[Kim Smith]

Please use the TX forum https://opentuition.com/forum/acca-forums/acca-tx-taxation-forums/

[Kim Smith]

@Samuel6242961 – welcome to our forums, but I do not understand what you are asking.

If you are looking for “test your knowledge” type Qs at the end of each chapter of study, we have “Practice Questions” – for example, here is for PM https://opentuition.com/acca/pm/acca-performance-management-pm-practice-questions

ACCA has “Quizzes” for each chapter in the Study Hub https://www.accaglobal.com/uk/en/student/your-study-options/studyhub.html

[Kim Smith]

I recommend you take a look at Activity 4 Inherent Risk Factors in AA Chapter 8 Identifying and Assessing Risk in ACCA’s Study Hub – there are a list of 10 factors for you to decide whether they should be evaluated at the financial statement level or assertion level.

[Kim Smith]

As per our notes (https://opentuition.com/acca/aa/acca-audit-assurance-aa-notes page 53)

Risks must be assessed at two levels to provide a basis for designing further audit procedures:
(1) The financial statement level (i.e. relating to the financial statements AS A WHOLE, for example,
the risk of management override of internal control).
(2) The assertion level (i.e. relating to classes of transactions, account balances and disclosures).

These two levels demand different “auditor’s responses [to the risk of material misstatement]” as set out on page 59:

5.1. Financial statement level
Risks at the financial statement level are those that relate to the financial statements as a whole and potentially affect many assertions. For example, the risks arising from fraud or a deficient control environment or significant doubts about going concern. The auditor’s response to such risks may include:
? Assigning more experienced audit staff
? Designing audit procedures that are less predictable
? Exercising greater supervision over audit work.
5.2. Assertion level
At the assertion level, essentially any single figure which appears in the financial statements is making assertions. For example, it is saying something about its accuracy, its measurement, completeness and occurrence (of a transaction) or existence (of an asset or liability).
At the assertion level, the nature, timing and extent of audit procedures must be designed to respond to the assessed risks (ISA 330). For example, if you are worried about receivables valuation you have to do a lot more work verifying that receivables are recoverable. It may be possible to wait for several months after the year end to see which customers actually pay. Assertions are described in more detail in Chapter 10.

[Kim Smith]

Please use the afm forum

[Kim Smith]

My warmest congratulations! I had no doubt whatsoever that you would pass, as you put in the effort to understand the subject matter. (It is very frustrating when students want only to “learn” answers.)

You have a solid foundation for AAA (soon to be SAA), perhaps I will see you again for that. I do hope so.

[Kim Smith]

An audit committee is comprised of INDEPENDENT NON-executive directors. There roles in corporate governance are independent of the executive directors/board responsible for management. (For more detail not examinable in AA see https://www.accaglobal.com/gb/en/student/exam-support-resources/professional-exams-study-resources/strategic-business-leader/technical-articles/independence-as-a-concept-in-corporate-governance.html.)

I don’t know what you mean “looked upon” – anyone can read an auditor’s report – but it doesn’t give them a say in the work of the independent auditor.

[Kim Smith]

Here are some additional sources of Q practice that shouldn’t confuse and have fully justified answers (I hope! If not you can ask me on this forum!)

https://opentuition.com/acca/aa/aa-practice-questions You shouldn’t find these too demanding and you will see some different OT Q types (not just multiple choice and “which two” multiple response). I know the current real exam format does not have “standalone” OTs – but sometimes Qs within an OT case are effectively standalone – and these are quite good for clarifying technical understanding. Alternatively, if you don’t want to plough through these by topic, you can make your self a revision test of Qs drawn randomly from our Q bank: https://opentuition.com/acca/aa/acca-aa-revision-test

There are two sets of OT-case Qs here – each set has 3 scenario each with 5 Qs
https://opentuition.com/acca/aa/aa-case-questions-set-1
https://opentuition.com/acca/aa/aa-case-questions-set-2

The scenarios of these are briefer than the real exam but still test technically important points and, again, include different Q types.

And there’s another set of 3 scenarios with 5 Qs here https://opentuition.com/acca/aa/acca-aa-revision-mock-exam

[Kim Smith]

That is so considerate of you – but rest assured it doesn’t make be uncomfortable 🙂 My concern is that I do not want to mislead or confuse you in your studies by contradicting something you are reading that I don’t have.

I now have a copy of a Kaplan Kit so I can see where there are gaps in the answer justifications – e.g. for this Q there is no explanation why the “expert” option is incorrect.

I do have another concern – that the wording of the Qs you have copied is not as “polished” as the wording in the 2026-27 edition (e.g. the standard start to a Q with dates is always “It is 1 July 20X5.”).

So if you have an old edition you must not use it for any questions on auditors’ reports and opinions or “going concern” as ISA 570 (Revised 2024) is the examinable document.

