Procurement cards (P-cards) are corporate credit cards used for business purchases, and issuers often offer rebates or incentives to encourage their use. These rebates are typically based on the volume of spend, meaning the total dollar amount charged to the P-card over a specified period. This incentivizes organizations to consolidate more purchases on the card, benefiting both the issuer (through transaction fees) and the organization (through rebates).

The web source from Corcentric states: “P-card issuers commonly offer rebates based on the total volume of spend, encouraging organizations to increase card usage for eligible purchases.” This confirms that rebates are tied to the dollar amount spent (Option A), not the number of transactions (Option B), frequency of use (Option C), or number of cards issued (Option D).

The IOFM APS Certification Program covers “Payments,” including P-card programs and their benefits. The curriculum’s focus on “peer-tested best practices for each phase of the payment process” aligns with the industry standard that rebates are based on spend volume, as this drives cost savings and program efficiency.

Evaluated Receipt Settlement (ERS) is a payment process that eliminates the need for a supplier invoice by triggering payments based on the purchase order (PO) and receiving documents. The quantity of goods received, as confirmed by the receiving documents (e.g., goods received note or delivery receipt), determines the payment amount, ensuring that payments reflect only what was actually delivered.

The web source from Esker states: “Evaluated Receipt Settlement (ERS) is a procedure for paying suppliers without requiring a paper invoice from the supplier… Payments are triggered by the receipt of goods or services against a purchase order.” The Corcentric source further clarifies: “ERS uses the PO to establish the agreed-upon price and quantity, but the actual payment is based on the quantity received, as verified by the receiving documents.” This confirms that the receiving documents provide the critical data on the quantity delivered, which drives the ERS payment.

Supplier Invoice (A)is incorrect, as ERS eliminates the need for invoices.

Purchase Order (B)specifies the ordered quantity and price but does not confirm actualreceipt.

Advanced Shipping Notice (D)provides pre-delivery information but is not the final confirmation of received goods.

The IOFM APS Certification Program covers “Payments,” including ERS as a streamlined payment method. The curriculum’s focus on “peer-tested best practices for each phase of the payment process” aligns with the industry standard that ERS payments are based on receiving documents.

TheInternal Controlstopic in the APS Certification Program includes understanding foundational accounting standards, such asGenerally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), which govern financial reporting in the U.S. GAAP provides a standardized framework for recording and reporting financial transactions, ensuring consistency and transparency, which is critical for AP processes like invoice recording and financial statement preparation.

Option A (Government Accounting Acceptance Principles): Incorrect, as GAAP is not specific to government accounting and is not termed “acceptance principles.”

Option B (Government Accounting Actuarial Program): Incorrect, as GAAP is unrelated to actuarial programs or government-specific accounting.

Option C (General Accounting Administration Program): Incorrect, as GAAP is a set of principles, not an administrative program.

Option D (Generally Accepted Accounting Principles): Correct. GAAP is the standard framework for financial accounting, widely used by AP professionals to ensure accurate and compliant financial reporting.

Reference to IOFM APS Documents: The APS e-textbook underInternal Controlsstates, “Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) provide the rules and standards for financial reporting, ensuring that AP transactions are recorded consistently and transparently.” The training video mentions GAAP in the context of internal controls, noting its role in maintaining financial statement accuracy and compliance with regulations like the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.

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.

TheTax and Regulatory Compliancetopic in the APS Certification Program covers the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA), enacted in 2010 to combat tax evasion by U.S. taxpayers using foreign accounts. FATCA requires foreign financial institutions (FFIs) to report U.S. account holders’ information to the IRS, making it harder for individuals and organizations to hide income offshore and avoid U.S. taxes.

Option A (To ensure the privacy of individuals or organizations that bank outside of the U.S.): Incorrect. FATCA reduces privacy by requiring FFIs to report account details to the IRS, not protect it.

Option B (To make the rules regarding reporting payments made to U.S. persons and non-U.S. persons more consistent): Incorrect. FATCA focuses on reporting foreign accounts of U.S. taxpayers, not harmonizing payment reporting rules for U.S. and non-U.S. persons.

