APS Accredited Payables Specialist (APS) Certification Exam Questions and Answers

TheTax and Regulatory Compliancetopic in the APS Certification Program covers sales tax exemptions, particularly for goods purchased for resale (e.g., by wholesalers or retailers). To claim a sales tax exemption, the buyer must provide anexemption certificateto the seller, documenting that the goods are for resale and not subject to sales tax at the point of purchase. The seller retains this certificate for audit purposes.

Option A (File a letter of intent with the local taxing jurisdiction): Incorrect. A letter of intent is not a standard requirement; the exemption is documented via a certificate provided to the seller.

Option B (Provide an exemption certificate to the seller): Correct. An exemption certificate (e.g., a resale certificate) verifies the buyer’s intent to resell the goods, exempting the transaction from sales tax.

Option C (Inform the state in writing that the tax will be paid by the buyer): Incorrect. The buyer does not directly notify the state; the exemption is handled between buyer and seller via the certificate.

Option D (Supply a copy of a sales tax license to the seller): Incorrect. While a sales tax license may be relevant for the buyer’s operations, the exemption certificate is the specific document required for resale exemptions.

Reference to IOFM APS Documents: The APS e-textbook underTax and Regulatory Compliancestates, “To claim a sales tax exemption for goods purchased for resale, the buyer must provide an exemption certificate to the seller, documenting the resale intent.” The training video explains, “AP professionals ensure exemption certificates are collected for resale purchases to avoid unnecessary sales tax payments, maintaining compliance with state regulations.”

TheTax and Regulatory Compliancetopic in the APS Certification Program covers value-added tax (VAT), a consumption tax levied on the value added at each stage of production or distribution, common in many countries (e.g., EU, Canada). The acronymVATstands forValue Added Tax, a standard term in tax compliance.

Option A (Value assessed tax): Incorrect. This is not a recognized term in tax regulations.

Option B (Variable added tax): Incorrect. The term does not reflect the concept of value added at production stages.

Option C (Variable assessed tax): Incorrect. This is not a standard tax term.

Option D (Value added tax): Correct. VAT is universally known as Value Added Tax, as defined by tax authorities and IOFM materials.

Reference to IOFM APS Documents: The APS e-textbook underTax and Regulatory Compliancedefines VAT as “Value Added Tax, a tax on the value added at each stage of goods or services production.” The training video explains, “VAT, or Value Added Tax, is a key compliance area for AP in international transactions, requiring accurate invoicing and reporting.”

TheVendor Master Filetopic in the IOFM APS Certification Program emphasizes the importance of structured data in the vendor master file (VMF) to support organizational processes. Entering acommodity code(a standardized code classifying goods or services) in a user-defined field allows procurement to categorize vendor offerings, enablingspend analysisto identify spending patterns, negotiate better terms, and optimize supplier selection.

Option A (It prevents a duplicate vendor from being entered): Incorrect. Commodity codes classify goods/services, not vendor identities; duplicate prevention relies on TIN or name checks.

Option B (It indicates which team member created the new record): Incorrect. Commodity codes are unrelated to record creation metadata, which is tracked separately.

Option C (It automatically generates a price comparison to other similar vendors): Incorrect. Commodity codes enable categorization but do not automatically generate price comparisons; additional tools are needed.

Option D (It enables procurement to use the data for spend analysis): Correct. Commodity codes allow procurement to group vendors by product/service type, facilitating spend analysis and strategic sourcing.

Reference to IOFM APS Documents: The APS e-textbook underVendor Master Filestates, “Entering commodity codes in the vendor master file enables procurement to perform spend analysis by categorizing vendor goods and services.” The training video notes, “Commodity codes support procurement’s ability to analyze spending patterns, a key benefit of structured VMF data.”

TheInternal Controlstopic in the APS Certification Program explains that detective controls are designed to identify errors, fraud, or control failures after they occur. They include activities like reviewing transactions for irregularities and assessing the effectiveness of preventive controls.Segregation of duties, however, is a preventive control, not a detective one, as it prevents fraud by dividing responsibilities.

Item I (Establish segregation of duties): Segregation of duties prevents fraud by ensuring no single employee controls all aspects of a transaction (e.g., invoice approval and payment). This is a preventive control, not detective.

