12 April 2009 a fire completely destroyed the company’s largest warehouse and the inventory it
contained. The carrying amounts of the warehouse and the inventory were $10 million and $6 million
respectively. It appears that the company has not updated the value of its insurance cover and only expects
to be able to recover a maximum of $9 million from its insurers. Waxwork’s trading operations have been
severely disrupted since the fire and it expects large trading losses for some time to come. (4 marks)
(ii) A single class of inventory held at another warehouse was valued at its cost of $460,000 at 31 March
2009. In April 2009 70% of this inventory was sold for $280,000 on which Waxworks’ sales staff earned
a commission of 15% of the selling price. (3 marks)
(iii) On 18 May 2009 the government announced tax changes which have the effect of increasing Waxwork’s
deferred tax liability by $650,000 as at 31 March 2009. (3 marks)
Required:
Explain the required treatment of the items (i) to (iii) by Waxwork in its financial statements for the year
ended 31 March 2009.
Note: assume all items are material and are independent of each other. (10 marks as indicated)