Option C (To make it more difficult for individuals or organizations to avoid paying taxes by banking outside of the U.S.): Correct. FATCA’s primary purpose is to prevent tax evasion by requiring FFIs and certain non-financial foreign entities to report U.S. account holders’ financial information, ensuring taxable income is reported.

Option D (To respond to attempts by foreign governments to capture taxes on activities of U.S. persons in their countries): Incorrect. FATCA addresses U.S. tax compliance, not foreign governments’ tax policies.

Reference to IOFM APS Documents: The APS e-textbook underTax and Regulatory Compliancestates, “FATCA was enacted to combat tax evasion by requiring foreign financial institutions to report U.S. account holders’ information, making it difficult to avoid taxes through offshore accounts.” TheMaster Guide to Form 1099 Compliance, a recommended IOFM resource, explains, “FATCA ensures compliance by imposing withholding on payments to non-compliant FFIs, targeting U.S. taxpayers hiding income abroad.” The training video reinforces this, noting FATCA’s role in “closing loopholes for offshore tax evasion.”

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.”

An accountable plan, as defined by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), is a reimbursement or allowance arrangement for business expenses, including Travel and Entertainment (T&E), that meets three specific requirements to avoid being treated as taxable income: (1)Expense substantiation, where employees must provide documented evidence (e.g., receipts) for expenses; (2)Business connection requirement, meaning expenses must be incurred in connection with performing services for the employer; and (3)Return of unused cash advances on a timely basis, ensuring any excess advances are returned within a reasonable period (typically 120 days). All three elements (Options I, II, and III) are required for a T&E accountable plan.

The web source from the IRS states: “An accountable plan must meet three requirements: 1) Employees must have paid or incurred expenses while performing services as an employee (business connection); 2) Employees must adequately account for these expenses within areasonable period (substantiation); and 3) Employees must return any excess allowance or advance within a reasonable period.” This directly supports Option B, as all three elements are included in the IRS definition.

The IOFM APS Certification Program covers “Tax and Regulatory Compliance,” including IRS regulations for T&E accountable plans. The curriculum’s focus on “peer-tested best practices” and compliance with federal tax laws emphasizes the three IRS requirements, confirming that all three elements are essential.

The preparation of IRS Form 1099 (e.g., 1099-MISC, 1099-NEC) is a critical component of theTax and Regulatory Compliancetopic in the IOFM APS Certification Program. Form 1099 is used to report payments made to non-employees, such as independent contractors, vendors, or other entities, for services rendered, typically when payments exceed $600 in a calendar year. To prepare a 1099, the payer (e.g., the organization’s AP department) must obtain the payee’sTaxpayer Identification Number (TIN), which can be either an Employer Identification Number (EIN) for businesses or a Social Security Number (SSN) for individuals. The TIN is collected via IRS Form W-9, which vendors must provide to the payer.

Option A (PTIN): A Preparer Tax Identification Number (PTIN) is used by tax preparers who file tax returns on behalf of others. It is not required for vendors or payees when preparing a 1099. This option is incorrect.

Option B (W-4): Form W-4 is used by employees to indicate withholding preferences for federal income tax from their wages. Since 1099 forms are for non-employees (e.g., contractors), a W-4 is irrelevant. This option is incorrect.

Option C (TIN): The TIN is mandatory for 1099 reporting. The IRS requires the payee’s TIN to be included on the 1099 form to track payments and ensure tax compliance. If a vendor fails to provide a TIN, the payer may be required to implement backup withholding (e.g., 24% as of 2025). This is the correct answer.

Option D (W-2): Form W-2 is used to report wages paid to employees, not payments to vendors or contractors. Since 1099 forms are for non-employee compensation, a W-2 is not applicable. This option is incorrect.