Item II (Look for errors and irregularities): Detective controls, such as account reconciliation or audits, identify errors or fraudulent activities after they occur. This is a valid function.

Item III (Determine if preventive controls are effective): Detective controls, like monitoring or control testing, assess whether preventive controls (e.g., vendor validation) are working. This is a valid function.

Option A (I, II, and III): Incorrect, as Item I is a preventive control.

Option B (I and III only): Incorrect, as Item I is not a detective control function.

Option C (II and III only): Correct, as Items II and III describe detective control functions.

Option D (I and II only): Incorrect, as Item I is not a detective control function.

Reference to IOFM APS Documents: The APS e-textbook underInternal Controlsstates, “Detective controls, such as audits and reconciliations, look for errors and irregularities and evaluate the effectiveness of preventive controls.” It clarifies that “segregation of duties is a preventive control to avoid conflicts of interest.” The training video discusses detective controls as tools for “post-transaction review and control assessment,” excluding segregation of duties.

TheInternal Controlstopic in the IOFM APS Certification Program covers the COSO (Committee of Sponsoring Organizations) framework, a widely recognized model for designing and evaluating internal controls, as mandated by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX). The COSO framework includes five components: Control Environment, Risk Assessment, Control Activities, Information and Communication, and Monitoring Activities.Accounting principlesare not a COSO component, as they relate to GAAP (Generally Accepted Accounting Principles), not internal control categories.

Option A (Control environment): This is a COSO component, setting the tone for the organization’s control consciousness, including leadership and ethics.

Option B (Information and communication): This is a COSO component, ensuring relevant information is identified, captured, and communicated effectively.

Option C (Risk assessment): This is a COSO component, involving the identification and analysis of risks to achieving objectives.

Option D (Accounting principles): Accounting principles (e.g., GAAP) guide financial reporting but are not part of the COSO framework’s internal control categories. This is the correct answer.

Reference to IOFM APS Documents: The APS e-textbook underInternal Controlsstates, “The COSO framework includes five components: Control Environment, Risk Assessment, Control Activities, Information and Communication, and Monitoring Activities, used to design and testinternal controls.” It distinguishes COSO from GAAP, noting that “accounting principles govern financial reporting, not internal control frameworks.” The training video reinforces this by discussing COSO’s role in SOX compliance, listing the five components and excluding accounting principles.

TheVendor Master Filetopic in the APS Certification Program covers vendor validation to ensure legitimacy and prevent fraud. The best way to verify a vendor’s business registration in the U.S. is tocheck the database of the Secretary of Statein the state where the vendor is registered, as this provides authoritative, public confirmation of the vendor’s legal status and registration details.

Option A (Send a letter to the vendor requesting written confirmation): Incorrect. Vendor-provided confirmation is less reliable, as it may be falsified, and is not authoritative.

Option B (Submit a request to the IRS to do a Form 1120 search): Incorrect. Form 1120 is a corporate tax return, not a business registration record, and the IRS does not provide registration verification services.

Option C (Require a sworn affidavit from the vendor’s financial institution): Incorrect. Financial institutions do not typically provide affidavits for business registration, and this is not a standard practice.

Option D (Check the database of the Secretary of State where the vendor is registered): Correct. Secretary of State databases offer verifiable, public records of business registration, the most reliable method.

Reference to IOFM APS Documents: The APS e-textbook underVendor Master Filestates, “To verify a vendor’s business registration, check the Secretary of State database in the vendor’s state of incorporation for authoritative confirmation.” The training video notes, “The best practice for validating vendor legitimacy is accessing Secretary of State records online to confirm registration details.”

The three-way match is a standardized accounts payable process used to verify the legitimacy of a supplier invoice before payment by cross-referencing three key documents: the purchase order (PO), the supplier invoice, and the receiving documents (also referred to as the receiving report, goods received note, or delivery receipt). This process ensures that the invoice reflects the agreed-upon terms of the purchase order and that the goods or services were actually delivered as specified, thereby mitigating risks of overpayment, fraud, or errors.

The correct answer is “Receiving documents,” as these confirm the delivery of goods or services and are a core component of the three-way match. The purchase order authorizes the purchase, specifying quantities, prices, and terms. The invoice details the supplier’s request for payment. The receiving documents verify that the ordered items were delivered, matching the quantities and conditions specified in the PO.

