[jeff]

Post by Another71.

Free Study Planner, Notes, Audio, Flashcards: https://www.another71.com/cpa-exam-study-plan/

Free CPA Exam Survival Guide: https://www.another71.com/cpa-exam-survival-guide/

[Anonymous]

Thanks SMaz, good luck to you too

There were a few sims where the AL didn't help at all. However, like you mention, there were 2-3 (one word for word) that using the AL helped greatly.

[Martin]

Do they have samples of different simulations on the AL? Why people say that they found an answer to a simulation word for word. How do you search for that?

Through God all things can happen!

“You never fail until you stop trying.”
― Albert Einstein
When I was young, I used to admire intelligent people;as I grow older, I admire kind people.
“Just keep swimming, just keep swimming.”

FAR= 72-84
Audit= 73-82
BEC= 74-75
Reg=77

[smazthespaz]

Yes you can find some reports in the AL word for word; there are templates. Let's say a simulation is asking the format of an agreed-upon procedure via SSAE. You would just need to search for “agreed upon procedure” and browse the results for a template or example.

REG - 83 11/24/14
AUD - 94 2/17/15
FAR - 93 5/26/15
BEC - 90 8/10/15

[Martin]

smazthespaz, thanks for the explanation.

Through God all things can happen!

“You never fail until you stop trying.”
― Albert Einstein
When I was young, I used to admire intelligent people;as I grow older, I admire kind people.
“Just keep swimming, just keep swimming.”

FAR= 72-84
Audit= 73-82
BEC= 74-75
Reg=77

[Martin]

According to Becker, the average of net receivable to calculate the ratio of A/R turnover is to get Net Credit sales divided by Average net receivables. And to get average net receivable, you would need to get Beginning Bal plus ending Balance divided by 2. Lets say you have A/R on 2001 for 3,000 and on 2002 your balance is 2,000, so you will add 3,000+2,000=5000/2=2500 is this correct when calculating averages on ratios?

The reason I ask is because I saw a question on Ninja where they calculated the average differently. In the above example, they would add the difference between 2001 to 2002 (3000-2000=1000) and then add the difference to ending bal, in this case, 1,000 plus 3,000 divided by 2= 2000, so as you can see in one we have 2500 but the other comes to 2,000. Which one is correct?

Through God all things can happen!

“You never fail until you stop trying.”
― Albert Einstein
When I was young, I used to admire intelligent people;as I grow older, I admire kind people.
“Just keep swimming, just keep swimming.”

FAR= 72-84
Audit= 73-82
BEC= 74-75
Reg=77

[mariam almas]

@Real Madrid yeah i noted that as well, even in A4 SIM 1-4 (Becker) a different method has been used for calculation the averages. hope someone clarify it for us

AUD: 81 (Done)
REG: Currently studying
FAR: TBD
BEC: TBD

NH

[Anonymous]

@Real Madrid – I've seen 2 correct ways to calculate the average, I will demonstrate below based on your example.

Example:

E.O.Y 2001 – A/R $3,000

2002 – A/R $2,000

A) E.O.Year 1 + Year 2 / N = ($3,000 + $2,000) / (2) = $5,000 / 2 = $2,500

B) (0.5(E.O.Year 1 + Year 2)) = (0.5 ($3,000 + $2,000)) = (0.5 ($5,000)) = $2,500

The way you suggested (A) is by far the easiest / less confusing way to compute the average. I would say the second example that you gave would definitely be incorrect, I don't think I would try to compute an average that way.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________

Also, just got this question in Ninja. I hope that we are all blessed with such a question in our “FIRST” testlet.

Question:

Significant deficiencies are matters that come to an auditor's attention that should be communicated to an entity's audit committee because they represent:

A.disclosures of information that significantly contradict the auditor's going concern assumption.

B.material fraud or noncompliance with laws and regulations perpetrated by high-level management.

C.significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal control.

D.manipulation or falsification of accounting records or documents from which financial statements are prepared.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________

I won't make you wait for the answer to this one.

Since an entity's audit committee has the responsibility and authority over internal control and financial reporting matters, it is the appropriate recipient of information concerning significant deficiencies in the design or operation of the internal control.

Information that significantly contradicts the auditor's going concern assumption is used in determining the need for disclosure.

The other answer choices represent examples of possible significant deficiencies involving the internal control:

Material fraud or noncompliance with laws and regulations perpetrated by employees or management (especially high-level management)

Manipulation or falsification of accounting records or documents from which financial statements are prepared

Significant deficiencies may also be material weaknesses, due to their material effect on the financial statements and the fact that they were not detected by the entity's internal controls in a timely manner.

Sorry, I may have enjoyed the thought of that question on exam day too much.

