考取ACCA证书有什么好处

发布时间：2022-01-21

“考取ACCA证书有什么好处呢?”相信大部分同学都会有此疑问。接下来就让51题库考试学习网带领大家一起来看看ACCA考试相关的内容吧!

一、国际顶级证书

1.ACCA在全球享有极高声誉，参加此项目学习的学员，通过由ACCA官方组织的全球统一考试后，可收获国际权威的资格证书—ACCA国际注册会计师证书，获得此证书可进入可口可乐等世界一线知名企业工作。ACCA系列证书包含了一系列的金融财务国际职业资格。

例如：

国际商业会计资格证-Diploma in Accounting ａｎｄ　Business

高级国际商业会计资格证–Advanced Diploma in Accounting ａｎｄ　Business

完成14个科目全球考试之后，可获得-ACCA Affiliate(准会员)资质

拥有3年相关工作经验可获得ACCA Member(会员)资质

2.牛津布鲁克斯大学理学学士学位(BSc degree in Applied Accounting)

ACCA与英国牛津布鲁克斯大学合作，学员通过ACCA前2个阶段的考试后，只需向院校提交相关学位申请论文，就可以获得该所大学颁发的会计学应用理学学士学位。牛津布鲁克斯大学有相关项目的介绍：http://business.brookes.ac.uk/undergraduate/2014/acca/

二、更多海外升学机会

ACCA在全球范围内获得众多大学的认可，例如邓迪大学、埃克赛特大学、赫尔大学以及布拉德福德大学等众多财经名校。学员可赴英国1-2年完成本科、硕士阶段ACCA-金融专业、ACCA-国际管理、ACCA-国际商务、ACCA-工商管理和ACCA-国际会计专业学习，并获得学士学位、硕士学位。

三、实践就业能力

毕业生可全面掌握财务、财务管理、审计、税务及经营战略等各方面的专业知识，提升分析能力并且拓宽战略思维。

培养的不仅是会计人员，而是为现代商业服务的专业人士，范围远大于会计，其中包含了金融、管理、财务等全方面的知识,成为一名专业的金融管理者。可以从事如金融分析，替公司做信贷，深入解析财务报告等工作。作为公司的一个管理者，经营战略等方面的专业知识与技能训练能显著提升管理水平。

四、终身职业平台与人脉

职业发展想要一帆风顺，拥有合适的资源毫无疑问能让你事半功倍。ACCA给毕业生的职业支持包括学员起步所需的所有信息：职业发展管理资源与Hudson Human Capital Solutions合作，是目前最有用的职业发展建议项目之一。

又要和大家说再见了!想要了解更多ACCA考试相关的内容，请多多关注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。

4 Ryder, a public limited company, is reviewing certain events which have occurred since its year end of 31 October

2005. The financial statements were authorised on 12 December 2005. The following events are relevant to the

financial statements for the year ended 31 October 2005:

(i) Ryder has a good record of ordinary dividend payments and has adopted a recent strategy of increasing its

dividend per share annually. For the last three years the dividend per share has increased by 5% per annum.

On 20 November 2005, the board of directors proposed a dividend of 10c per share for the year ended

31 October 2005. The shareholders are expected to approve it at a meeting on 10 January 2006, and a

dividend amount of $20 million will be paid on 20 February 2006 having been provided for in the financial

statements at 31 October 2005. The directors feel that a provision should be made because a ‘valid expectation’

has been created through the company’s dividend record. (3 marks)

(ii) Ryder disposed of a wholly owned subsidiary, Krup, a public limited company, on 10 December 2005 and made

a loss of $9 million on the transaction in the group financial statements. As at 31 October 2005, Ryder had no

intention of selling the subsidiary which was material to the group. The directors of Ryder have stated that there

were no significant events which have occurred since 31 October 2005 which could have resulted in a reduction

in the value of Krup. The carrying value of the net assets and purchased goodwill of Krup at 31 October 2005

were $20 million and $12 million respectively. Krup had made a loss of $2 million in the period 1 November

2005 to 10 December 2005. (5 marks)