The other options are not part of the three-way match:

Remittance adviceis a document sent to the supplier to confirm payment details after the payment is made, not part of the verification process.

Bank draftis a payment instrument, not a document used for matching.

P-card statementrelates to procurement card transactions, which are typically not subject to the three-way match process, as they follow a different reconciliation process.

The NetSuite source clearly defines the three-way match: “Three-way matching is a payment verification technique that compares the details associated with a particular purchase across a trio of related documents… Purchase order, which authorizes a purchase to be made… Delivery receipt, or a receiving report, which confirms that the purchase was delivered… Supplier’s invoice, which lists how much the buyer owes the supplier”. Similarly, the Tipalti source states: “PO Matching: Ensure accuracy and prevent fraud with 2 and 3-way PO matching,” reinforcing that the three-way match involves the PO, invoice, and receiving documents. The Ramp source further clarifies: “3-way matching is a fraud-prevention process used by accounts payable teams to verify invoices before payment. It cross-checks three documents: Purchase order (PO)… Goods received note (GRN)… Supplier invoice”.

While the IOFM APS study guide is not directly quoted in the provided sources for this specific question, the IOFM Accounts Payable Specialist Certification Program emphasizes the three-way match under the “Invoices” and “Internal Controls” modules. The program description notes that it covers “peer-tested best practices for each phase of the payment process – from receipt of invoice, through processing and payment,” which includes the three-way match process. The focus on accuracy, compliance, and fraud prevention in IOFM’s curriculum aligns with the standard definition of the three-way match involving the PO, invoice, and receiving documents.

Wire transfers are a secure and immediate payment method typically used for high-value transactions due to their reliability and speed, despite higher transaction fees compared to other methods like ACH. Organizations commonly use wire transfers for high dollar payments, such as large vendor payments, international transactions, or critical one-time payments.

The web source from Corcentric explains: “Wire transfers are often used for high-value payments where speed and security are critical, such as large supplier payments or international transactions.” This aligns with Option B.

Direct deposit of executive pay (A)is typically handled via ACH for regular payroll.

Low dollar bulk payments (C)are more cost-effectively processed via ACH or checks.

Rent or mortgage payments (D)may use wire transfers in some cases but are not the most common use.

The IOFM APS Certification Program covers “Payments,” including payment methods like wire transfers. The curriculum’s focus on “peer-tested best practices” supports the use of wire transfers for high dollar payments due to their security and immediacy.

TheTax and Regulatory Compliancetopic in the IOFM APS Certification Program covers IRS penalties for 1099 filings and the criteria for penalty abatement under ‘reasonable cause.’ Reasonable cause can be established by demonstrating due diligence, such as obtaining a TIN match, documenting efforts to collect correct payee information, or outlining plans to improve future reporting. However,an error rate less than 5%is not a recognized IRS criterion for reasonable cause, as the IRS focuses on intent and effort, not specific error thresholds.

Option A (Proof of a successful TIN match prior to the date of assessment): Valid. A TIN match with the IRS verifies payee information, demonstrating due diligence, which supports reasonable cause for abatement.

Option B (Documentation showing the error rate to be less than 5% of total 1099s): Not valid. The IRS does not specify a percentage threshold (e.g., 5%) for penalty abatement. Reasonable cause depends on actions taken, not error rates. Correct answer.

Option C (The organization’s plan for improving the accuracy of future reporting): Valid. A documented plan to enhance compliance (e.g., improved TIN collection processes) shows intent to correct issues, supporting reasonable cause.

Option D (Steps the organization has taken in an attempt to obtain the correct payee information): Valid. Documenting efforts like requesting W-9 forms or sending B Notices demonstrates due diligence, a key factor for reasonable cause.

Reference to IOFM APS Documents: The APS e-textbook underTax and Regulatory Compliancestates, “IRS penalties for incorrect 1099 filings can be abated for reasonable cause, including proof of TIN matching, efforts to obtain correct payee data, and plans for future compliance.” TheMaster Guide to Form 1099 Complianceclarifies, “Reasonable cause does not include specific error rate thresholds like 5%; instead, it focuses on documented due diligence.” The training video reinforces this, noting that “TIN matches and W-9 solicitations are key to penalty abatement.”