[Kim Smith]

If you look at the members forum you will see a lot of posts about PER https://opentuition.com/forum/qualified-members-forum

If you can’t find an answer there or here https://www.accaglobal.com/gb/en/help/student-faqs-practical-experience-requirements.html use the contact us tool: https://forms.accaglobal.com/contact-us
Follow the prompts – after the 3rd or 4th selection you can scroll down an information pop-up to
“Do you need to send us a message?” Select Yes

[Kim Smith]

I’ve only read your first para and my immediate thought is that “ask an expert” is invariably an incorrect answer/distractor because it’s a “cop out”. An auditor MUST be able to identify risks of material misstatement in financial statements without deferring to somone else!

Now to the Q – again, at a glance, I see this is NOT a past OT-case Q (where are you getting these from? do they not have answer justifications?)

You say option 3 is given as the correct answer – “1 and 3 only” – since “2” is a distractor, I agree with the given answer.

[Kim Smith]

The assessed risk for receivable arises from “The bonus was linked to increasing the number of customers signing 24-month mobile contracts.” The risk usually associated with incentivising sales staff to make more sales is that less attention is paid to credit risk – if customers are not sufficiently credit worthy, there is a risk that receivables may be overstated. All the suggested responses other than “extend cut-off testing” are relevant to this risk.

The assess risk for inventory arises from “Inventory 160,000 – 125,000” – if you’re selling your stock like hot cakes, you’d expect inventory holding to fall. So the assessed risk is inventory overstatement.

[Kim Smith]

First let me say that for lots of reasons I can see this is NOT a real past OT case question. Presumably you have an answer justification, so what is it about that justification that is not clear?

The Q ask which of the following is NOT a suitable response. “Extend cut-off testing” is a suitable response to the risk that that transactions (in this case sales) may be recorded in the incorrect accounting period.

I see nothing in the narrative that identifies cut-off as a risk – so even without looking at the other options, extending cut-off cannot be a response to an ASSESSED risk.

[Kim Smith]

It is not necessary for every single staff member in a firm to be a member of a supervisory body. However, simply having the “owner” as a member is likely insufficient, as the audit regulations require specifically qualified individuals to be responsible for the audit work.

[Kim Smith]

I think B is the best of the available answers but this is not a past exam Q, so you shouldn’t worry about it. To be sure you are looking at real exam style and standard Qs & As, I recommend you practice Qs in the CBE platform and ACCA mis-named “study” hub – as it includes good revision question practice. If using a publisher’s “kit”, past exam “OT Case” Qs should be no older than 2018 – if earlier they will be adapted and similarly not true exam style and standard.

[Kim Smith]

Short answer: No! It’s not an examinable document.

[Kim Smith]

I don’t recognise the question and there are things about the way it is written which suggest that it not a past exam question, though it is “in the style of”.

I confess I did not read it with suffienct care and it is true that mere screening “Reviewing the professional qualifications of a number of applicants and providing advice on their suitability for the position” does not usually create a threat …. but it is with the proviso “as long as individuals within the firm do not assume a management responsibility”. So this, at least, should be safeguarded.

The Code goes on to say that the evaluation of the threat should include the role of the individual to be recruited (in this case a NED) and suggests as a safeguard that the service might be provided using professionals who are not members of the audit team.

This illustates that safeguards shouldn’t be dismissed as unnecessary when something is not specifically prohibited.

Weighing up the options, B seems best as it says yes you could provide this service with a safeguard. My initial response was over-cautious becuase I missed that this was simply “screening”.

All that said, you shouldn’t worry about the “nuances” in such Qs, as real exam questions have to be objective 🙂

[Kim Smith]

Excellent! You’re most welcome!

[Kim Smith]

i don’t now what is “option 4” you are referring to (in what question? in whose material? a Q name/exam session is generally helpful)

Does this go anyway towards answering your question? https://opentuition.com/topic/potential-employment-with-client If not do please ask for clarification!

[Kim Smith]

Welcome to my forum! Your “theory”, that certainly applies to recruiting a finance director, say, of an audit client, applies here also as a self-interest threat. The audit client is asking for help recruit a NED to an audit committee – a committee that advises the board on the matters concerning the external audit – including appointment and independence (!) The audit firm must decline because it would be seen to have a vested interest in the outcome. Please say if that isn’t a sufficiently clear explanation.

[Kim Smith]

Welcome to my forum – Yes!

[Kim Smith]

Welcome to my forum!

Short answer – no (only at the level of OTs that can be automarked)

We only provide services to students that can be provided for free

But ACCA releases a video to help students debrief their answers to pre-session mock exams

[Kim Smith]

Yes

[Kim Smith]

Welcome to my forum – Yes!

[Kim Smith]

@Ismail12 this is a poll post. You needed to ask elsewhere for a prompt answer. Our materials are still relevant even if recorded years ago …. somethings don’t change! There’s plenty revision question practice in ACCA’s Study Hub and Practice Platform.

[Author]

Posts