(iii) Ryder acquired a wholly owned subsidiary, Metalic, a public limited company, on 21 January 2004. The

consideration payable in respect of the acquisition of Metalic was 2 million ordinary shares of $1 of Ryder plus

a further 300,000 ordinary shares if the profit of Metalic exceeded $6 million for the year ended 31 October

2005. The profit for the year of Metalic was $7 million and the ordinary shares were issued on 12 November

2005. The annual profits of Metalic had averaged $7 million over the last few years and, therefore, Ryder had

included an estimate of the contingent consideration in the cost of the acquisition at 21 January 2004. The fair

value used for the ordinary shares of Ryder at this date including the contingent consideration was $10 per share.

The fair value of the ordinary shares on 12 November 2005 was $11 per share. Ryder also made a one for four

bonus issue on 13 November 2005 which was applicable to the contingent shares issued. The directors are

unsure of the impact of the above on earnings per share and the accounting for the acquisition. (7 marks)

(iv) The company acquired a property on 1 November 2004 which it intended to sell. The property was obtained

as a result of a default on a loan agreement by a third party and was valued at $20 million on that date for

accounting purposes which exactly offset the defaulted loan. The property is in a state of disrepair and Ryder

intends to complete the repairs before it sells the property. The repairs were completed on 30 November 2005.

The property was sold after costs for $27 million on 9 December 2005. The property was classified as ‘held for

sale’ at the year end under IFRS5 ‘Non-current Assets Held for Sale and Discontinued Operations’ but shown at

the net sale proceeds of $27 million. Property is depreciated at 5% per annum on the straight-line basis and no

depreciation has been charged in the year. (5 marks)

(v) The company granted share appreciation rights (SARs) to its employees on 1 November 2003 based on ten

million shares. The SARs provide employees at the date the rights are exercised with the right to receive cash

equal to the appreciation in the company’s share price since the grant date. The rights vested on 31 October

2005 and payment was made on schedule on 1 December 2005. The fair value of the SARs per share at

31 October 2004 was $6, at 31 October 2005 was $8 and at 1 December 2005 was $9. The company has

recognised a liability for the SARs as at 31 October 2004 based upon IFRS2 ‘Share-based Payment’ but the

liability was stated at the same amount at 31 October 2005. (5 marks)

Required:

Discuss the accounting treatment of the above events in the financial statements of the Ryder Group for the year

ended 31 October 2005, taking into account the implications of events occurring after the balance sheet date.

(The mark allocations are set out after each paragraph above.)

(25 marks)