Reference to IOFM APS Documents: The IOFM APS e-textbook and training video under theTax and Regulatory Compliancesection emphasize the importance of collecting a valid TIN via Form W-9 for 1099 reporting. TheMaster Guide to Form 1099 Compliance, a recommended IOFM resource, details the IRS requirements for TIN collection and backup withholding. Specifically, it states that “a valid TIN is required for all reportable payments to avoid IRS penalties and ensure accurate 1099 filing.” Additionally, the APS curriculum covers IRS regulations, including the need to process “B Notices” when TINs are missing or incorrect, reinforcing the centrality of the TIN in 1099 preparation.

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.

Evaluated Receipt Settlement (ERS) is a payment process where invoices are not required from the vendor. Instead, payment is triggered based on the purchase order (PO) and receiving documents, streamlining the accounts payable process by eliminating invoice processing. A successful ERS program relies on accurate POs and receiving data, standardized pricing, and clear terms with vendors. The exclusion of early pay discounts is a key feature, as ERS payments are typically made on a fixed schedule based on receipt of goods, not invoice terms that include discount incentives.

The web source from Esker explains: “Evaluated Receipt Settlement (ERS) is a procedure for paying suppliers without requiring a paper invoice from the supplier… Payments are triggered by the receipt of goods or services against a purchase order. ERS eliminates the need for supplier invoices, reducing errors and costs.” The source from Corcentric adds: “ERS is designed to streamline payments by using PO and receipt data, typically without early payment discounts, as payments are made on a predictable schedule.” Early pay discounts are excluded because ERS prioritizes automation and predictability over negotiating variable payment terms.

The other options are incorrect:

Billing of miscellaneous charges separately(Option A) complicates ERS, as it requires additional reconciliation outside the PO and receipt data.

Receiving a complete invoice with the shipment(Option B) contradicts the ERS model, which eliminates the need for invoices.

Use of pro forma purchase orders(Option D) is not standard, as ERS relies on firm POs, not provisional ones like pro forma POs.

The IOFM APS Certification Program covers “Payments,” including advanced payment methods like ERS. The curriculum’s focus on “peer-tested best practices for each phase of the payment process” aligns with the industry standard that ERS programs exclude early pay discounts to ensure streamlined, predictable payments.

TheInvoicestopic in the APS Certification Program covers the complexities of value-added tax (VAT) refunds, particularly for businesses operating in VAT jurisdictions (e.g., EU). VAT refund processes are stringent, requiring specific invoice details like the company’s name and address (Item I) and, in many cases, original invoices (Item III). However,only authorized agents applying for refunds (Item II)is not universally true, as businesses or their tax representatives can often file directly, depending on the jurisdiction.

Item I (Invoices must include the name and address of the company filing for the refund): True. VAT regulations (e.g., EU VAT Directive) require invoices to include the claimant’s name and address to verify eligibility. This contributes to refund difficulty.

Item II (Only authorized agents may apply for the refunds): Not universally true. While some jurisdictions allow or require agents, businesses can often file directly or designate representatives without mandating third-party agents. This does not consistently contribute to difficulty.

Item III (An original invoice must be submitted): True. Many VAT jurisdictions require original invoices (or certified copies) to validate claims, increasing administrative burden and difficulty.

Option A (II only): Incorrect, as Item II is not universally applicable, and Items I and III are valid.

Option B (I only): Incorrect, as Item III also contributes to refund difficulty.

Option C (I and III only): Correct, as Items I and III are standard requirements that make VAT refunds difficult.

Option D (II and III only): Incorrect, as Item II is not a universal requirement.

Reference to IOFM APS Documents: The APS e-textbook underInvoicesstates, “VAT refund processes are complex due to requirements like including the claimant’s name and address on invoices and submitting original invoices.” It notes that “while agents may assist, direct filing bybusinesses is often permitted, depending on the jurisdiction.” The training video discusses VAT refunds, highlighting the need for “specific invoice details and original documents” as key challenges.

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.

