[Zaq]

I feel like the study group is definitely losing its focus and more about people joining us, rejoining us, or questions about the structure of the exam instead of the actual review session of the overall material itself.

Not sure if this thread is appropriate in itself, but I’d like to dedicate this thread to questions and answers that SPECIFICALLY focus on the content and material of AUD and NOTHING ELSE. That way we can have a single source for people to look up and look through when reviewing over some of the most problematic or confusing topics.

FAR: 50, 76!
REG: 74... (ouch baby, very ouch), 76!
AUD: 65, 91!?
BEC: 80! Aaaand doneskies!

May 2012 to August 2013. Can't believe it's over.

[Zaq]

To start this off:

Can someone help me to understand how to identify the appropriate management assertions for account balances, disclosures/presentations, and transactions? Becker uses COVERU, but I notice there is a strange discrepancy between the text and their flashcards. And I think Jeff uses like a “PERCEIVE” mnemonic.

FAR: 50, 76!
REG: 74... (ouch baby, very ouch), 76!
AUD: 65, 91!?
BEC: 80! Aaaand doneskies!

May 2012 to August 2013. Can't believe it's over.

[voigtma]

Hi InfernoOmni! Jeff's memory trick is really good…. PERCV OCCCA OCCA (Perceive Orange County CA)

Account Balances

Presentation

Existence

Rights & Obligations

Completeness

Valuation

Transactions

Occurance

Cutoff

Classification

Completeness

Accuracy

Disclosures

(everything from above except Cutoff)

FAR 79 (Feb 2013)
AUD 77 (Aug 2013)
REG 75 (May 2014)
BEC 79 (June 2014!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

[Anonymous]

I had an issue remembering this too and here is a trick I made up that worked for me:

C – All

O – Transactions

V – All

E – BaT

R – BaD

U – TaD

(All = Balances, Transactions and Disclosures)

Just say “All, Transactions, All, BaT, BaD, TaD” to yourself a couple of times and see if it sticks.

[Zaq]

^Oooh, I really like that one. I'm a stickler for a combination of strange words or sounds in regards to association and memory.

FAR: 50, 76!
REG: 74... (ouch baby, very ouch), 76!
AUD: 65, 91!?
BEC: 80! Aaaand doneskies!

May 2012 to August 2013. Can't believe it's over.

[Anonymous]

Inferno, if you knew some of the things I make up in my head to get certain concepts to sink in you'd think I was crazy, but if that's what it takes… !

[Zaq]

For REG, to memorize the Individual Taxation accounts: WIDSABCIPRKUSO. “Wishing I didn't shoot a blue cop. I probably really killed unexpectantly killed someone's owner.” A friend of mine gave me this mnemonic that I swore was awful, but I couldn't get out of my head.

FAR: 50, 76!
REG: 74... (ouch baby, very ouch), 76!
AUD: 65, 91!?
BEC: 80! Aaaand doneskies!

May 2012 to August 2013. Can't believe it's over.

[Zaq]

A Wiley question had the following fact nugget: “A suitable criteria is necessary for attestation standards; written assertions are not always necessary. A client who is not responsible for the subject matter cannot have assertions of it.”

When the hell are there times when a client is not responsible for the subject matter of an attestation service?

FAR: 50, 76!
REG: 74... (ouch baby, very ouch), 76!
AUD: 65, 91!?
BEC: 80! Aaaand doneskies!

May 2012 to August 2013. Can't believe it's over.

[Zaq]

Hm. Okay, here's another one:

Both Projections and Pro Forma F/S deal with hypotheticals, correct? From my understanding:

– A Projection (unlike a forecast) changes past information to set up a “what if” scenario for predicting future results. Not for General Use.

– A Pro Forma F/S looks at historical financials and applies a “what if” scenario, BUT is not designed for predicting future results

Is this correct?

FAR: 50, 76!
REG: 74... (ouch baby, very ouch), 76!
AUD: 65, 91!?
BEC: 80! Aaaand doneskies!

May 2012 to August 2013. Can't believe it's over.

[Author]

Replies