问答题
Section B – TWO questions ONLY to be attempted<br>(a) Coate, a public limited company, is a producer of ecologically friendly electrical power (green electricity). Coate’s revenue comprises mainly the sale of electricity and green certificates. Coate obtains green certificates under a national government scheme. Green certificates represent the environmental value of green electricity. The national government requires suppliers who do not produce green electricity to purchase a certain number of green certificates. Suppliers who do not produce green electricity can buy green certificates either on the market on which they are traded or directly from a producer such as Coate. The national government wishes to give incentives to producers such as Coate by allowing them to gain extra income in this way.<br>Coate obtains the certificates from the national government on satisfactory completion of an audit by an independent organisation, which confirms the origin of production. Coate then receives a certain number of green certificates from the national government depending on the volume of green electricity generated. The green certificates are allocated to Coate on a quarterly basis by the national government and Coate can trade the green certificates.<br>Coate is uncertain as to the accounting treatment of the green certificates in its financial statements for the period ended 30 November 2012 and how to treat the green certificates which were not sold at the end of the reporting period. (7 marks)<br>(b) During the year ended 30 November 2012, Coate acquired an overseas subsidiary whose financial statements are prepared in a different currency to Coate. The amounts reported in the consolidated statement of cash flows included the effect of changes in foreign exchange rates arising on the retranslation of its overseas operations. Additionally, the group’s consolidated statement of cash flows reported as a loss the effect of foreign exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents as Coate held some foreign currency of its own denominated in cash. (5 marks)<br>Under the shareholder agreement, consensus is required with respect to:<br>– significant changes in the company’s activities;<br>– plans or budgets that deviate from the business plan;<br>– accounting policies; acquisition of assets above a certain value; employment or dismissal of senior employees; distribution of dividends or establishment of loan facilities<br>Coate feels that the consensus required above does not constitute a hindrance to the power to control Patten, as it is customary within the industry to require shareholder consensus for decisions of the types listed in the shareholders’ agreement.<br>(d) In the notes to Coate’s financial statements for the year ended 30 November 2012, the tax expense included an amount in respect of ‘Adjustments to current tax in respect of prior years’ and this expense had been treated as a prior year adjustment. These items related to adjustments arising from tax audits by the authorities in relation to previous reporting periods.<br>The issues that resulted in the tax audit adjustment were not a breach of tax law but related predominantly to transfer pricing issues, for which there was a range of possible outcomes that were negotiated during 2012 with the taxation authorities. Further at 30 November 2011, Coate had accounted for all known issues arising from the audits to that date and the tax adjustment could not have been foreseen as at 30 November 2011, as the audit authorities changed the scope of the audit. No penalties were expected to be applied by the taxation authorities.<br>Required:<br>Discuss how the above events should be accounted for in the individual or, as appropriate, the consolidated financial statements of Coate.<br>Note: The mark allocation is shown against each of the four events above.<br>Professional marks will be awarded in question 2 for the clarity and quality of the presentation and discussion. (2 marks)
问答题
Section A – THIS ONE question is compulsory and MUST be attempted<br>Minny is a company which operates in the service sector. Minny has business relationships with Bower and Heeny. All three entities are public limited companies. The draft statements of financial position of these entities are as follows at 30 November 2012:<br>The following information is relevant to the preparation of the group financial statements:<br>1. On 1 December 2010, Minny acquired 70% of the equity interests of Bower. The purchase consideration comprised cash of $730 million. At acquisition, the fair value of the non-controlling interest in Bower was $295 million. On 1 December 2010, the fair value of the identifiable net assets acquired was $835 million and retained earnings of Bower were $319 million and other components of equity were $27 million. The excess in fair value is due to non-depreciable land.<br>2. On 1 December 2011, Bower acquired 80% of the equity interests of Heeny for a cash consideration of $320 million. The fair value of a 20% holding of the non-controlling interest was $72 million; a 30% holding was $108 million and a 44% holding was $161 million. At the date of acquisition, the identifiable net assets of Heeny had a fair value of $362 million, retained earnings were $106 million and other components of equity were $20 million. The excess in fair value is due to non-depreciable land.