正确答案：
4 (i) Proposed dividend
The dividend was proposed after the balance sheet date and the company, therefore, did not have a liability at the balance
sheet date. No provision for the dividend should be recognised. The approval by the directors and the shareholders are
enough to create a valid expectation that the payment will be made and give rise to an obligation. However, this occurred
after the current year end and, therefore, will be charged against the profits for the year ending 31 October 2006.
The existence of a good record of dividend payments and an established dividend policy does not create a valid expectation
or an obligation. However, the proposed dividend will be disclosed in the notes to the financial statements as the directors
approved it prior to the authorisation of the financial statements.
(ii) Disposal of subsidiary
It would appear that the loss on the sale of the subsidiary provides evidence that the value of the consolidated net assets of
the subsidiary was impaired at the year end as there has been no significant event since 31 October 2005 which would have
caused the reduction in the value of the subsidiary. The disposal loss provides evidence of the impairment and, therefore,
the value of the net assets and goodwill should be reduced by the loss of $9 million plus the loss ($2 million) to the date of
the disposal, i.e. $11 million. The sale provides evidence of a condition that must have existed at the balance sheet date
(IAS10). This amount will be charged to the income statement and written off goodwill of $12 million, leaving a balance of
$1 million on that account. The subsidiary’s assets are impaired because the carrying values are not recoverable. The net
assets and goodwill of Krup would form. a separate income generating unit as the subsidiary is being disposed of before the
financial statements are authorised. The recoverable amount will be the sale proceeds at the date of sale and represents the
value-in-use to the group. The impairment loss is effectively taking account of the ultimate loss on sale at an earlier point in
time. IFRS5, ‘Non-current assets held for sale and discontinued operations’, will not apply as the company had no intention
of selling the subsidiary at the year end. IAS10 would require disclosure of the disposal of the subsidiary as a non-adjusting
event after the balance sheet date.
(iii) Issue of ordinary shares
IAS33 ‘Earnings per share’ states that if there is a bonus issue after the year end but before the date of the approval of the
financial statements, then the earnings per share figure should be based on the new number of shares issued. Additionally
a company should disclose details of all material ordinary share transactions or potential transactions entered into after the
balance sheet date other than the bonus issue or similar events (IAS10/IAS33). The principle is that if there has been a
change in the number of shares in issue without a change in the resources of the company, then the earnings per share
calculation should be based on the new number of shares even though the number of shares used in the earnings per share
calculation will be inconsistent with the number shown in the balance sheet. The conditions relating to the share issue
(contingent) have been met by the end of the period. Although the shares were issued after the balance sheet date, the issue
of the shares was no longer contingent at 31 October 2005, and therefore the relevant shares will be included in the
computation of both basic and diluted EPS. Thus, in this case both the bonus issue and the contingent consideration issue
should be taken into account in the earnings per share calculation and disclosure made to that effect. Any subsequent change
in the estimate of the contingent consideration will be adjusted in the period when the revision is made in accordance with
IAS8.
Additionally IFRS3 ‘Business Combinations’ requires the fair value of all types of consideration to be reflected in the cost of
the acquisition. The contingent consideration should be included in the cost of the business combination at the acquisition
date if the adjustment is probable and can be measured reliably. In the case of Metalic, the contingent consideration has
been paid in the post-balance sheet period and the value of such consideration can be determined ($11 per share). Thus
an accurate calculation of the goodwill arising on the acquisition of Metalic can be made in the period to 31 October 2005.
Prior to the issue of the shares on 12 November 2005, a value of $10 per share would have been used to value the
contingent consideration. The payment of the contingent consideration was probable because the average profits of Metalic
averaged over $7 million for several years. At 31 October 2005 the value of the contingent shares would be included in a
separate category of equity until they were issued on 12 November 2005 when they would be transferred to the share capital
and share premium account. Goodwill will increase by 300,000 x ($11 – $10) i.e. $300,000.
(iv) Property
IFRS5 (paragraph 7) states that for a non-current asset to be classified as held for sale, the asset must be available for
immediate sale in its present condition subject to the usual selling terms, and its sale must be highly probable. The delay in
this case in the selling of the property would indicate that at 31 October 2005 the property was not available for sale. The
property was not to be made available for sale until the repairs were completed and thus could not have been available for
sale at the year end. If the criteria are met after the year end (in this case on 30 November 2005), then the non-current
asset should not be classified as held for sale in the previous financial statements. However, disclosure of the event should
be made if it meets the criteria before the financial statements are authorised (IFRS5 paragraph 12). Thus in this case,
disclosure should be made.
The property on the application of IFRS5 should have been carried at the lower of its carrying amount and fair value less
costs to sell. However, the company has simply used fair value less costs to sell as the basis of valuation and shown the
property at $27 million in the financial statements.
The carrying amount of the property would have been $20 million less depreciation $1 million, i.e. $19 million. Because
the property is not held for sale under IFRS5, then its classification in the balance sheet will change and the property will be
valued at $19 million. Thus the gain of $7 million on the wrong application of IFRS5 will be deducted from reserves, and
the property included in property, plant and equipment. Total equity will therefore be reduced by $8 million.
(v) Share appreciation rights
IFRS2 ‘Share-based payment’ (paragraph 30) requires a company to re-measure the fair value of a liability to pay cash-settled
share based payment transactions at each reporting date and the settlement date, until the liability is settled. An example of
such a transaction is share appreciation rights. Thus the company should recognise a liability of ($8 x 10 million shares),
i.e. $80 million at 31 October 2005, the vesting date. The liability recognised at 31 October 2005 was in fact based on the
share price at the previous year end and would have been shown at ($6 x 1/2) x 10 million shares, i.e. $30 million. This
liability at 31 October 2005 had not been changed since the previous year end by the company. The SARs vest over a twoyear
period and thus at 31 October 2004 there would be a weighting of the eventual cost by 1 year/2 years. Therefore, an
additional liability and expense of $50 million should be accounted for in the financial statements at 31 October 2005. The
SARs would be settled on 1 December 2005 at $9 x 10 million shares, i.e. $90 million. The increase in the value of the
SARs since the year end would not be accrued in the financial statements but charged to profit or loss in the year ended31 October 2006.