[smazthespaz]

Real

I'm not sure I understand the logic on the second method. Let's say you have a beginning balance of 2800 and an ending balance of 3000 (little fluctuation). That's now saying that the average is 1600 ((3000 + 200)/2). That doesn't make sense for balance sheet items.

I've always seen it as your first method (BB + EB divided by 2).

REG - 83 11/24/14
AUD - 94 2/17/15
FAR - 93 5/26/15
BEC - 90 8/10/15

[Martin]

smazthespaz, I did not get the logic either but that is how they supposedly calculated the right answer on Ninja MC. Thanks!

ARCPA2B, thanks for the clarification.

Through God all things can happen!

“You never fail until you stop trying.”
― Albert Einstein
When I was young, I used to admire intelligent people;as I grow older, I admire kind people.
“Just keep swimming, just keep swimming.”

FAR= 72-84
Audit= 73-82
BEC= 74-75
Reg=77

[LKD CPA]

Just returned from my AUD exam in what will hopefully be my last CPA exam ever! I finished at the 2 hour mark. Felt very confident and very prepared and walked out of there feeling I had enough for a pass. If that doesn't come back to bite me then I'll be done with this forever!!!! Just wanted to say thanks to everyone on this thread for helping me clarify topics, letting me question, letting me vent, and overall not go to crazy. Best of luck to you all in this journey!

FAR: 74, 83
REG: 76
BEC: 77
AUD: 89

[harris016]

Which of the following procedures would be most appropriate for testing the completeness assertion as it applies to inventory?

a.

Performing cutoff procedures for shipping and receiving.

b.

Scanning perpetual inventory, production, and purchasing records.

c.

Examining paid vendor invoices.

d.

Tracing inventory items from the tag listing back to the physical inventory quantities.

Explanation

Choice “a” is correct. Performing cutoff procedures provides assurance that goods in transit (shipped or received) are appropriately included or excluded from inventory and this procedure is most appropriate for testing the completeness assertion.

Choice “b” is incorrect. Scanning perpetual inventory, production, and purchasing records would only include transactions that have been recorded. The completeness assertion is focused on unrecorded transactions.

Choice “c” is incorrect. Examining paid vendor invoices would exclude invoices from vendors for goods received but not yet billed by the vendor.

Choice “d” is incorrect. Tracing items from the tag listing back to the physical inventory quantities is a test for the existence of the inventory on the tag listing. For the completeness assertion, the auditor should trace from the physical inventory quantities to the tag listing.

I am going crazy about Becker and this question. They say the correct answer is A. However, it explicitly says in the book that going from tags to record inventory is COMPLETENESS. Can somebody help me out here I am confused. Going from inventory to tags is the test for EXISTENCE…essentially saying ok everything you said was here does EXIST….going from the tags to the inventory is saying ok here are the items that do EXIST and we traced them back to your inventory to make sure your inventory is COMPLETE.

Am I wrong here?

[willpassby2014]

Why B is not the correct answer. Any one

In which of the following circumstances would an auditor not express an unmodified opinion?

A.

There has been a material change in accounting principles between periods.

B.

Quarterly financial data required by the SEC has been omitted.

C.

The auditor wishes to emphasize an unusually important subsequent event.

Correct D.

The auditor is unable to obtain audited financial statements of a consolidated investee.

BEC Passed
FAR Passed
AUD Passed
REG Passed

[harris016]

When the data is required by the SEC it is not a departure from GAAP or a scope limitation…it will simply be noted in the report.

If it would of said required by GAAP or the applicable framework then it would be qualified or adverse.

Think of it this way…the financial data required by the SEC has nothing to do with the fair presentation of the financial statements…so an unmodified opinion works.

As for the correct answer….this is a scope limitation….this limitation has a direct impact of the financial statements….if you are consolidating your books with an investee it will have a significant impact on your numbers,,,,therefore not being able to obtain evidence of where those numbers came from directly impacts the fair presentation of the financial statements therefore making it a scope limitation.

Anytime you modify an opinion has to be because of things impacting the fair presentation of the f/s

[Anonymous]

Willpassby2014 – B is not correct because the auditor could use alternative procedures to review that material; however, not receiving the audited financials from an consolidated investee is a scope issue and there is no possible alternative procedures for the auditor to use. What helps me with these type of questions is to think about if the information isn't available, can I as the auditor do something else to meet the requirements. I hope this helps some.

Why B is not the correct answer. Any one

In which of the following circumstances would an auditor not express an unmodified opinion?

A.

There has been a material change in accounting principles between periods.

B.

Quarterly financial data required by the SEC has been omitted.

C.

The auditor wishes to emphasize an unusually important subsequent event.

Correct D.

The auditor is unable to obtain audited financial statements of a consolidated investee.

[willpassby2014]

Thanks guys. Giving my exam on 27th .

BEC Passed
FAR Passed
AUD Passed
REG Passed

[Author]

Replies