<br>It is the group’s policy to measure the non-controlling interest at fair value at the date of acquisition.<br>3. Both Bower and Heeny were impairment tested at 30 November 2012. The recoverable amounts of both cash generating units as stated in the individual financial statements at 30 November 2012 were Bower, $1,425 million, and Heeny, $604 million, respectively. The directors of Minny felt that any impairment of assets was due to the poor performance of the intangible assets. The recoverable amount has been determined without consideration of liabilities which all relate to the financing of operations.<br>4. Minny acquired a 14% interest in Puttin, a public limited company, on 1 December 2010 for a cash consideration of $18 million. The investment was accounted for under IFRS 9 Financial Instruments and was designated as at fair value through other comprehensive income. On 1 June 2012, Minny acquired an additional 16% interest in Puttin for a cash consideration of $27 million and achieved significant influence. The value of the original 14% investment on 1 June 2012 was $21 million. Puttin made profits after tax of $20 million and $30 million for the years to 30 November 2011 and 30 November 2012 respectively. On 30 November 2012, Minny received a dividend from Puttin of $2 million, which has been credited to other components of equity<br>5. Minny purchased patents of $10 million to use in a project to develop new products on 1 December 2011. Minny has completed the investigative phase of the project, incurring an additional cost of $7 million and has determined that the product can be developed profitably. An effective and working prototype was created at a cost of $4 million and in order to put the product into a condition for sale, a further $3 million was spent. Finally, marketing costs of $2 million were incurred. All of the above costs are included in the intangible assets of Minny.<br>6. Minny intends to dispose of a major line of the parent’s business operations. At the date the held for sale criteria were met, the carrying amount of the assets and liabilities comprising the line of business were:<br>It is anticipated that Minny will realise $30 million for the business. No adjustments have been made in the financial statements in relation to the above decision.<br>Required:<br>(a) Prepare the consolidated statement of financial position for the Minny Group as at 30 November 2012. (35 marks)<br>(b) Minny intends to dispose of a major line of business in the above scenario and the entity has stated that the held for sale criteria were met under IFRS 5 Non-current Assets Held for Sale and Discontinued Operations. The criteria in IFRS 5 are very strict and regulators have been known to question entities on the application of the standard. The two criteria which must be met before an asset or disposal group will be defined as recovered principally through sale are: that it must be available for immediate sale in its present condition and the sale must be highly probable.<br>Required:<br>Discuss what is meant in IFRS 5 by ‘available for immediate sale in its present condition’ and ‘the sale must be highly probable’, setting out briefly why regulators may question entities on the application of the standard. (7 marks)<br>(c) Bower has a property which has a carrying value of $2 million at 30 November 2012. This property had been revalued at the year end and a revaluation surplus of $400,000 had been recorded in other components of equity. The directors were intending to sell the property to Minny for $1 million shortly after the year end. Bower previously used the historical cost basis for valuing property.<br>Required: Without adjusting your answer to part (a), discuss the ethical and accounting implications of the above intended sale of assets to Minny by Bower. (8 marks)
问答题
Ethan, a public limited company, develops, operates and sells investment properties.<br>(a) Ethan focuses mainly on acquiring properties where it foresees growth potential, through rental income as well as value appreciation. The acquisition of an investment property is usually realised through the acquisition of the entity, which holds the property.<br>In Ethan’s consolidated financial statements, investment properties acquired through business combinations are recognised at fair value, using a discounted cash flow model as approximation to fair value. There is currently an active market for this type of property. The difference between the fair value of the investment property as determined under the accounting policy, and the value of the investment property for tax purposes results in a deferred tax liability.<br>Goodwill arising on business combinations is determined using the measurement principles for the investment properties as outlined above. Goodwill is only considered impaired if and when the deferred tax liability is reduced below the amount at which it was first recognised. This reduction can be caused both by a reduction in the value of the real estate or a change in local tax regulations. As long as the deferred tax liability is equal to, or larger than, the prior year, no impairment is charged to goodwill. Ethan explained its accounting treatment by confirming that almost all of its goodwill is due to the deferred tax liability and that it is normal in the industry to account for goodwill in this way.