Assigning a user name and password is a method ofdata authentication, which verifies the identity of users accessing systems or data to ensure only authorized individuals can perform actions. This is a fundamental security control in accounts payable to protect sensitive financial information. Optical character recognition (Option A) is used for extracting data from documents, robotic process automation (Option B) automates repetitive tasks, and security lockdown (Option D) refers to broader measures like restricting system access during a breach, not specifically user authentication.

The web source from Esker states: “Data authentication, such as assigning user names and passwords, ensures that only authorized personnel can access sensitive AP systems and data.” This directly supports Option C.

The IOFM APS Certification Program covers “Internal Controls,” including security measures like authentication to protect AP processes. The curriculum’s focus on “peer-tested best practices” aligns with using user names and passwords as a standard authentication method.

The current thinking on maintaining a petty cash fund is that it ispractically obsolete and should be eliminated, if possible, due to the availability of more efficient and secure alternatives, such as payment cards or electronic reimbursements. Petty cash funds are prone to mismanagement, theft, and lack of oversight, and modern AP practices favor digital solutions for small transactions.

The web source from SAP Concur states: “Petty cash funds are increasingly considered obsolete, as payment cards and electronic reimbursements offer more secure and trackable alternatives for small transactions.” This directly supports Option A. The other options are incorrect:

Option B: Requiring three individuals to sign off is excessive and not a standard practice.

Option C: Petty cash is not considered a best practice, even in service or consulting businesses.

Option D: Petty cash is typically managed by AP or administrative staff, not treasury executives.

The IOFM APS Certification Program covers “Internal Controls,” including best practices for managing small transactions. The curriculum’s focus on “peer-tested best practices” aligns with the trend toward eliminating petty cash in favor of modern payment methods.

TheVendor Master Filetopic in the IOFM APS Certification Program emphasizes the importance of maintaining an audit trail for changes to the vendor master file (VMF) to ensure transparency, accountability, and fraud prevention. An effective audit trail should recordwho requested the change(to verify authorization),who actually made the change(to track accountability), andthe date the change was made(to establish a timeline), ensuring a complete record for compliance and audits.

Item I (Who requested the change): Essential to verify that the request came from an authorized individual, supporting internal controls and fraud prevention.

Item II (Who actually made the change): Critical to track the individual who modified the VMF, ensuring accountability and traceability.

Item III (The date the change was made): Necessary to document when the change occurred, aiding in audits and fraud investigations.

Option A (I, II, and III): Correct, as all three items are essential components of a VMF audit trail.

Option B (I and II only): Incorrect, as Item III (date) is also essential.

Option C (II and III only): Incorrect, as Item I (requester) is also essential.

Option D (I and III only): Incorrect, as Item II (changer) is also essential.

Reference to IOFM APS Documents: The APS e-textbook underVendor Master Filestates, “An audit trail for VMF changes must include who requested the change, who made the change, and the date of the change to ensure transparency and compliance.” The training video reinforces, “Recording the requester, the person making the change, and the date in the VMF audit trail is critical for fraud prevention and audit readiness.”

Cash management refers to an organization’s processes for managing the inflow and outflow of funds to optimize liquidity, ensure financial stability, and meet operational needs. This includes overseeing cash receipts, payments, and forecasting cash flow. While payment terms (Option A) and payroll disbursements (Option B) are components of cash management, they are not the comprehensive definition. Enterprise resource planning systems (Option C) are tools that may support cash management but are not the definition itself.

The web source from Corcentric states: “Cash management involves managing an organization’s inflow and outflow of funds to maintain liquidity and meet financial obligations.” This directly supports Option D.

The IOFM APS Certification Program covers “Payments,” including cash management principles as they relate to AP processes. The curriculum’s focus on “peer-tested best practices” aligns with the definition of cash management as managing cash inflows and outflows.

ThePaymentstopic in the APS Certification Program covers best practices for handling rush payments, which require expedited processing while maintaining security and compliance. Acceptable practices include allowing vendors to pick up payments (with proper controls) and prioritizing electronic payments for speed and security.Mailing the paymentis generally not suitable for rush payments due to delivery delays.

Item I (Allow the payment to be picked up by the vendor): Acceptable, provided strict controls (e.g., ID verification) are in place to ensure the correct recipient collects the payment.