Even when using a corporate travel card, employees must keep and submit T&E receipts for several reasons. First, there may be additional out-of-pocket expenses (e.g., tips, small cash purchases) not charged to the card, requiring receipts for reimbursement (Option I). Second, corporate card statements often lack sufficient detail (e.g., itemized expenses or business purpose), necessitating receipts to meet approval and compliance requirements (Option III). However, paper receipts are not inherently easier to handle or archive than electronic ones (Option II), as modern T&E systems favor digital receipt management for efficiency and accessibility.

The web source from Esker states: “Employees must submit receipts for T&E expenses, even with corporate cards, to account for out-of-pocket expenses and to provide detailed documentation for approval, as card statements may lack itemized details.” The NetSuite source adds: “Digital receipt management is preferred over paper receipts, as it simplifies archiving and retrieval.” This supports Options I and III, while refuting Option II, as paper receipts are less efficient in modern systems.

The IOFM APS Certification Program covers “Travel and Entertainment (T&E),” emphasizing proper documentation and compliance in expense reporting. The curriculum’s focus on “peer-tested best practices” aligns with the need for receipts to document out-of-pocket expenses and provide detailed approval data, but not for paper-based archiving.

TheTax and Regulatory Compliancetopic in the APS Certification Program covers the Streamlined Sales Tax Project (SSTP), initiated to simplify U.S. sales tax compliance across states. The SSTP has achieveda uniform exemption certificate(Item II) to standardize resale and other exemptions andrate and boundary databases(Item III) to provide accurate tax rates and jurisdictional boundaries. However, it has not fullyresolved the origin vs. destination question(Item I), as sourcing rules (origin-based vs. destination-based taxation) remain state-specific.

Item I (Resolved the origin vs. destination question): Not fully accomplished. The SSTP provides guidelines for sourcing, but states still choose between origin-based (tax based on seller’s location) and destination-based (tax based on buyer’s location) rules, creating variability.

Item II (Implemented a uniform exemption certificate): Accomplished. The SSTP developed a uniform Streamlined Sales and Use Tax Exemption Certificate, accepted by member states to simplify compliance.

Item III (Created rate and boundary databases): Accomplished. The SSTP provides centralized databases for tax rates and jurisdictional boundaries, aiding accurate tax calculations.

Option A (I only): Incorrect, as Item I is not fully accomplished.

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

Option C (II only): Incorrect, as Item III is also accomplished.

Option D (II and III only): Correct, as Items II and III are key SSTP achievements.

Reference to IOFM APS Documents: The APS e-textbook underTax and Regulatory Compliancestates, “The Streamlined Sales Tax Project has implemented a uniform exemption certificate and created rate and boundary databases to simplify compliance, but origin vs. destination sourcing remains variable across states.” The training video notes, “SSTP’s uniform certificate and tax databases are major achievements, though sourcing rules still differ by state.”

Data integrity refers to the assurance that data remains accurate, complete, and unaltered throughout its lifecycle, whether during storage, processing, or transmission. It ensures that data is free from unauthorized modifications or corruption. While testing for accuracy (Option D) is related, data integrity specifically focuses on preventing unauthorized changes (Option A). A digital signature (Option B) or encryption (Option C) are security measures that may support data integrity but do not define it.

The web source from Corcentric states: “Data integrity means that data remains unaltered and consistent, ensuring it is free from unauthorized modifications or errors.” This directly supports Option A.

The IOFM APS Certification Program covers “Internal Controls,” including data security and integrity in AP processes. The curriculum’s focus on “peer-tested best practices” aligns with the definition of data integrity as preventing unauthorized alterations.

TheInternal Controlstopic in the APS Certification Program addresses fraud prevention, referencing the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners (ACFE) for fraud trends. According to the ACFE’s Report to the Nations,asset misappropriationis the most common type of occupational fraud, involving schemes like theft of cash, inventory, or other assets. It is more frequent than corruption, financial misstatement, or intellectual property fraud due to its simplicity and accessibility in roles like AP.

Option A (Asset misappropriation): Correct. ACFE data consistently shows asset misappropriation as the most common fraud scheme, accounting for over 80% of cases, due to its prevalence in roles with access to funds or assets.