<br>Since 2008, Ethan has incurred substantial annual losses except for the year ended 31 May 2011, when it made a small profit before tax. In year ended 31 May 2011, most of the profit consisted of income recognised on revaluation of investment properties. Ethan had announced early in its financial year ended 31 May 2012 that it anticipated substantial growth and profit. Later in the year, however, Ethan announced that the expected profit would not be achieved and that, instead, a substantial loss would be incurred. Ethan had a history of reporting considerable negative variances from its budgeted results. Ethan’s recognised deferred tax assets have been increasing year-on-year despite the deferred tax liabilities recognised on business combinations. Ethan’s deferred tax assets consist primarily of unused tax losses that can be carried forward which are unlikely to be offset against anticipated future taxable profits. (11 marks)<br>(b) Ethan wishes to apply the fair value option rules of IFRS 9 Financial Instruments to debt issued to finance its investment properties. Ethan’s argument for applying the fair value option is based upon the fact that the recognition of gains and losses on its investment properties and the related debt would otherwise be inconsistent. Ethan argued that there is a specific financial correlation between the factors, such as interest rates, that form. the basis for determining the fair value of both Ethan’s investment properties and the related debt. (7 marks)<br>(c) Ethan has an operating subsidiary, which has in issue A and B shares, both of which have voting rights. Ethan holds 70% of the A and B shares and the remainder are held by shareholders external to the group. The subsidiary is obliged to pay an annual dividend of 5% on the B shares. The dividend payment is cumulative even if the subsidiary does not have sufficient legally distributable profit at the time the payment is due.<br>In Ethan’s consolidated statement of financial position, the B shares of the subsidiary were accounted for in the same way as equity instruments would be, with the B shares owned by external parties reported as a non-controlling interest. (5 marks)<br>Required: Discuss how the above transactions and events should be recorded in the consolidated financial statements of Ethan. Note: The mark allocation is shown against each of the three transactions above. Professional marks will be awarded in question 3 for the quality of the discussion. (2 marks)
问答题
Section A – THIS ONE question is compulsory and MUST be attempted<br>The following draft statements of financial position relate to Robby, Hail and Zinc, all public limited companies, as at 31 May 2012:<br>The following information needs to be taken into account in the preparation of the group financial statements of Robby:<br>(i) On 1 June 2010, Robby acquired 80% of the equity interests of Hail. The purchase consideration comprised cash of $50 million. Robby has treated the investment in Hail at fair value through other comprehensive income (OCI).<br>A dividend received from Hail on 1 January 2012 of $2 million has similarly been credited to OCI.<br>It is Robby’s policy to measure the non-controlling interest at fair value and this was $15 million on 1 June 2010.<br>On 1 June 2010, the fair value of the identifiable net assets of Hail were $60 million and the retained earnings of Hail were $16 million. The excess of the fair value of the net assets is due to an increase in the value of non-depreciable land.<br>(ii) On 1 June 2009, Robby acquired 5% of the ordinary shares of Zinc. Robby had treated this investment at fair value through profit or loss in the financial statements to 31 May 2011.<br>On 1 December 2011, Robby acquired a further 55% of the ordinary shares of Zinc and gained control of the company.<br>The consideration for the acquisitions was as follows:<br>At 1 December 2011, the fair value of the equity interest in Zinc held by Robby before the business combination was $5 million.<br>It is Robby’s policy to measure the non-controlling interest at fair value and this was $9 million on 1 December 2011.<br>The fair value of the identifiable net assets at 1 December 2011 of Zinc was $26 million, and the retained earnings were $15 million. The excess of the fair value of the net assets is due to an increase in the value of property, plant and equipment (PPE), which was provisional pending receipt of the final valuations. These valuations were received on 1 March 2012 and resulted in an additional increase of $3 million in the fair value of PPE at the date of acquisition. This increase does not affect the fair value of the non-controlling interest at acquisition. PPE is to be depreciated on the straight-line basis over a remaining period of five years.<br>(iii) Robby has a 40% share of a joint operation, a natural gas station. Assets, liabilities, revenue and costs are apportioned on the basis of shareholding.<br>The following information relates to the joint arrangement activities:<br>– The natural gas station cost $15 million to construct and was completed on 1 June 2011 and is to be dismantled at the end of its life of 10 years. The present value of this dismantling cost to the joint arrangement at 1 June 2011, using a discount rate of 5%, was $2 million.