注意查看!2020年安徽省ACCA考试报名时间
发布时间:2020-09-03
ACCA在国内称为“国际注册会计师”,ACCA资格被认为是“国际财会界的通行证”。安徽省的考生请注意,2020年ACCA考试报名时间已经公布了,51题库考试学习网为大家带来了报名相关事宜,让我们一起来看看吧!
一、报名时间及费用缴纳:
2020年12月ACCA考试报名时间、考试费用- |
|||
报名周期 |
报名(截止)日期 |
考试科目 |
考试费用 |
提前报名截止 |
2020年8月10日 |
|
|
F4-F9 |
123英镑 |
||
Strategic Business Leader |
210英镑 |
||
Strategic Business Reporting |
164英镑 |
||
P4-P7(4选2) |
164英镑 |
||
常规报名截止 |
2020年11月2日 |
|
|
F4-F9 |
130英镑 |
||
Strategic Business Leader |
222英镑 |
||
Strategic Business Reporting |
173英镑 |
||
P4-P7(4选2) |
173英镑 |
||
后期报名截止 |
2020年11月9日 |
|
|
F4-F9 |
332英镑 |
||
Strategic Business Leader |
358英镑 |
||
Strategic Business Reporting |
358英镑 |
||
P4-P7(4选2) |
358英镑 |
二、ACCA报考条件:
(一)凡具有教育部承认的大专以上学历,即可报名成为ACCA的正式学员;
(二)教育部认可的高等院校在校生,顺利完成大一的课程考试,即可报名成为ACCA的正式学员;
(三)未符合(一)、(二)项报名资格的16周岁以上的申请者,也可以先申请参加FIA(Foundations in Accountancy)基础财务资格考试。在完成基础商业会计(FAB)、基础管理会计(FMA)、基础财务会计(FFA)3门课程,并完成ACCA基础职业模块,可获得ACCA商业会计师资格证书(Diploma in Accounting and Business),资格证书后可豁免ACCAF1-F3三门课程的考试,直接进入技能课程的考试。
三、报名规则:
1.申请参加ACCA考试者,必须先注册成为ACCA学员。
2.学员必须按考试大纲设置的先后次序报考,即应用知识模块,应用技能模块,战略专业模块。同一个模块里的课程可以选择任意顺序报考,但建议在同一个模块中也按照课程顺序报考。
3.基础阶段的应用知识模块考试时间为两小时,基础阶段的应用技能模块和战略专业阶段的所有课程考试时间为三小时,及格成绩为50分(百分制)。从2016年起,ACCA实行4个考季,即学员可选择在3、6、9、12月考季在当地考点进行考试。学员每年最多可报考8门不相同的科目。
请注意:中国大陆地区自2018年3月考季开始将取消PM-FM的笔试。
4.基础阶段9门考试不设时限;专业阶段考试年限为7年,从通过第一门战略专业阶段考试之日算起。
5.考试的报名时间不同,考试资费标准就不同(该优惠政策仅限网上报名)。较早报名考试,费用会相对较少。报考时间分为提前报名时段,常规报名时段和后期报名时段。
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。
5 GE Railways plc (GER) operates a passenger train service in Holtland. The directors have always focused solely on
the use of traditional financial measures in order to assess the performance of GER since it commenced operations
in 1992. The Managing Director of GER has asked you, as a management accountant, for assistance with regard to
the adoption of a balanced scorecard approach to performance measurement within GER.
Required:
(a) Prepare a memorandum explaining the potential benefits and limitations that may arise from the adoption of
a balanced scorecard approach to performance measurement within GER. (8 marks)
(a) To: Board of directors
From: Management Accountant
Date: 8 June 2007
The potential benefits of the adoption of a balanced scorecard approach to performance measurement within GER are as
follows:
A broader business perspective
Financial measures invariably have an inward-looking perspective. The balanced scorecard is wider in its scope and
application. It has an external focus and looks at comparisons with competitors in order to establish what constitutes best
practice and ensures that required changes are made in order to achieve it. The use of the balanced scorecard requires a
balance of both financial and non-financial measures and goals.
A greater strategic focus
The use of the balanced scorecard focuses to a much greater extent on the longer term. There is a far greater emphasis on
strategic considerations. It attempts to identify the needs and wants of customers and the new products and markets. Hence
it requires a balance between short term and long term performance measures.