4 (a) A company may choose to finance its activities mainly by equity capital, with low borrowings (low gearing) or by

relying on high borrowings with relatively low equity capital (high gearing).

Required:

Explain why a highly geared company is generally more risky from an investor’s point of view than a company

with low gearing. (3 marks)

正确答案：
(a) A highly-geared company has an obligation to pay interest on its loans regardless of its profit level. It will show high profits if
its overall rate of return on capital is greater than the rate of interest being paid on its borrowings, but a low profit or a loss if
there is a down-turn in its profit such that the rate of interest to be paid exceeds the return on its assets.

1 The board of Worldwide Minerals (WM) was meeting for the last monthly meeting before the publication of the yearend

results. There were two points of discussion on the agenda. First was the discussion of the year-end results;

second was the crucial latest minerals reserves report.

WM is a large listed multinational company that deals with natural minerals that are extracted from the ground,

processed and sold to a wide range of industrial and construction companies. In order to maintain a consistent supply

of minerals into its principal markets, an essential part of WM’s business strategy is the seeking out of new sources

and the measurement of known reserves. Investment analysts have often pointed out that WM’s value rests principally

upon the accuracy of its reserve reports as these are the best indicators of future cash flows and earnings. In order to

support this key part of its strategy, WM has a large and well-funded geological survey department which, according

to the company website, contains ‘some of the world’s best geologists and minerals scientists’. In its investor relations

literature, the company claims that:

‘our experts search the earth for mineral reserves and once located, they are carefully measured so that the company

can always report on known reserves. This knowledge underpins market confidence and keeps our customers

supplied with the inventory they need. You can trust our reserve reports – our reputation depends on it!’

At the board meeting, the head of the geological survey department, Ranjana Tyler, reported that there was a problem

with the latest report because one of the major reserve figures had recently been found to be wrong. The mineral in

question, mallerite, was WM’s largest mineral in volume terms and Ranjana explained that the mallerite reserves in

a deep mine in a certain part of the world had been significantly overestimated. She explained that, based on the

interim minerals report, the stock market analysts were expecting WM to announce known mallerite reserves of

4·8 billion tonnes. The actual figure was closer to 2·4 billion tonnes. It was agreed that this difference was sufficient

to affect WM’s market value, despite the otherwise good results for the past year. Vanda Monroe, the finance director,

said that the share price reflects market confidence in future earnings. She said that an announcement of an incorrect

estimation like that for mallerite would cause a reduction in share value. More importantly for WM itself, however, it

could undermine confidence in the geological survey department. All agreed that as this was strategically important

for the company, it was a top priority to deal with this problem.

Ranjana explained how the situation had arisen. The major mallerite mine was in a country new to WM’s operations.

The WM engineer at the mine said it was difficult to deal with some local people because, according to the engineer,

‘they didn’t like to give us bad news’. The engineer explained that when the mine was found to be smaller than

originally thought, he was not told until it was too late to reduce the price paid for the mine. This was embarrassing

and it was agreed that it would affect market confidence in WM if it was made public.