Item II (Insist on making the payment electronically): Acceptable and preferred, as electronic payments (e.g., ACH, wire transfers) are fast, secure, and trackable, ideal for rush scenarios.

Item III (Mail the payment): Not acceptable for rush payments, as mailing introduces delays (e.g., 2–5 days), undermining the urgency.

Option A (II and III only): Incorrect, as Item III is not suitable for rush payments.

Option B (I, II, and III): Incorrect, as Item III is not suitable.

Option C (I and II only): Correct, as Items I and II are acceptable rush payment practices.

Option D (I and III only): Incorrect, as Item III is not suitable.

Reference to IOFM APS Documents: The APS e-textbook underPaymentsstates, “For rush payments, electronic payments are preferred for speed and security, and vendor pickup is acceptable with controls, but mailing is not suitable due to delays.” The training video notes, “Rush payments should leverage ACH or wire transfers, or controlled pickup, avoiding mail to meet urgent deadlines.”

TheVendor Master Filetopic in the APS Certification Program highlights vendor validation to prevent fraud, including checking addresses for red flags. A significant red flag is when avendor’s address matches one of the organization’s own locations, as this may indicate insider fraud (e.g., an employee creating a fake vendor using a company address).

Option A (The vendor has the same address as one of the organization’s own locations): Correct. This is a red flag, as it suggests potential fraud, such as an employee setting up a fictitious vendor at a company site.

Option B (The vendor does not appear to use a post office box): Incorrect. Not using a P.O. box is not inherently suspicious; many legitimate vendors use physical addresses.

Option C (The vendor’s warehouse and its accounts receivable address are different): Incorrect. Different addresses for operational and financial functions are common and not a red flag.

Option D (The vendor is located in an unincorporated area): Incorrect. Location in an unincorporated area is not inherently suspicious and does not indicate fraud.

Reference to IOFM APS Documents: The APS e-textbook underVendor Master Filestates, “A red flag during vendor address checks is when the vendor’s address matches an organization’s own location, indicating potential insider fraud.” The training video notes, “Always verify vendor addresses against company locations to detect fraudulent setups.”

Software-as-a-Service (SaaS)is a cloud-based software delivery model where applications are hosted by a provider and accessed over the internet, typically on a subscription basis. Another term for SaaS ison-demand software, as it allows users to access software as needed without on-premises installation. A perpetual software license (Option A) refers to a one-time purchase model, onsite vendor support (Option B) is a service, and consultant-specific applications (Option C) is not a standard term.

The web source from Tipalti states: “Software-as-a-Service (SaaS), also known as on-demand software, provides cloud-based access to applications, enabling flexible and scalable AP solutions.” This directly supports Option D.

The IOFM APS Certification Program covers “Technology and Automation,” including cloud-based solutions like SaaS. The curriculum’s focus on “peer-tested best practices” aligns with recognizing SaaS as on-demand software for AP automation.

TheVendor Master Filetopic in the APS Certification Program emphasizes fraud prevention through robust vendor validation processes. Key practices include confirming a vendor’s physical address, checking government sanction lists (e.g., OFAC), and requiring a W-9 to verify tax identification numbers (TINs). However,verifying that vendors are bonded(i.e., insured against financial loss) is not a standard requirement for vendor fraud prevention, as it is more relevant to specific industries (e.g., construction) and not universally applicable.

Option A (Confirmation of a physical address): Verifying a physical address ensures the vendor is a legitimate entity, reducing the risk of fraudulent shell companies. This is a key practice.

Option B (Verifying that vendors are bonded): Bonding is not a standard AP requirement for fraud prevention. It may apply to certain vendors (e.g., contractors), but it is not essential for all vendor fraud prevention programs. This is the correct answer.

Option C (Checking government sanction lists): Checking lists like OFAC (Office of Foreign Assets Control) ensures compliance with regulations and prevents payments to sanctioned entities, a critical fraud prevention step. This is a key practice.

Option D (Requiring a W-9): A W-9 provides the vendor’s TIN, enabling verification with the IRS to prevent fraudulent identities and ensure tax compliance. This is a key practice.

