Yes, your tips are all appeared in the exam! And your advice that “do not be panic when I face unexpected” helped me a lot during exam 😇Thank you, hope I can pass at this time!
Your tips and videos helped a lot, thanks Ben! For the ROMM part, that's relieving that most of students didn't found material misstatements too because I didn't also. I double-checked my calculation for materiality level and it was correct but most of the misstatements I found were below the materiality level which confused me so I transferred my focus to other requirements hoping that I will score good there! Hopefully I pass!
I felt like it was not AAA exam but the ethics exam! I wrote threat of taking on management responsibilities like 2 or 3 times for different questions! The question about advising to design the KPIs (assistance from auditors was asked) and the advice to design controls for banking sector and also promoting to the clients (of auditors). With the consequent self review threat for both cases. I don’t know, I prepared so much for this exam (thanks to Ben!!!!!), but once I finished the exam I felt absolutely exhausted and with mixed feelings (about passing it). There were not much numbers to earn the analysis and evaluation professional marks, pure ethics in my opinion 😓
Frustrating that there weren’t many numbers - as that’s a source of easy marks. Hopefully you stuck to your timings, and tried to avoid repetition (in each requirement). Repetition is fine across different questions, if the management threat was there multiple times.
-For the inventory the materiality level was below the threshold and we were asked to justify why it was material, think materiality was $1m to $2m -for ROMM i could only find 3 risk as question required us to use only exhibit 1 and 2 - There was a question about materiality in Group audit( Exactly what does the examiner want there)
It’s hard for me to comment in detail - I haven’t seen the exam paper. My understanding is that there were several issues, which taken together (in aggregate), were material
When i saw exam i really thinking that this exam is for sure made by ben wilson When i see procedure on valuation of inventory+ big quality management question I really impressed with exam tips Thank you ben for your support I hope you would continue to support acca students all over the globe 🌍
is it just me that thought that the Bulbs Question, the Acqusition was actually a Associate rather than an Sub since, there was 5 board seats & 2 was only held by the group. Therefore equity method accounting
I've had several comments from students on this. In general, owning more than 50% means that it is a subsidiary. But ONLY if there is overall control of the business. If there are other factors in the scenario that indicate that they don't have control, then its an associate
@@ACCABenWilsonAAA the information in the question mentioned that the shareholding is 58%, and the company has appointed 2 members to the board out of 5 and the other three are engineers who built the company. Additionally, the question mentioned that this was the first time that the company made the acquisition and the first time that they would be consolidating the FS. The following procedures question required procedures to be mentioned regarding the acquisition and not goodwill. Based on this information would it be an associate or a subsidiary in your opinion?
As per my understanding, in the going concern question, it was clearly stated that management has only disclosed the details about the incident, but material uncertainty is not mentioned. Therefore, instead of MUGC para, audit opinion will be modified.
It’s hard for me to comment without having seen the question….but here goes! If the matter has been fully and correctly disclosed, including the potential going concern impact, then unmodified opinion + MURGC paragraph If the disclosure is inadequate, then a modified opinion. Qualified if material, adverse if material and pervasive
@@ACCABenWilsonAAA In my exam examiner specifically stated that they fully disclose the impact of withdrawn of suppliers So in my opinion there would be no modification necessary and murgc para would be appropriate
Sir thank u so much for your videos!I think in Bulbs variant there were 25 marks audit risks,8 marks for procedures for the aquisition of a sub and the remaining 8 marks for auditor responsipilities on noclar.thats total of 40 marks in q1.
Sat the exam in Ireland, my Q2 was the following: a - responsibility of auditor for group and component 4 marks b i) - issues and evidence for subsidiary & brand recognition b ii) - issues and evidence for subsidiary and request to include subsidiary FS for Jan to Dec 20X4 in Group Consolidated FS with y/e March 20X5 Total 12 marks c - implications on audit report 4marks
The going concern question was very tough I had both going concern and the bank company quality management- both huge marks for the questions wasn’t split up so was quite difficult
What variant was this going concern question ? INT? As i am confused now if i did it wrong, in INT variant exam ..there was a question on reporting which had 12 marks question for comment on the matters to consider n evidence n then 4 marks for audit opinion n audit report, but the scenario was about 2 companies, one was lark/lake co which had issues relating to intangible assets as internally generated brand name n second was brook which was about some bonus linked to revenues n profits .. Was this question related to going concern?? Because i did it as except for material misstatement..
My INT had the going concern question and question 1 had 24marks for Audit risk....I however didn't manage my time properly so at this point I am not sure if I passed 😢
Yes, your tips are all appeared in the exam! And your advice that “do not be panic when I face unexpected” helped me a lot during exam 😇Thank you, hope I can pass at this time!
Ah, really glad my tips and advice were helpful for you!
Your tips and videos helped a lot, thanks Ben!
For the ROMM part, that's relieving that most of students didn't found material misstatements too because I didn't also. I double-checked my calculation for materiality level and it was correct but most of the misstatements I found were below the materiality level which confused me so I transferred my focus to other requirements hoping that I will score good there! Hopefully I pass!
You're very welcome! Well done for moving on to other parts - keeping moving is key to passing AAA.
