点击查看:2020年青海省9月ACCA考试成绩查询时间

发布时间:2020-09-05


参加2020年9月ACCA考试的小伙伴注意啦,考试成绩公布日期已经出来了,大家可以先来了解一下,51题库考试学习网为大家带来了青海省ACCA考试成绩查询的相关内容,让我们一起来看看吧!

2020年9月ACCA考试成绩公布日期:2020年10月12日。

ACCA考试成绩查询方式一共有三种,分别是:手机短信通知、邮件通知、在线查询。

(一)手机短信通知

(二)邮件通知

ACCA官方会根据所有考生的预留手机号和注册邮箱地址,通过短信和电子邮件的形式将成绩单发送给各位考生。不过,要实现这一功能,需要学员自行登录My ACCA账户中,设置由邮件或短信通知成绩这一选项。

(三)在线查询

1. 进入ACCA官网http://www.accaglobal.com/hk/en.html 点击右上角My ACCA进行登录;

2. 输入账号、密码登录后进入主页面,点击Exam status & Results;

3. 跳转页面后选择View your status report;

4. 进入之后,就可以查询自己所报科目的成绩详情了。

如何申请成绩复核?

在评卷之前,ACCA评分团队要与考官开会,讨论试卷并确定统一详细的评分表。验卷团队会对每一份试卷进行仔细检查,确保每一道试题都没有漏评分,且每份试卷的总分是正确。在整个评卷过程中验卷团队总共要检查8次。在考试成绩发布之前,ACCA会再进行一次检查,以确保学员的ACCA考试成绩准确无误。

然而,ACCA也意识到有时候学员会对他们所获得的考试结果有所怀疑。因此,在以下情况下,您可以要求查卷:

1.您参加了考试,并提交了答卷,却说您缺席考试;

2.您缺席考试,却收到考试成绩;

3.您对自己的考试成绩有所怀疑。

您必须在考试成绩发布日后的15个工作日内提出查卷申请。如果ACCA成绩有误,您会在下次报考截止日期前收到改正了的成绩,但是ACCA的复核工作也要收取相应的费用(52英镑)。

ACCA的有效期:

ACCA学员有七年的时间通过专业阶段的考试。如果学员不能在七年内通过所有专业阶段考试,那么超过七年的已通过专业阶段科目的成绩将作废,须重新考试。七年时限从学员通过第一门专业阶段考试之日算起。

说明:因考试政策、内容不断变化与调整,51题库考试学习网提供的考试信息仅供参考,如有异议,请考生以权威部门公布的内容为准!

以上就是今天分享的全部内容了,各位小伙伴根据自己的情况进行查阅,希望本文对各位有所帮助,预祝各位取得满意的成绩,如需了解更多相关内容,请关注51题库考试学习网!


下面小编为大家准备了 ACCA考试 的相关考题,供大家学习参考。

(c) The Shirtmaster division and Corporate Clothing division, though being part of the same group, operate largely

independently of one another.

Assess the costs and benefits of the two divisions continuing to operate independently of one another.

(15 marks)

正确答案:
(c) The Shirtmaster Group has decided to structure itself using two divisions who are dealing with very different markets,
customers and buying behaviours. In so doing the intention is to provide more value to the customer through a better
understanding of their needs. The existence of the two divisions also reflects the origins of the two family businesses.
Mintzberg in his work on organisation design and structure sees divisional configurations as being appropriate in relatively
simple and static environments where significant strategic power is delegated from the ‘strategic apex’ to the ‘middle line‘
general managers with responsibility for the performance of the division. Indeed one of the benefits cited for divisionalised
companies is their ability to provide a good training ground in strategic decision making for general managers who can then
progress to senior positions at company headquarters. Tony Masters’s reluctance to delegate real strategic decision making
power to the senior managers in the Shirtmaster division may be preventing those managers developing key managerial skills.
Using the Boston Box model one could classify the Shirtmaster division as a ‘dog’ with low market share in a market exhibiting
change but little growth. The Corporate Clothing division, by contrast, can be regarded as a ‘problem child’ having a small
share but of a growing market. Porter’s ‘better-off test’ needs to be met – are the two divisions better off being in the same
Group? As it stands there seems little synergy between the two divisions – there seems to be little evidence of the two divisions
sharing resources or transferring skills or learning between the two divisions. Their two value chains and systems are both
separate and different though on the face of it there are many activities that are similar. Operating independently may
encourage healthy competition between the two divisions and consequently better performance through better motivated staff.
Specialised competences such as Corporate Clothing division’s on-line response to customer orders and design changes are
more easily developed within a divisionalised structure. Performance can be clearly identified and controlled and resources
channelled to those areas showing potential. However, this may be at the expense of costly duplication of resources and an
inability to get the necessary scale to compete in either of their separate markets. Certainly, the lack of co-operation betweenthe divisions in areas such as information systems may lead to higher costs and poorer performance.