Reference to IOFM APS Documents: The APS e-textbook underVendor Master Filelists “confirming physical addresses, checking sanction lists, and requiring W-9 forms” as essential for vendor fraud prevention. It notes that “bonding is not a universal requirement for vendor validation,though it may be relevant for specific contracts.” The training video emphasizes vendor verification processes, highlighting address checks, sanction list reviews, and W-9 requirements but not bonding.

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) of 2002 imposes strict requirements on financial reporting and internal controls for U.S. public companies. For T&E processes, SOX compliance requires accurate recordkeeping to ensure financial transparency (Option I) and a reliable approval workflow to prevent fraud and ensure proper authorization (Option II). While report generation with visibility (Option III) is valuable for oversight, it is not explicitly mandated by SOX, which focuses on controls and documentation rather than specific reporting tools.

The web source from Tipalti states: “SOX compliance for T&E processes requires accurate recordkeeping to support financial reporting and a robust approval workflow to ensure proper authorization and prevent fraud.” This supports Options I and II. Option III, while beneficial, is not a direct SOX requirement, as SOX emphasizes controls over reporting mechanisms.

The IOFM APS Certification Program covers “Tax and Regulatory Compliance,” including SOX requirements for financial processes like T&E. The curriculum’s focus on “peer-tested best practices” aligns with the need for accurate records and reliable approvals to meet SOX standards.

TheVendor Master Filetopic in the APS Certification Program outlines best practices for maintaining an accurate and efficient VMF. These include verifying vendor data, blocking inactive vendors, and consolidating duplicates to prevent errors and fraud.Deleting and re-entering vendors that moveis not a good practice, as it disrupts historical data and audit trails; instead, the VMF should be updated with the new address.

Option A (Having a vendor verification program): A good practice, ensuring vendors are legitimate through TIN matches, address verification, and sanction list checks.

Option B (Blocking inactive vendors after a certain period): A good practice, preventing accidental payments to dormant vendors while retaining their data for records.

Option C (Finding and consolidating duplicate vendors): A good practice, reducing errors like duplicate payments by merging redundant vendor records.

Option D (Deleting and re-entering vendors that move): Not a good practice. Deleting and re-entering disrupts transaction history; updating the address is the correct approach. Correct answer.

Reference to IOFM APS Documents: The APS e-textbook underVendor Master Filestates, “Best practices include vendor verification, blocking inactive vendors, and consolidating duplicates,but deleting and re-entering vendors for address changes is inefficient and risks data loss.” The training video emphasizes, “Update vendor addresses in the VMF rather than deleting records to maintain audit trails.”

Assumed receipt, also known as assumed receipt invoicing, is a process where payment is made based on the assumption that goods have been received, typically when receiving documents are not immediately available. This contrasts with processes like three-way matching, which require explicit confirmation of receipt. The term “Assumed Receipt” directly describes this practice, while “Positive Payment” and “Negative Assurance” are not standard terms in accounts payable for this context.

The web source from Tipalti explains: “Assumed receipt invoicing allows payments to be processed based on the purchase order and invoice, assuming goods have been received, often used to expedite payments when receiving data is delayed.” This aligns with the definition of assumed receipt as the process described in the question.

Positive Payment (I)is not a recognized term in accounts payable for this process.

Negative Assurance (II)is a term used in auditing, not accounts payable.

Assumed Receipt (III)is the correct term, making Option C the only accurate choice.

The IOFM APS Certification Program covers “Payments,” including various payment processes and their terminology. While the specific term “assumed receipt” is not directly quoted in the provided sources, the curriculum’s emphasis on “peer-tested best practices” includes understanding alternative payment methods, supporting the use of “Assumed Receipt” as the standard term.

TheInternal Controlstopic in the APS Certification Program emphasizes fraud prevention, including check fraud, which is a significant risk in AP due to the handling of payments. Check fraud can occur throughcheck alteration(modifying payee or amount),invalid payments(payments to fraudulent vendors or for unauthorized transactions), andstolen issued checks(checks intercepted and cashed fraudulently). All three are recognized methods of check fraud.

Item I (Check alteration): Altering a check’s payee, amount, or date is a common fraud method, often mitigated by controls like positive pay. This is a valid way.

Item II (Invalid payments): Payments to fictitious vendors or for unauthorized purposes (e.g., duplicate invoices) constitute fraud, often enabled by weak vendor validation. This is a valid way.