<br>– In the year, gas with a direct cost of $16 million was sold for $20 million. Additionally, the joint arrangement incurred operating costs of $0·5 million during the year.<br>Robby has only contributed and accounted for its share of the construction cost, paying $6 million. The revenue and costs are receivable and payable by the other joint operator who settles amounts outstanding with Robby after the year end.<br>(iv) Robby purchased PPE for $10 million on 1 June 2009. It has an expected useful life of 20 years and is depreciated on the straight-line method. On 31 May 2011, the PPE was revalued to $11 million. At 31 May 2012, impairment indicators triggered an impairment review of the PPE. The recoverable amount of the PPE was $7·8 million. The only accounting entry posted for the year to 31 May 2012 was to account for the depreciation based on the revalued amount as at 31 May 2011. Robby’s accounting policy is to make a transfer of the excess depreciation arising on the revaluation of PPE.<br>(v) Robby held a portfolio of trade receivables with a carrying amount of $4 million at 31 May 2012. At that date, the entity entered into a factoring agreement with a bank, whereby it transfers the receivables in exchange for $3·6 million in cash. Robby has agreed to reimburse the factor for any shortfall between the amount collected and $3·6 million. Once the receivables have been collected, any amounts above $3·6 million, less interest on this amount, will be repaid to Robby. Robby has derecognised the receivables and charged $0·4 million as a loss to profit or loss.<br>(vi) Immediately prior to the year end, Robby sold land to a third party at a price of $16 million with an option to purchase the land back on 1 July 2012 for $16 million plus a premium of 3%. The market value of the land is $25 million on 31 May 2012 and the carrying amount was $12 million. Robby accounted for the sale, consequently eliminating the bank overdraft at 31 May 2012.<br>Required:<br>(a) Prepare a consolidated statement of financial position of the Robby Group at 31 May 2012 in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards. (35 marks)<br>(b) (i) In the above scenario (information point (v)), Robby holds a portfolio of trade receivables and enters into a factoring agreement with a bank, whereby it transfers the receivables in exchange for cash. Robby additionally agreed to other terms with the bank as regards any collection shortfall and repayment of any monies to Robby. Robby derecognised the receivables. This is an example of the type of complex transaction that can arise out of normal terms of trade. The rules regarding derecognition are quite complex and are often not understood by entities.<br>Describe the rules of IFRS 9 Financial Instruments relating to the derecognition of a financial asset and how these rules affect the treatment of the portfolio of trade receivables in Robby’s financial statements. (9 marks)<br>(ii) Discuss the legitimacy of Robby selling land just prior to the year end in order to show a better liquidity position for the group and whether this transaction is consistent with an accountant’s responsibilities to users of financial statements.<br>Note: Your answer should include reference to the above scenario. (6 marks)
问答题
Scramble, a public limited company, is a developer of online computer games.<br>(a) At 30 November 2011, 65% of Scramble’s total assets were mainly represented by internally developed intangible assets comprising the capitalised costs of the development and production of online computer games. These games generate all of Scramble’s revenue. The costs incurred in relation to maintaining the games at the same standard of performance are expensed to the statement of comprehensive income. The accounting policy note states that intangible assets are valued at historical cost. Scramble considers the games to have an indefinite useful life, which is reconsidered annually when the intangible assets are tested for impairment. Scramble determines value in use using the estimated future cash flows which include maintenance expenses, capital expenses incurred in developing different versions of the games and the expected increase in turnover resulting from the above mentioned cash outflows. Scramble does not conduct an analysis or investigation of differences between expected and actual cash flows. Tax effects were also taken into account. (7 marks)<br>(b) Scramble has two cash generating units (CGU) which hold 90% of the internally developed intangible assets. Scramble reported a consolidated net loss for the period and an impairment charge in respect of the two CGUs representing 63% of the consolidated profit before tax and 29% of the total costs in the period. The recoverable amount of the CGUs is defined, in this case, as value in use. Specific discount rates are not directly available from the market, and Scramble estimates the discount rates, using its weighted average cost of capital. In calculating the cost of debt as an input to the determination of the discount rate, Scramble used the risk-free rate adjusted by the company specific average credit spread of its outstanding debt, which had been raised two years previously. As Scramble did not have any need for additional financing and did not need to repay any of the existing loans before 2014, Scramble did not see any reason for using a different discount rate. Scramble did not disclose either the events and