Option B (Intellectual property fraud): Intellectual property fraud is less common, as it requires specialized knowledge and access, and is not a primary AP concern. This is incorrect.

**Option C (Corruption (энер

Answer: A

TheInternal Controlstopic in the APS Certification Program addresses fraud prevention, referencing the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners (ACFE) for fraud trends. According to the ACFE’sReport to the Nations,asset misappropriationis the most common type of occupational fraud, involving schemes like theft of cash, inventory, or other assets. It is more frequent than corruption, financial misstatement, or intellectual property fraud due to its simplicity and accessibility in roles like accounts payable (AP).

Option A (Asset misappropriation): Correct. The ACFE’sReport to the Nations(2022 edition, as referenced in IOFM materials) states that asset misappropriation accounts for approximately 86% of occupational fraud cases, making it the most common scheme. Examples include stealing cash, falsifying expense reports, or misusing company assets, which are prevalent in AP due to access to payments and vendor data.

Option B (Intellectual property fraud): Intellectual property fraud, such as theft of trade secrets, is less common (less than 5% of cases per ACFE) and typically involves specialized roles, not AP. This is incorrect.

Option C (Corruption (bribery)): Corruption, including bribery and kickbacks, accounts for about 38% of cases (often overlapping with other schemes), but is less frequent than asset misappropriation. This is incorrect.

Option D (Financial misstatement): Financial misstatement, such as falsifying financial reports, is the least common (around 10% of cases) but often involves the highest financial impact. This is incorrect.

Reference to IOFM APS Documents: The APS e-textbook underInternal Controlscites the ACFE’sReport to the Nations, stating, “Asset misappropriation is the most common fraud scheme, comprising over 80% of cases, due to its ease of execution in roles like AP.” The training videodiscusses fraud risks in AP, emphasizing that “per the ACFE, asset misappropriation, such as cash theft or fraudulent payments, is the most frequent fraud type.”

TheInternal Controlstopic in the IOFM APS Certification Program emphasizes the role of accounts payable (AP) in managing financial processes, ensuring compliance, and supporting organizational objectives. AP has a significant influence on several key areas, including vendor relationships (through timely payments and communication), cash management (by optimizing payment timing and methods), and financial statements (by ensuring accurate recording of liabilities and expenses). However, AP typically has minimal direct influence oninventory turnover, which is more closely tied to supply chain and inventory management functions.

Option A (Inventory turnover): Inventory turnover measures how quickly a company sells and replaces its inventory. While AP processes payments for inventory purchases, it does not directly control inventory levels, purchasing decisions, or sales velocity, which are managed by procurement and sales teams. This is the correct answer, as it is the exception.

Option B (Vendor relationships): AP directly influences vendor relationships by ensuring timely and accurate payments, resolving disputes, and maintaining vendor master file data. This is a core AP responsibility, so it is not the exception.

Option C (Cash management): AP plays a critical role in cash management by scheduling payments to optimize cash flow, using electronic payments, and implementing positive pay to prevent fraud. This is a key AP function, so it is not the exception.

Option D (Financial statements): AP impacts financial statements by recording invoices (affecting liabilities and expenses) and payments (affecting cash and liabilities). Accurate AP processes ensure reliable financial reporting, so this is not the exception.

Reference to IOFM APS Documents: The APS e-textbook underInternal Controlshighlights AP’s role in “supporting financial integrity through accurate transaction recording and cash flow management.” It notes that AP professionals manage vendor payments and cash outflows, directly affecting vendor relationships, cash management, and financial statement accuracy. However, inventory turnover is described as a supply chain metric, outside AP’s primary scope. The IOFM training video reinforces this by focusing on AP’s responsibilities in payment processing and financial reporting, with no mention of inventory turnover as a direct AP function.

