NO.PZ202208300100001103
问题如下:
The best conclusion Andrei can make about the classification of warranty expenses in 2014 is that Galaxy’s:选项:
A.earnings quality is lower. B.financial reporting quality is lower. C.return on sales is improved.解释:
Solution
A is correct. The classification of warranty expense as a non-operating item reduces Galaxy’s earnings quality. High-quality earnings allow investors to identify core or recurring earnings, and Galaxy’s core earnings are overstated when an operating cost, like warranties, are classified as non-operating. The company disclosed the change in classification in both the MD&A and notes to the financial statements, thereby exhibiting high financial reporting quality.
B is incorrect. Galaxy has explained the change—the change may not be GAAP, but they did disclose it, exhibiting a reasonable level of reporting quality because it is still possible to assess a company’s results
C is incorrect. The reclassification of an expense between operating and non-operating or non-recurring does not affect net income (and hence return on sales) but would affect the operating margin and the interpretation of core earnings.
中文解析:
这道题考查的是财务报告的质量潜在问题:分类问题
题干给了,Galaxy公司2013年MD&A中关于保修费用的描述如下:该公司为其产品提供一年的保修期,并在销售时记录为销售和管理费用。2013年确认的保修费用为5,000美元。Galaxy公司2014年MD&A中关于保修费用的描述如下:2014年该公司提供一年的产品保修期。经过五年的索赔经验,公司意识到实际索赔低于累计金额,并修改了我们的保修估算率。该公司还认为,其生产过程已经变得非常可靠。因此,2014年保修费用(2000美元)计入营业外费用。
接下来题目问,2014年保修费用的重新分类,最有可能产生什么影响。
分类问题主要是指不按经济实质对报表项目进行错误分类,从而误导报表使用者。这道题中主要是将营业成本划分为非经常性项目或营业外支出。
A选项是正确的。将保修费用归类为非经营性项目,这降低了Galaxy公司的收益质量。高质量的收益让投资者能够识别核心收益,当运营成本如保修费用被归类为非经营成本时,G公司的收益被夸大了。但是由于公司在财务报表的附注中披露了分类的变化,所以它的财务报告质量还是很高的。
B选项错误,由于公司在财务报表的附注中披露了分类的变化,所以它的财务报告质量还是很高的。C选项错误,费用之间的重新分类不影响净利润(因此也不影响return on
sales),但会影响operating margin和core
earnings。
一级的内容会在二级重复考吗?