A greater focus on qualitative aspects
The use of the balanced scorecard attempts to overcome the over-emphasis of traditional measures on the quantifiable aspects
of the internal operations of an organisation expressed in purely financial terms. Its use requires a balance between
quantitative and qualitative performance measures. For example, customer satisfaction is a qualitative performance measure
which is given prominence under the balanced scorecard approach.
A greater focus on longer term performance
The use of traditional financial measures is often dominated by financial accounting requirements, for example, the need to
show fixed assets at their historic cost. Also, they are primarily focused on short-term profitability and return on capital
employed in order to gain stakeholder approval of short term financial reports, the longer term or whole life cycle often being
ignored.
The limitations of a balanced scorecard approach to performance measurement may be viewed as follows:
The balanced scorecard attempts to identify the chain of cause and effect relationships which will provide the stimulus for
the future success of an organisation.
Advocates of a balanced scorecard approach to performance measurement suggest that it can constitute a vital component
of the strategic management process.
However, Robert Kaplan and David Norton, the authors of the balanced scorecard concept concede that it may not be suitable
for all firms. Norton suggests that it is most suitable for firms which have a long lead time between management action and
financial benefit and that it will be less suitable for firms with a short-term focus. However, other flaws can be detected in
the balanced scorecard.
The balanced scorecard promises to outline the theory of the firm by clearly linking the driver/outcome measures in a cause
and effect chain, but this will be difficult if not impossible to achieve.
The precise cause and effect relationships between measures for each of the perspectives on the balanced scorecard will be
complex because the driver and outcome measures for the various perspectives are interlinked. For example, customer
satisfaction may be seen to be a function of several drivers, such as employee satisfaction, manufacturing cycle time and
quality. However, employee satisfaction may in turn be partially driven by customer satisfaction and employee satisfaction
may partially drive manufacturing cycle time. A consequence of this non-linearity of the cause and effect chain (i.e., there is
non-linear relationship between an individual driver and a single outcome measure), is that there must be a question mark
as to the accuracy of any calculated correlations between driver and outcome measures. Allied to this point, any calculated
correlations will be historic. This implies that it will only be possible to determine the accuracy of cause and effect linkages
after the event, which could make the use of the balanced scorecard in dynamic industries questionable. If the market is
undergoing rapid evolution, for example, how meaningful are current measures of customer satisfaction or market share?
These criticisms do not necessarily undermine the usefulness of the balanced scorecard in presenting a more comprehensive
picture of organisational performance but they do raise doubts concerning claims that a balanced scorecard can be
constructed which will outline a clear cause and effect chain between driver and outcome measures and the firm’s financial
objectives.
(d) Discuss the professional accountant’s liability for reporting on prospective financial information and the
measures that the professional accountant might take to reduce that liability. (6 marks)
(d) Professional accountant’s liability
Liability for reporting on PFI
Independent accountants may be required to report on PFI for many reasons (e.g. to help secure a bank loan). Such forecasts
and projections are inherently unreliable. If the forecast or projection does not materialise, and the client or lenders (or
investors) consequently sustain financial loss, the accountant may face lawsuits claiming financial loss.
Courts in different jurisdictions use various criteria to define the group of persons to whom independent accountants may be
held liable for providing a report on an inaccurate forecast or projection. The most common of these are that an accountant
is liable to persons with whom there is proximity:
(i) only (i.e. the client who engaged the independent accountant);
(ii) or whose relationship with the accountant sufficiently approaches privity;
(iii) and to persons or members of a limited group of persons for whose benefit and guidance the accountant supplied the
information or knew that the recipient of the information intended to supply it;
(iv) and to persons who reasonably can be foreseen to rely on the information.
Measures to reduce liability
As significant assumptions will be essential to a reader’s understanding of a financial forecast, the independent accountant
should ensure that they are adequately disclosed and clearly stated to be the management’s responsibility. Hypothetical
assumptions should be clearly distinguished from best estimates.
The introduction to any forecast (and/or report thereon) should include a caveat that the prospective results may not be
attained. Specific and extensive warnings (‘the actual results … will vary’) and disclaimers (‘we do not express an opinion’)
may be effective in protecting an independent accountant sued for inaccuracies in forecasts or projections that they have
reported on.
Any report to a third party should state:
■ for whom it is prepared, who is entitled to rely on it (if anyone) and for what purpose;
■ that the engagement was undertaken in accordance with the engagement terms;
■ the work performed and the findings.