Item III (Stolen issued checks): Stealing issued checks (e.g., from mail) and cashing them fraudulently is a well-documented fraud risk, mitigated by secure check handling. This is a valid way.

Option A (I, II, and III): Correct, as all three are ways organizations suffer from check fraud.

Option B (II and III only): Incorrect, as Item I is also a valid method.

Option C (I and III only): Incorrect, as Item II is also a valid method.

Option D (I and II only): Incorrect, as Item III is also a valid method.

Reference to IOFM APS Documents: The APS e-textbook underInternal Controlslists “check alteration, invalid payments to fraudulent vendors, and stolen checks” as common check fraud methods. It emphasizes controls like positive pay and secure check storage to mitigate these risks. The training video discusses check fraud scenarios, citing all three methods as prevalent in AP processes.

TheGeneral Services Administration (GSA)is the U.S. government organization responsible for publishing per diem travel guidelines, which establish standard rates for lodging, meals, and incidental expenses for federal employees traveling on official business. These rates are widely used by organizations to set T&E policies for allowable travel expenses.

The web source from the GSA states: “The General Services Administration (GSA) establishes per diem rates for federal travel, providing guidelines for lodging, meals, and incidental expenses.” This directly supports Option D. The other options are incorrect:

Federal Reserve Board (A)regulates monetary policy, not travel guidelines.

Department of Treasury (B)oversees tax and financial policy, not per diem rates.

Department of Commerce (C)focuses on economic and trade issues.

The IOFM APS Certification Program covers “Travel and Entertainment (T&E),” including the use of per diem rates for expense management. The curriculum’s focus on “peer-tested best practices” aligns with referencing GSA per diem guidelines for T&E compliance.

Value Added Tax (VAT) invoices are subject to strict regulatory requirements, as they impact taxreporting and compliance. When a VAT invoice contains a billing error (e.g., incorrect amount, tax rate, or details), the recommended solution is to withhold payment and return the invoice to the vendor for correction. This ensures that the corrected invoice complies with VAT regulations, allowing accurate tax reporting and reclaiming of input VAT. Paying an incorrect invoice or reporting the error to the VAT administration without correction risks non-compliance and audit issues.

The web source from Avalara explains: “If a VAT invoice is incorrect, it must be corrected by the supplier issuing a new invoice or a credit note, depending on the nature of the error.” This aligns with the option to return the invoice to the vendor for correction. Paying the incorrect amount (Option B) or short/overpaying with an explanation (Option D) can complicate VAT reconciliation and may not be accepted by tax authorities, as the invoice must accurately reflect the transaction. Reporting the transaction to the VAT administration (Option A) is unnecessary unless the error involves fraud or persistent issues, and it does not resolve the invoice discrepancy.

The IOFM APS Certification Program covers “Tax and Regulatory Compliance,” including VAT compliance and invoice handling. While the specific question is not directly quoted in the provided sources, IOFM’s curriculum emphasizes compliance with tax regulations, as noted in the program description: “Review peer-tested best practices for each phase of the payment process – from receipt of invoice, through processing and payment.” The focus on accurate invoice processing supports returning the invoice for correction as the standard practice.

TheInternal Controlstopic in the APS Certification Program includes understanding the broader organizational context in which AP operates, including governance and strategic objectives. An organization’s mission statement is a high-level declaration of its purpose, values, and strategic direction. It providesmethodology and directionby guiding decision-making and aligning processes with the organization’s goals, rather than detailing specific policies, ethics standards, or metrics.

Option A (Policies and procedures): Policies and procedures are operational guidelines that dictate how tasks (e.g., AP processes) are performed. A mission statement does not provide these details; it sets a broader vision. This option is incorrect.

Option B (Ethics and compliance standards): While a mission statement may reflect ethical values, it is not the primary vehicle for defining ethics and compliance standards, which are typically outlined in separate codes of conduct or compliance policies. This option is incorrect.

Option C (Methodology and direction): The mission statement articulates the organization’s purpose and strategic direction, providing a framework (methodology) for how the organization operates and where it is headed. This is the correct answer.

Option D (Metrics and benchmarking information): Metrics and benchmarking are performance measurement tools, not part of a mission statement, which focuses on vision and purpose rather than quantitative data. This option is incorrect.