Rush checks, issued outside the regular check run schedule, increase processing costs and disrupt workflows. Effective strategies to minimize rush check requests include distributing the check run schedule with clear cut-off dates and times to encourage timely submissions (Option I) and charging a rush check processing fee to deter unnecessary requests (Option II). Publishing the names of frequent requestors (Option III) is not a professional or recommended practice, as it may create workplace tension without addressing the root cause.

The web source from SAP Concur notes: “To reduce rush checks, organizations can communicate payment schedules clearly and impose fees for expedited processing to incentivize adherence to regular check runs.” This supports Options I and II. Option III is not mentioned in industry best practices and is considered inappropriate.

The IOFM APS Certification Program covers “Internal Controls,” including strategies to optimize payment processes. The curriculum’s emphasis on “peer-tested best practices” aligns with proactive measures like scheduling communication and fee structures to control rush checks.

Fraudulent expense reimbursement schemes in T&E processes typically involve misrepresenting or manipulating expense reports to obtain unauthorized reimbursements. Common schemes include reporting personal expenses as business-related (Option A), forging or altering receipts (Option B), and submitting the same expense multiple times for reimbursement (Option C). Lapping schemes (Option D), which involve misappropriating funds and covering them with subsequent payments, are more associated with accounts receivable or cash management, not T&E expense reimbursements.

The web source from SAP Concur explains: “Common T&E fraud schemes include submitting personal expenses as business-related, altering or forging receipts, and requesting multiple reimbursements for the same expense.” Lapping schemes are not mentioned in the context of T&E fraud, as they pertain to different financial processes, such as diverting payments and covering them with later receipts, per the Corcentric source: “Lapping is a fraud scheme typically seen in accounts receivable, not expense reimbursements.”

The IOFM APS Certification Program covers “Travel and Entertainment (T&E),” including fraud prevention in expense reporting. The curriculum’s emphasis on “peer-tested best practices” includes identifying common T&E fraud schemes, supporting Options A, B, and C as prevalent, while excluding lapping schemes (Option D).

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.”

Data security in accounts payable requires a comprehensive approach involvinghardware(Option I, e.g., secure servers and firewalls),software(Option II, e.g., encryption tools and authentication systems), andhuman resources(Option III, e.g., employee training on security protocols and access management). All three components are essential to protect sensitive financial data from breaches and unauthorized access.

The web source from Corcentric states: “Effective data security in AP combines hardware, such as secure servers, software, like encryption and access controls, and human resources, through training and policy enforcement, to safeguard sensitive information.” This supports Option D, as all three elements are integral to data security.

The IOFM APS Certification Program covers “Internal Controls,” emphasizing a multi-faceted approach to data security. The curriculum’s focus on “peer-tested best practices” aligns with using hardware, software, and human resources to ensure robust security.

The Check Clearing for the 21st Century Act (Check 21), passed in 2003, enables banks to process checks electronically by allowing check truncation, where a physical check can be converted into a digital image (substitute check) at any point in the clearing process. This expedites check clearing and reduces costs associated with physical check handling. The law was enacted after September 11, 2001, partly in response to disruptions in check processing caused by grounded air transport post-9/11.

The web source from Tipalti states: “Check 21, passed in 2003, allows check truncation by converting checks into electronic images, speeding up the clearing process.” The other options areincorrect:

The Patriot Act (B)focuses on anti-terrorism and money laundering.

Gramm-Leach-Bliley (C)addresses financial privacy and was passed in 1999.

Sarbanes-Oxley (D)deals with corporate governance and financial reporting, passed in 2002.

The IOFM APS Certification Program covers “Tax and Regulatory Compliance,” including regulations affecting payment processes. The curriculum’s emphasis on “peer-tested best practices” includes understanding laws like Check 21 that impact check processing.

TheInternal Controlstopic in the APS Certification Program highlights the importance of a sound records management plan for AP processes, particularly for compliance, security, and financialanalysis. A records management plan ensures that documents (e.g., invoices, vendor data) are organized, secure, and accessible, supporting legal protection, information security, and expenditure analysis.