Best of luck for results day :)
I felt like it was not AAA exam but the ethics exam!
I wrote threat of taking on management responsibilities like 2 or 3 times for different questions!
The question about advising to design the KPIs (assistance from auditors was asked) and the advice to design controls for banking sector and also promoting to the clients (of auditors).
With the consequent self review threat for both cases.
I don’t know, I prepared so much for this exam (thanks to Ben!!!!!), but once I finished the exam I felt absolutely exhausted and with mixed feelings (about passing it).
There were not much numbers to earn the analysis and evaluation professional marks, pure ethics in my opinion 😓
Frustrating that there weren’t many numbers - as that’s a source of easy marks.
Hopefully you stuck to your timings, and tried to avoid repetition (in each requirement). Repetition is fine across different questions, if the management threat was there multiple times.
-For the inventory the materiality level was below the threshold and we were asked to justify why it was material, think materiality was $1m to $2m
-for ROMM i could only find 3 risk as question required us to use only exhibit 1 and 2
- There was a question about materiality in Group audit( Exactly what does the examiner want there)
It’s hard for me to comment in detail - I haven’t seen the exam paper.
My understanding is that there were several issues, which taken together (in aggregate), were material
The moment the exam ended I know I failed but thanks Ben you're a genius your tips was helpful at least i can get a guaranted 20 marks
You’re very welcome. It’s normal to remember the tough parts - try to stay positive.
When i saw exam i really thinking that this exam is for sure made by ben wilson
When i see procedure on valuation of inventory+ big quality management question
I really impressed with exam tips
Thank you ben for your support
I hope you would continue to support acca students all over the globe 🌍
My tips really did come in this time (they're usually good......but not this good!)
You're very welcome :)
@@ACCABenWilsonAAA yes Sir
is it just me that thought that the Bulbs Question, the Acqusition was actually a Associate rather than an Sub since, there was 5 board seats & 2 was only held by the group. Therefore equity method accounting
Let's see... I also stated my answer based on this point.😅
I've had several comments from students on this.
In general, owning more than 50% means that it is a subsidiary. But ONLY if there is overall control of the business. If there are other factors in the scenario that indicate that they don't have control, then its an associate
@@ACCABenWilsonAAA the information in the question mentioned that the shareholding is 58%, and the company has appointed 2 members to the board out of 5 and the other three are engineers who built the company.
Additionally, the question mentioned that this was the first time that the company made the acquisition and the first time that they would be consolidating the FS. The following procedures question required procedures to be mentioned regarding the acquisition and not goodwill.
Based on this information would it be an associate or a subsidiary in your opinion?
As per my understanding, in the going concern question, it was clearly stated that management has only disclosed the details about the incident, but material uncertainty is not mentioned.
Therefore, instead of MUGC para, audit opinion will be modified.
Yes this was what mentioned
It’s hard for me to comment without having seen the question….but here goes!
If the matter has been fully and correctly disclosed, including the potential going concern impact, then unmodified opinion + MURGC paragraph
If the disclosure is inadequate, then a modified opinion. Qualified if material, adverse if material and pervasive
@@ACCABenWilsonAAA
In my exam examiner specifically stated that they fully disclose the impact of withdrawn of suppliers
So in my opinion there would be no modification necessary and murgc para would be appropriate
Yes, absolutely right. It was a case of inadequate disclosure so modified opinion. @ACCABenWilsonAAA
@@MuhammadAbdullah-rx6zmbut examiner also specifically stated in the question that material uncertainty is not disclosed.
Sir thank u so much for your videos!I think in Bulbs variant there were 25 marks audit risks,8 marks for procedures for the aquisition of a sub and the remaining 8 marks for auditor responsipilities on noclar.thats total of 40 marks in q1.
Thank you!
Sat the exam in Ireland, my Q2 was the following:
a - responsibility of auditor for group and component 4 marks
b i) - issues and evidence for subsidiary & brand recognition
b ii) - issues and evidence for subsidiary and request to include subsidiary FS for Jan to Dec 20X4 in Group Consolidated FS with y/e March 20X5
Total 12 marks
c - implications on audit report 4marks
I've not had any other students with this question - strange (I have lots of students in Ireland)
The going concern question was very tough
I had both going concern and the bank company quality management- both huge marks for the questions wasn’t split up so was quite difficult
it said Evaluate in this question, so we were required to give a conclusion right, that whether we should accept the client or not?
Yes, a conclusion would score a mark here
I am not ready for this 😂
What variant was this going concern question ? INT? As i am confused now if i did it wrong, in INT variant exam ..there was a question on reporting which had 12 marks question for comment on the matters to consider n evidence n then 4 marks for audit opinion n audit report, but the scenario was about 2 companies, one was lark/lake co which had issues relating to intangible assets as internally generated brand name n second was brook which was about some bonus linked to revenues n profits ..
Was this question related to going concern?? Because i did it as except for material misstatement..
No going concern question is something else
Which I have been faced in my exam
Your information is different
What was Ur variant of exam ? INT or else ?
Not all students sit the same exam questions in AAA. There are several 'variants' of the exam questions
My INT had the going concern question and question 1 had 24marks for Audit risk....I however didn't manage my time properly so at this point I am not sure if I passed 😢