Reference to IOFM APS Documents: The APS e-textbook underInternal Controlsbriefly addresses organizational governance, noting that “a mission statement defines the organization’s purpose and provides direction for all departments, including AP, to align their processes with strategic goals.” The training video emphasizes that AP professionals must understand the organization’s mission to ensure their work supports broader objectives, such as cost efficiency or vendor trust. The mission statement is described as a guiding framework, not a detailed operational or compliance document.

ThePaymentstopic in the APS Certification Program covers accounting concepts like accrued expenses, which are critical for accurate financial reporting.Accrued expensesare expenses that have been incurred (i.e., the organization has received goods or services) but have not yet been paid or recorded (posted) in the accounts payable system, often because an invoice has not been received by the period’s end. These are recognized to match expenses with the period they relate to, per accrual accounting principles.

Option A (Forecasted expenses for which an invoice has not been received): Incorrect, as accrued expenses are not forecasted (estimated future costs); they are actual expenses already incurred.

Option B (Planned expenditures that have not been incurred): Incorrect, as planned but unincurred expenditures are not recognized in accounting until incurred.

Option C (Incurred expenses that have not been posted in the current period): Correct. Accrued expenses are costs incurred (e.g., utilities used) but not yet recorded or paid, oftendue to a missing invoice, and are accrued to ensure accurate period-end reporting.

Option D (Pre-paid expenses that were paid with petty cash): Incorrect, as pre-paid expenses are paid in advance and recorded as assets, not accrued expenses, which are unpaid liabilities.

Reference to IOFM APS Documents: The APS e-textbook underPaymentsdefines accrued expenses as “expenses incurred in the current period but not yet posted or paid, often recorded at period-end to reflect true financial obligations.” The training video provides examples, such as accruing wages or utilities when invoices are delayed, emphasizing the importance of accrual accounting for financial accuracy.

A blanket purchase order (PO) is a long-term agreement with a supplier to purchase goods or services over a specified period, often used for recurring or high-volume purchases. A key limitation is that itshould not extend past a specified timeframe, as blanket POs are typically set for a defined duration (e.g., one year) to manage pricing, terms, and supplier commitments. Extending beyond this timeframe without renegotiation can lead to pricing discrepancies or supply chain issues.

The web source from NetSuite explains: “A blanket purchase order covers multiple deliveries over a set period, but it is limited by a specified timeframe to ensure pricing and terms remain valid.” This directly supports Option B. The other options are incorrect:

Option A: Blanket POs can be used for both goods and services, not just services.

Option C: Payment terms for blanket POs vary and are not restricted to same-day wire transfers.

Option D: Blanket POs are designed for multiple deliveries over time, not a specific delivery date.

The IOFM APS Certification Program covers “Invoices,” including the use of purchase orders in invoice processing. The curriculum’s focus on “peer-tested best practices” supports the understanding of blanket POs and their time-bound nature.

TheInternal Controlstopic in the APS Certification Program details the COSO framework’s Control Environment component, which establishes the foundation for effective internal controls. Key elements include clear roles and responsibilities, timely information distribution, and ongoing monitoring of controls. However,staff working in self-directed teamsis not a COSO requirement, as the framework focuses on structure and accountability rather than specific team management styles.

Option A (Internal controls are monitored and evaluated): This aligns with COSO’s Monitoring Activities component but also supports the Control Environment by ensuring controls are enforced. It is a necessary element.

Option B (Staff work in self-directed teams): COSO does not mandate self-directed teams. While teamwork may be beneficial, the Control Environment emphasizes defined roles and oversight, not specific team structures. This is the correct answer.

Option C (Information is distributed in a timely way): This supports the Control Environment by ensuring employees have the information needed to perform their duties, aligning with COSO’s Information and Communication component. It is a necessary element.

Option D (People know their responsibilities and limits of authority): This is a core element of the Control Environment, ensuring clear accountability and authority structures. It is a necessary element.

Reference to IOFM APS Documents: The APS e-textbook underInternal Controlsexplains, “The COSO Control Environment requires clear responsibilities, timely information flow, and ongoing monitoring to establish effective controls.” It lists elements like “defined roles and authority limits” and “effective communication” but does not mention self-directed teams as a requirement. The training video emphasizes COSO’s focus on accountability and structure, noting that team configurations are organizational choices, not COSO mandates.