Item I (To afford some protection against lawsuits): A records management plan ensures documentation is available to defend against legal claims, such as vendor disputes or audits, providing evidence of compliance. This is a valid reason.

Item II (To safeguard vital information): Records management protects sensitive data (e.g., vendor TINs, payment details) from loss or unauthorized access, ensuring confidentiality and compliance. This is a valid reason.

Item III (To analyze and manage expenditures): Records management enables AP to track and analyze spending patterns, supporting budgeting and cost control. This is a valid reason.

Option A (III only): Incorrect, as Items I and II are also valid reasons.

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

Option C (I, II, and III): Correct, as all three items are reasons for a sound records management plan.

Option D (I only): Incorrect, as Items II and III are also valid reasons.

Reference to IOFM APS Documents: The APS e-textbook underInternal Controlsstates, “A sound records management plan protects against lawsuits by maintaining auditable records, safeguards vital information like vendor data, and enables expenditure analysis for cost management.” The training video discusses records management as a critical control, citing its role in legal compliance, data security, and financial oversight.

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.”

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.

TheVendor Master Filetopic in the APS Certification Program outlines the goals of a vendor management program, which include preventing duplicate payments, ensuring compliance with laws (e.g., IRS reporting), and collecting spend data for procurement.Streamlining sales and use tax processes, while related to AP, is typically handled through tax compliance systems or purchasing processes, not the vendor management program, which focuses on vendor data and relationships.

Option A (Reducing duplicate payments): A key goal, achieved by maintaining accurate vendor master file data to avoid duplicate vendor entries.

Option B (Streamlining sales and use tax process): Not a primary goal. Sales tax processes are managed separately, often through AP or procurement systems, not the vendor management program. Correct answer.

Option C (Collecting spend information for procurement): A goal, as vendor management provides data on spending patterns, aiding procurement negotiations.

Option D (Compliance with laws and regulations): A goal, ensuring vendor data supports IRS reporting (e.g., 1099s) and sanction list compliance.

Reference to IOFM APS Documents: The APS e-textbook underVendor Master Filestates, “Vendor management programs aim to reduce duplicate payments, ensure regulatory compliance, and collect spend data for procurement, but sales tax processes are typically managed outside vendor management.” The training video notes, “Vendor management focuses on accurate data to prevent errors like duplicates and support compliance, not directly on tax processes.”

TheInvoicestopic in the APS Certification Program covers double-entry accounting for recording invoices. When an incoming invoice is received, it represents an obligation to pay a vendor (a liability) and an expense (or asset, depending on the purchase). The correct journal entry is todebit the expense account(to recognize the cost incurred) andcredit the accounts payable (AP) liability account(to record the amount owed).

Option A (A debit to the asset account and a corresponding debit to the expense account): Incorrect, as recording an invoice does not typically involve debiting both an asset and an expense account. An asset might be debited for capital purchases, but the second debit to an expense account is invalid, and no credit is provided to balance the entry.

Option B (A credit to the AP liability account and a corresponding credit to the expense account): Incorrect, as crediting the expense account would reduce expenses, which is not the purpose of recording an invoice. Additionally, two credits do not form a valid journal entry without a debit.

Option C (A debit to expense and a credit to the AP liability account): Correct. Debiting the expense account (e.g., utilities, supplies) recognizes the cost incurred, and crediting the AP liability account records the obligation to pay the vendor. This is the standard entry for expense-related invoices.

Option D (A credit to expense and a debit to the AP liability account): Incorrect, as crediting the expense account would decrease expenses, which is not appropriate when recording an invoice. Debiting the AP liability would also incorrectly increase the liability.

Reference to IOFM APS Documents: The APS e-textbook underInvoicesexplains, “When an invoice is received, the journal entry debits an expense account (or asset for capital purchases) andcredits the accounts payable liability account to reflect the obligation.” The training video illustrates this with examples, such as debiting “Office Supplies Expense” and crediting “Accounts Payable” for a supply invoice, emphasizing accurate recording to ensure financial statement integrity.