circumstances that led to the recognition of the impairment loss or the amount of the loss recognised in respect of each cash-generating unit. Scramble felt that the events and circumstances that led to the recognition of a loss in respect of the first CGU were common knowledge in the market and the events and the circumstances that led to the recognition loss of the second CGU were not needed to be disclosed. (7 marks)<br>(c) Scramble wished to diversify its operations and purchased a professional football club, Rashing. In Rashing’s financial statements for the year ended 30 November 2011, it was proposed to include significant intangible assets which related to acquired players’ registration rights comprising registration and agents’ fees. The agents’ fees were paid by the club to players’ agents either when a player is transferred to the club or when the contract of a player is extended. Scramble believes that the registration rights of the players are intangible assets but that the agents fees do not meet the criteria to be recognised as intangible assets as they are not directly attributable to the costs of players’ contracts. Additionally, Rashing has purchased the rights to 25% of the revenue from ticket sales generated by another football club, Santash, in a different league. Rashing does not sell these tickets nor has any discretion over the pricing of the tickets. Rashing wishes to show these rights as intangible assets in its financial statements. (9 marks)<br>Required:<br>Discuss the validity of the accounting treatments proposed by Scramble in its financial statements for the year ended 30 November 2011.<br>The mark allocation is shown against each of the three accounting treaments above. Professional marks will be awarded for clarity and expression of your discussion. (2 marks)
问答题
Section A – THIS ONE question is compulsory and MUST be attempted<br>Traveler, a public limited company, operates in the manufacturing sector. The draft statements of financial position are as follows at 30 November 2011:<br>The following information is relevant to the preparation of the group financial statements:<br>1 On 1 December 2010, Traveler acquired 60% of the equity interests of Data, a public limited company. The purchase consideration comprised cash of $600 million. At acquisition, the fair value of the non-controlling interest in Data was $395 million. Traveler wishes to use the ‘full goodwill’ method. On 1 December 2010, the fair value of the identifiable net assets acquired was $935 million and retained earnings of Data were $299 million and other components of equity were $26 million. The excess in fair value is due to non-depreciable land.<br>On 30 November 2011, Traveler acquired a further 20% interest in Data for a cash consideration of $220 million.<br>2 On 1 December 2010, Traveler acquired 80% of the equity interests of Captive for a consideration of $541 million. The consideration comprised cash of $477 million and the transfer of non-depreciable land with a fair value of $64 million. The carrying amount of the land at the acquisition date was $56 million. At the year end, this asset was still included in the non-current assets of Traveler and the sale proceeds had been credited to profit or loss.<br>At the date of acquisition, the identifiable net assets of Captive had a fair value of $526 million, retained earnings were $90 million and other components of equity were $24 million. The excess in fair value is due to non-depreciable land. This acquisition was accounted for using the partial goodwill method in accordance with IFRS 3 (Revised) Business Combinations.<br>3 Goodwill was impairment tested after the additional acquisition in Data on 30 November 2011. The recoverable amount of Data was $1,099 million and that of Captive was $700 million.<br>4 Included in the financial assets of Traveler is a ten-year 7% loan. At 30 November 2011, the borrower was in financial difficulties and its credit rating had been downgraded. Traveler has adopted IFRS 9 Financial Instruments and the loan asset is currently held at amortised cost of $29 million. Traveler now wishes to value the loan at fair value using current market interest rates. Traveler has agreed for the loan to be restructured; there will only be three more annual payments of $8 million starting in one year’s time. Current market interest rates are 8%, the original effective interest rate is 6·7% and the effective interest rate under the revised payment schedule is 6·3%.<br>5 Traveler acquired a new factory on 1 December 2010. The cost of the factory was $50 million and it has a residual value of $2 million. The factory has a flat roof, which needs replacing every five years. The cost of the roof was $5 million. The useful economic life of the factory is 25 years. No depreciation has been charged for the year. Traveler wishes to account for the factory and roof as a single asset and depreciate the whole factory over its economic life. Traveler uses straight-line depreciation.