An independent accountant’s report should avoid inappropriate and open-ended wording, for example, ‘we certify …’ and ‘we
obtained all the explanations we considered necessary’.
Engagement terms to report on PFI should include an appropriate liability cap that is reasonable given the specific
circumstances of the engagement.
The independent accountant may be able to obtain indemnity from a client in respect of claims from third parties. Such ‘hold
harmless’ clauses obligate the client to indemnify the independent accountant from third party claims.
(c) State the specific inquiries you should make of Robson Construction Co’s management relevant to its
accounting for construction contracts. (6 marks)
(c) Specific inquiries – accounting for construction contracts
Tutorial note: This answer is illustrative of the types of inquiry that should be made. Other relevant answer points will be
awarded similar credit. For each full mark to be earned an inquiry should address the specifics of Robson (e.g. that its
accounting policies are ‘generally less prudent’). The identification of asset overstatement/liability understatement may
reduce the purchase price offered by Prescott.
■ Are any constructions being undertaken without signed contracts?
Tutorial note: Any expenditure on constructions without contracts (e.g. of a speculative nature, perhaps to keep the
workforce employed) must be accounted for under IAS ‘Inventories’; revenue cannot be recognised nor profit taken.
■ Is full provision made for future losses foreseen on loss-making contracts?
Tutorial note: The information in the brief is that ‘provisions are made’. The level of provision is not indicated and
could be less than full.
■ Which contracts started during the year are likely to be/have been identified as loss-making (for which no provision has
yet been made)?
Tutorial note: Profits and losses are only determined by contract at each financial year end.
■ What are management’s assumptions and judgments on the likely future outcome on the Sarwar contract (and other
actual and contingent liabilities)?
Tutorial note: Robson would be imprudent if it underestimates the probability of an unfavourable outcome (or
overestimates the likelihood of successful recourse).
■ What claims history has Robson experienced? (What proportion of contracts have been subject to claims? What
proportion of claims brought have been successful? How have they been settled? Under insurance? Out-of-court
settlement?) How effective are the penalty clauses? (Is Robson having to pay penalties for overrunning on contracts?)
■ What are the actual useful lives of assets used in construction? What level of losses are made on disposal?
Tutorial note: If such assets are depreciated over useful lives that are estimated to be too long, depreciation costs
incurred to date (and estimated depreciation to be included in costs to completion) will be understated. This will result
in too much profit/too little loss being calculated on contracts.
■ What is the cause of losses on contracts? For example, if due to theft of building supplies Robson’s management is not
exercising sufficient control over the company’s assets.
(ii) Deema Co. (4 marks)
(ii) Deema Co
The claim is an event after the balance sheet date. If the accident occurred prior to the year end of 30 September 2007,
the claim gives additional evidence of a year end condition, and thus meets the definition of an adjusting post balance
sheet event. In this case the matter appears to have been properly disclosed in the notes to the financial statements per
IAS 10 Events After the Balance Sheet Date and IAS 37 Provisions, Contingent Liabilities and Contingent Assets. A
provision would only be necessary if the claim was probable to succeed and there is sufficient appropriate evidence that
this is not the case. There is therefore no disagreement, and no limitation on scope.
Therefore the senior is correct to propose an unqualified opinion.
However, it is not necessary for the audit report to contain an emphasis of matter paragraph.
ISA 701 Modifications to the Independent Auditor’s Report states that an emphasis of matter paragraph should be used
to highlight a matter where there is significant uncertainty.
Uncertainties are normally only regarded as significant if they involve a level of concern about the going concern status
of the company or would have an unusually great effect on the financial statements. This is not the case here as there
is enough cash to pay the damages in the unlikely event that the claim goes against Deema Co. This appears to be a
one-off situation with a low risk of the estimate being subject to change and thus there is no significant uncertainty.
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。
- 2021-04-25
- 2021-01-13
- 2020-01-08
- 2021-01-13
- 2020-01-09
- 2021-01-14
- 2020-09-03
- 2021-01-13
- 2021-10-09
- 2020-03-27
- 2020-04-18
- 2020-01-10
- 2021-01-21
- 2020-01-10
- 2020-09-03
- 2021-01-13
- 2020-01-09
- 2020-07-04
- 2019-03-08
- 2021-04-04
- 2020-01-13
- 2020-04-10
- 2020-01-10
- 2020-01-10
- 2020-01-09
- 2021-01-16
- 2020-01-10
- 2021-05-06
- 2020-01-10
- 2020-01-09