（b) Draft a report as at today’s date advising Cutlass Inc on its proposed activities. The

(b) Draft a report suitable for inclusion in a Management Commentary for Jones and Cousin which deals with:

(i) the key risks and relationships of the business (9 marks)

What are examples of good subjects？ (More than one correct answer)

A.ACME

B.We’re going for lunch at 1 p.m.

C.ACME Corp. | HR Portal | draft of functional documentation, v. 0.1

D.Please, send your report—deadline: March 10th

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 Paragraph

We 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)

(c) On 1 May 2007 Sirus acquired another company, Marne plc. The directors of Marne, who were the only

shareholders, were offered an increased profit share in the enlarged business for a period of two years after the

date of acquisition as an incentive to accept the purchase offer. After this period, normal remuneration levels will

be resumed. Sirus estimated that this would cost them $5 million at 30 April 2008, and a further $6 million at

30 April 2009. These amounts will be paid in cash shortly after the respective year ends. (5 marks)

Required:

Draft a report to the directors of Sirus which discusses the principles and nature of the accounting treatment of

the above elements under International Financial Reporting Standards in the financial statements for the year

ended 30 April 2008.

(d) Sirus raised a loan with a bank of $2 million on 1 May 2007. The market interest rate of 8% per annum is to

be paid annually in arrears and the principal is to be repaid in 10 years time. The terms of the loan allow Sirus

to redeem the loan after seven years by paying the full amount of the interest to be charged over the ten year

period, plus a penalty of $200,000 and the principal of $2 million. The effective interest rate of the repayment

option is 9·1%. The directors of Sirus are currently restructuring the funding of the company and are in initial

discussions with the bank about the possibility of repaying the loan within the next financial year. Sirus is

uncertain about the accounting treatment for the current loan agreement and whether the loan can be shown as

a current liability because of the discussions with the bank. (6 marks)

Appropriateness of the format and presentation of the report and quality of discussion (2 marks)

Required:

Draft a report to the directors of Sirus which discusses the principles and nature of the accounting treatment of

the above elements under International Financial Reporting Standards in the financial statements for the year

ended 30 April 2008.

(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)

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.

(b) When a director retires, amounts become payable to the director as a form. of retirement benefit as an annuity.

These amounts are not based on salaries paid to the director under an employment contract. Sirus has

contractual or constructive obligations to make payments to former directors as at 30 April 2008 as follows:

(i) certain former directors are paid a fixed annual amount for a fixed term beginning on the first anniversary of

the director’s retirement. If the director dies, an amount representing the present value of the future payment

is paid to the director’s estate.

(ii) in the case of other former directors, they are paid a fixed annual amount which ceases on death.

The rights to the annuities are determined by the length of service of the former directors and are set out in the

former directors’ service contracts. (6 marks)

Required:

Draft a report to the directors of Sirus which discusses the principles and nature of the accounting treatment of

the above elements under International Financial Reporting Standards in the financial statements for the year

ended 30 April 2008.

(b) You are an audit manager in a firm of Chartered Certified Accountants currently assigned to the audit of Cleeves

Co for the year ended 30 September 2006. During the year Cleeves acquired a 100% interest in Howard Co.

Howard is material to Cleeves and audited by another firm, Parr & Co. You have just received Parr’s draft

auditor’s report for the year ended 30 September 2006. The wording is that of an unmodified report except for

the opinion paragraph which is as follows:

Audit opinion

As more fully explained in notes 11 and 15 impairment losses on non-current assets have not been

recognised in profit or loss as the directors are unable to quantify the amounts.

In our opinion, provision should be made for these as required by International Accounting Standard 36

(Impairment). If the provision had been so recognised the effect would have been to increase the loss before

and after tax for the year and to reduce the value of tangible and intangible non-current assets. However,

as the directors are unable to quantify the amounts we are unable to indicate the financial effect of such

omissions.

In view of the failure to provide for the impairments referred to above, in our opinion the financial statements

do not present fairly in all material respects the financial position of Howard Co as of 30 September 2006

and of its loss and its cash flows for the year then ended in accordance with International Financial Reporting

Standards.

Your review of the prior year auditor’s report shows that the 2005 audit opinion was worded identically.

Required:

(i) Critically appraise the appropriateness of the audit opinion given by Parr & Co on the financial

statements of Howard Co, for the years ended 30 September 2006 and 2005. (7 marks)

(b) You are the audit manager of Petrie Co, a private company, that retails kitchen utensils. The draft financial

statements for the year ended 31 March 2007 show revenue $42·2 million (2006 – $41·8 million), profit before

taxation 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 file

for the year ended 31 March 2007:

(i) Petrie’s management board decided to revalue properties for the year ended 31 March 2007 that had

previously all been measured at depreciated cost. At the balance sheet date three properties had been

revalued by a total of $1·7 million. Another nine properties have since been revalued by $5·4 million. The

remaining 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 financial

statements of Petrie Co for the year ended 31 March 2007.

NOTE: The mark allocation is shown against each of the matters above.