The board discussed the options open to it. The chairman, who was also a qualified accountant, was Tim Blake. He

began by expressing serious concern about the overestimation and then invited the board to express views freely. Gary

Howells, the operations director, said that because disclosing the error to the market would be so damaging, it might

be best to keep it a secret and hope that new reserves can be found in the near future that will make up for the

shortfall. He said that it was unlikely that this concealment would be found out as shareholders trusted WM and they

had many years of good investor relations to draw on. Vanda Monroe, the finance director, reminded the board that

the company was bound to certain standards of truthfulness and transparency by its stock market listing. She pointed

out that they were constrained by codes of governance and ethics by the stock market and that colleagues should be

aware that WM would be in technical breach of these if the incorrect estimation was concealed from investors. Finally,

Martin Chan, the human resources director, said that the error should be disclosed to the investors because he would

not want to be deceived if he were an outside investor in the company. He argued that whatever the governance codes

said and whatever the cost in terms of reputation and market value, WM should admit its error and cope with

whatever consequences arose. The WM board contains three non-executive directors and their views were also

invited.

At the preliminary results presentation some time later, one analyst, Christina Gonzales, who had become aware of

the mallerite problem, asked about internal audit and control systems, and whether they were adequate in such a

reserve-sensitive industry. WM’s chairman, Tim Blake, said that he intended to write a letter to all investors and

analysts in the light of the mallerite problem which he hoped would address some of the issues that Miss Gonzales

had raised.

Required:

(a) Define ‘transparency’ and evaluate its importance as an underlying principle in corporate governance and in

relevant and reliable financial reporting. Your answer should refer to the case as appropriate. (10 marks)

正确答案：
(a) Transparency and its importance at WM
Define transparency
Transparency is one of the underlying principles of corporate governance. As such, it is one of the ‘building blocks’ that
underpin a sound system of governance. In particular, transparency is required in the agency relationship. In terms of
definition, transparency means openness (say, of discussions), clarity, lack of withholding of relevant information unless
necessary and a default position of information provision rather than concealment. This is particularly important in financial
reporting, as this is the primary source of information that investors have for making effective investment decisions.
Evaluation of importance of transparency
There are a number of benefits of transparency. For instance, it is part of gaining trust with investors and state authorities
(e.g. tax people). Transparency provides access for investors and other stakeholders to company information thereby dispelling
suspicion and underpinning market confidence in the company through truthful and fair reporting. It also helps to manage
stakeholder claims and reduces the stresses caused by stakeholders (e.g. trade unions) for whom information provision is
important. Reasons for secrecy/confidentiality include the fact that it may be necessary to keep strategy discussions secret
from competitors. Internal issues may be private to individuals, thus justifying confidentiality. Finally, free (secret or
confidential) discussion often has to take place before an agreed position is announced (cabinet government approach).
Reference to case
At Worldwide Minerals, transparency as a principle is needed to deal with the discussion of concealment. Should a discussion
of possible concealment even be taking place? Truthful, accurate and timely reporting underpins investor confidence in all
capital-funded companies including WM. The issue of the overestimation of the mallerite reserve is clearly a matter of concern
to shareholders and so is an example of where a default assumption of transparency would be appropriate.

(ii) Can we entertain our clients as a gesture of goodwill or is corporate hospitality ruled out? (3 marks)

Required:

For EACH of the three FAQs, explain the threats to objectivity that may arise and the safeguards that should

be available to manage them to an acceptable level.

NOTE: The mark allocation is shown against each of the three questions.

正确答案：
(ii) Corporate hospitality
A partner in an audit firm is obviously in a position to influence the conduct and outcome of an audit. Therefore a
partner being on ‘too friendly’ terms with an audit client creates a familiarity threat. Other members of the audit team
may not exert as much influence on the audit.
A self-interest threat may also be perceived (e.g. if corporate hospitality is provided to keep a prestigious client).
There is no absolute prohibition against corporate hospitality provided:
■ the value attached to such hospitality is ‘insignificant’; and
■ the ‘frequency, nature and cost’ of the hospitality is reasonable.
Thus, flying the directors of an audit client for weekends away could be seen as significant. Similarly, entertaining an
audit client on a regular basis could be seen as unacceptable.
Partners and staff of Boleyn will need to be objective in their assessments of the significance or reasonableness of the
hospitality offered. (Would ‘a reasonable and informed third party’ conclude that the hospitality will or is likely to be
seen to impair your objectivity?)
If they have any doubts they should discuss the matter in the first instance with the audit engagement partner, who
should refer the matter to the ethics partner if in doubt.

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。

站内搜索
热门标签