<br>6 The actuarial value of Traveler’s pension plan showed a surplus at 1 December 2010 of $72 million, represented by the fair value of the assets of $250 million, the present value of the defined benefit obligation of $200 million and net unrecognised actuarial losses of $22 million. The average remaining working lives of the employees is 10 years. Traveler uses the corridor approach for recognising actuarial gains and losses. The aggregate of the current service cost, interest cost and expected return on assets amounted to a cost of $55 million for the year. After consulting with the actuaries, the company decided to reduce its contributions for the year to $45 million. The contributions were paid on 7 December 2011. No entries had been made in the financial statements for the above amounts. At the year end, the unrecognised actuarial losses were $20 million and the present value of available future refunds and reductions in future contributions was $18 million.<br>Required:<br>(a) Prepare a consolidated statement of financial position for the Traveler Group for the year ended 30 November 2011. (35 marks)<br>(b) Traveler has three distinct business segments. The management has calculated the net assets, turnover and profit before common costs, which are to be allocated to these segments. However, they are unsure as to how they should allocate certain common costs and whether they can exercise judgement in the allocation process. They wish to allocate head office management expenses; pension expense; the cost of managing properties and interest and related interest bearing assets. They also are uncertain as to whether the allocation of costs has to be in conformity with the accounting policies used in the financial statements.<br>Required:<br>Advise the management of Traveler on the points raised in the above paragraph. (7 marks)<br>(c) Segmental information reported externally is more useful if it conforms to information used by management in making decisions. The information can differ from that reported in the financial statements. Although reconciliations are required, these can be complex and difficult to understand. Additionally, there are other standards where subjectivity is involved and often the profit motive determines which accounting practice to follow. The directors have a responsibility to shareholders in disclosing information to enhance corporate value but this may conflict with their corporate social responsibility.<br>Required:<br>Discuss how the ethics of corporate social responsibility disclosure are difficult to reconcile with shareholder expectations. (6 marks)<br>Professional marks will be awarded in part (c) for clarity and expression of your discussion. (2 marks)
问答题
The publication of IFRS 9, Financial Instruments, represents the completion of the first stage of a three-part project to replace IAS 39 Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement with a new standard. The new standard purports to enhance the ability of investors and other users of financial information to understand the accounting of financial assets and reduces complexity.<br>Required:<br>(a) (i) Discuss the approach taken by IFRS 9 in measuring and classifying financial assets and the main effect that IFRS 9 will have on accounting for financial assets. (11 marks)<br>(ii) Grainger, a public limited company, has decided to adopt IFRS 9 prior to January 2012 and has decided to restate comparative information under IAS 8 Accounting Policies, Changes in Accounting Estimates and Errors. The entity has an investment in a financial asset which was carried at amortised cost under IAS 39 but will be valued at fair value through profit and loss (FVTPL) under IFRS 9. The carrying value of the assets was $105,000 on 30 April 2010 and $110,400 on 30 April 2011. The fair value of the asset was $106,500 on 30 April 2010 and $111,000 on 30 April 2011. Grainger has determined that the asset will be valued at FVTPL at 30 April 2011.<br>Required:<br>Discuss how the financial asset will be accounted for in the financial statements of Grainger in the year ended 30 April 2011. (4 marks)<br>(b) Recently, criticisms have been made against the current IFRS impairment model for financial assets (the incurred loss model). The issue with the incurred loss model is that impairment losses (and resulting write-downs in the reported value of financial assets) can only be recognised when there is evidence that they exist and have been incurred. Reporting entities are not allowed currently to consider the effects of expected losses. There is a view that earlier recognition of loan losses could potentially reduce the problems incurred in a credit crisis.<br>Grainger has a portfolio of loans of $5 million which was initially recognised on 1 May 2010. The loans mature in 10 years and carry an interest rate of 16%. Grainger estimates that no loans will default in the first two years, but from the third year onwards, loans will default at an annual rate of about 9%. If the loans default as expected, the rate of return from the portfolio will be approximately 9·07%. The number of loans are fixed without any new lending or any other impairment provisions.<br>Required:<br>(i) Discuss briefly the issues related to considering the effects of expected losses in dealing with impairment of financial assets. (4 marks)<br>(ii) Calculate the impact on the financial statements up to the year ended 30 April 2013 if Grainger anticipated the expected losses on the loan portfolio in year three. (4 marks)<br>Professional marks will be awarded in question 4 for clarity and quality of discussion. (2 marks)
套餐购买该问题答案仅对会员开放，欢迎开通会员 ¥ 19.9
0.64/天
1个月(不限次)
¥ 19.9
1000次
(不限时)
¥ 29.9
0.32/天
3个月(不限次)
¥ 59.9
0.16/天
1年(不限次)
立即支付
微信支付 
支付宝支付