(ii) why the ‘fair value option’ was initially introduced and why it has caused such concern. (5 marks)

正确答案:
(ii) Fair value option
As set out above, the standard permits entities to designate irrevocably on initial recognition any financial asset or liability
as one to be measured at fair value with gains and losses recognised in profit or loss. The fair value option was generally
introduced to reduce profit or loss volatility as it can be used to measure an economically matched position in the same
way (at fair value). Additionally it can be used in place of IAS 39’s requirement to separate embedded derivatives as
the entire contract is measured at fair value with changes reported in profit or loss.
Although the fair value option can be of use, it can be used in an inappropriate manner thus defeating its original
purpose. For example, companies might apply the option to instruments whose fair value is difficult to estimate so as
to smooth profit or loss as valuation of these instruments might be subjective. Also the use of this option might increase
rather than decrease volatility in profit or loss where, for example, a company applies the option to only one part of a
‘matched’ position. Finally, if a company applied the option to financial liabilities, it might result in the company
recognising gains or losses for changes in its own credit worthiness.
The IASB has issued an exposure draft amending IAS 39 in this area restricting the financial assets and liabilities to
which the fair value option can be applied.
I hope that the above information is useful.

(b) Discuss the view that fair value is a more relevant measure to use in corporate reporting than historical cost.

(12 marks)

正确答案:
(b) The main disagreement over a shift to fair value measurement is the debate over relevance versus reliability. It is argued that
historical cost financial statements are not relevant because they do not provide information about current exchange values
for the entity’s assets which to some extent determine the value of the shares of the entity. However, the information provided
by fair values may be unreliable because it may not be based on arm’s-length transactions. Proponents of fair value
accounting argue that this measurement is more relevant to decision makers even if it is less reliable and would produce
balance sheets that are more representative of a company’s value. However it can be argued that relevant information that is
unreliable is of no use to an investor. One advantage of historical cost financial information is that it produces earnings
numbers that are not based on appraisals or other valuation techniques. Therefore, the income statement is less likely to be
subject to manipulation by management. In addition, historical cost balance sheet figures comprise actual purchase prices,
not estimates of current values that can be altered to improve various financial ratios. Because historical cost statements rely
less on estimates and more on ‘hard’ numbers, it can be said that historical cost financial statements are more reliable than
fair value financial statements. Furthermore, fair value measurements may be less reliable than historical costs measures
because fair value accounting provides management with the opportunity to manipulate the reported profit for the period.
Developing reliable methods of measuring fair value so that investors trust the information reported in financial statements is
critical.
Fair value measurement could be said to be more relevant than historical cost as it is based on market values and not entity
specific measurement on initial recognition, so long as fair values can be reliably measured. Generally the fair value of the
consideration given or received (effectively historical cost) also represents the fair value of the item at the date of initial
recognition. However there are many cases where significant differences between historical cost and fair value can arise on
initial recognition.
Historical cost does not purport to measure the value received. It cannot be assumed that the price paid can be recovered in
the market place. Hence the need for some additional measure of recoverable value and impairment testing of assets.
Historical cost can be an entity specific measurement. The recorded historical cost can be lower or higher than its fair value.
For example the valuation of inventory is determined by the costing method adopted by the entity and this can vary from
entity to entity. Historical cost often requires the allocation of costs to an asset or liability. These costs are attributed to assets,
liabilities and expenses, and are often allocated arbitrarily. An example of this is self constructed assets. Rules set out in
accounting standards help produce some consistency of historical cost measurements but such rules cannot improve
representational faithfulness.
Another problem with historical cost arises as regards costs incurred prior to an asset being recognised. Historical costs
recorded from development expenditure cannot be capitalised if they are incurred prior to the asset meeting the recognition
criteria in IAS38 ‘Intangible Assets’. Thus the historical cost amount does not represent the fair value of the consideration
given to create the asset.
The relevance of historical cost has traditionally been based on a cost/revenue matching principle. The objective has been to
expense the cost of the asset when the revenue to which the asset has contributed is recognised. If the historical cost of the
asset differs from its fair value on initial recognition then the matching process in future periods becomes arbitrary. The
measurement of assets at fair value will enhance the matching objective. Historical cost may have use in predicting future
net reported income but does not have any necessary implications for future cash flows. Fair value does embody the market’s
expectations for those future cash flows.
However, historical cost is grounded in actual transaction amounts and has existed for many years to the extent that it is
supported by practical experience and familiarity. Historical cost is accepted as a reliable measure especially where no other
relevant measurement basis can be applied.

(c) Briefly describe five factors to be taken into account when deciding whether to use recruitment consultants.(5 marks)

正确答案:
(c) An organisation considering the use of external recruitment consultants would make its decision upon the availability, level and appropriateness of expertise available within the host organisation and its likely effectiveness, together with the cost of using consultants set against the cost of using the organisation’s own staff. The organisation should consider the level of expertise required of potential employees and therefore the appropriate knowledge required of the consultants and the need for impartiality or security which may be of particular importance for some organisations. In addition, the views of internal staff as to the likely effect of using outside consultants must be considered, as is the effect the use of consultants might have on the need to develop expertise within the organisation.

声明:本文内容由互联网用户自发贡献自行上传,本网站不拥有所有权,未作人工编辑处理,也不承担相关法律责任。如果您发现有涉嫌版权的内容,欢迎发送邮件至:contact@51tk.com 进行举报,并提供相关证据,工作人员会在5个工作日内联系你,一经查实,本站将立刻删除涉嫌侵权内容。