2020年ACCA考试报名条件，如何搭配考试科目？

发布时间：2020-03-05

想要参加ACCA考试，需要先注册成为学员。ACCA学员注册要求比较低，对申请人员的学历以及专业并无严格限制。ACCA考试的16个科目分为12门必修以及4门选修，选修部分为四选二，考生可自行选择。选修部分的科目难度都比较高，因此选择适合自己的科目，可以让学员更容易通过考试。鉴于此，51题库考试学习网在下面为大家带来ACCA考试科目选择的相关信息，以供参考。

首先，我们可以从考试内容入手。根据历年考试情况来看，ACCA F阶段基础知识与P阶段课程内容有很大的联系，也就说ACCA学员在进行F阶段的考试时，就能清晰地看到自己在某一方面的学习优势。所以，ACCA学员只需要根据自己的优势来选择对应的P阶段课程就能够为自己争取到更高的通关概率。那么，这些科目是如何对应的？

首先，如果你对F5科目很感兴趣，那么P5对于你来说就是不错的选择；假如你F9考试成绩很好，那么选择P4对你来说将会更加容易。其他的科目与此类似。因此，找到自己擅长的科目类型是通过考试的关键。

  除科目对应外， P阶段各科目的出题方式以及实际应用途径也可以作为ACCA学员科目选择的依据。ACCA考试科目中的P4-高级财务管理，此课程包含的知识点具有较强的实用性，其对应实际工作中的公司新项目投资评估、公司并购估值、公司财务或业务战略重组以及公司外汇及信用风险管理等内容，所以在此科目考试中各类计算占主要部分。因此，51题库考试学习网建议擅长计算的同学可优先报选读P4，在取得ACCA的qualification之后。当然了，有需要的小伙伴也可再选修P7课程，可以进一步提高自身的能力。在考取证书之后，让自己更有具有竞争力。

  而P7这门课程偏重于会计师事务所各类审计计划和报告，考试注重写作。因此，51题库考试学习网建议具有相关经验和擅长写作的同学可以考虑先选修这门课程。当然了，小伙伴们在取得ACCA的qualification后，如果需要也可再选修P4课程以进一步提高自身的能力。因此，51题库考试学习网还是建议各位小伙伴去尝试报考哦。

以上就是关于ACCA考试题型的相关情况。51题库考试学习网提醒：以上的科目搭配方式仅供参考，小伙伴们要以自己的实际情况去选择科目哦。最后，51题库考试学习网预祝准备参加2020年ACCA考试的小伙伴都能顺利通过。

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。

25 What should the minority interest figure be in the group’s consolidated balance sheet at 31 December 2005?

A $240,000

B $80,000

C $180,000

D $140,000

正确答案：A
20% x (400,000 + 800,000)

Moonstar Co is a property development company which is planning to undertake a $200 million commercial property development. Moonstar Co has had some difficulties over the last few years, with some developments not generating the expected returns and the company has at times struggled to pay its finance costs. As a result Moonstar Co’s credit rating has been lowered, affecting the terms it can obtain for bank finance. Although Moonstar Co is listed on its local stock exchange, 75% of the share capital is held by members of the family who founded the company. The family members who are shareholders do not wish to subscribe for a rights issue and are unwilling to dilute their control over the company by authorising a new issue of equity shares. Moonstar Co’s board is therefore considering other methods of financing the development, which the directors believe will generate higher returns than other recent investments, as the country where Moonstar Co is based appears to be emerging from recession.

Securitisation proposals

One of the non-executive directors of Moonstar Co has proposed that it should raise funds by means of a securitisation process, transferring the rights to the rental income from the commercial property development to a special purpose vehicle. Her proposals assume that the leases will generate an income of 11% per annum to Moonstar Co over a ten-year period. She proposes that Moonstar Co should use 90% of the value of the investment for a collateralised loan obligation which should be structured as follows:

– 60% of the collateral value to support a tranche of A-rated floating rate loan notes offering investors LIBOR plus 150 basis points

– 15% of the collateral value to support a tranche of B-rated fixed rate loan notes offering investors 12%

– 15% of the collateral value to support a tranche of C-rated fixed rate loan notes offering investors 13%

– 10% of the collateral value to support a tranche as subordinated certificates, with the return being the excess of receipts over payments from the securitisation process

The non-executive director believes that there will be sufficient demand for all tranches of the loan notes from investors. Investors will expect that the income stream from the development to be low risk, as they will expect the property market to improve with the recession coming to an end and enough potential lessees to be attracted by the new development.

The non-executive director predicts that there would be annual costs of $200,000 in administering the loan. She acknowledges that there would be interest rate risks associated with the proposal, and proposes a fixed for variable interest rate swap on the A-rated floating rate notes, exchanging LIBOR for 9·5%.

However the finance director believes that the prediction of the income from the development that the non-executive director has made is over-optimistic. He believes that it is most likely that the total value of the rental income will be 5% lower than the non-executive director has forecast. He believes that there is some risk that the returns could be so low as to jeopardise the income for the C-rated fixed rate loan note holders.

Islamic finance

Moonstar Co’s chief executive has wondered whether Sukuk finance would be a better way of funding the development than the securitisation.

Moonstar Co’s chairman has pointed out that a major bank in the country where Moonstar Co is located has begun to offer a range of Islamic financial products. The chairman has suggested that a Mudaraba contract would be the most appropriate method of providing the funds required for the investment.

Required:

(a) Calculate the amounts in $ which each of the tranches can expect to receive from the securitisation arrangement proposed by the non-executive director and discuss how the variability in rental income affects the returns from the securitisation. (11 marks)

(b) Discuss the benefits and risks for Moonstar Co associated with the securitisation arrangement that the non-executive director has proposed. (6 marks)

(c) (i) Discuss the suitability of Sukuk finance to fund the investment, including an assessment of its appeal to potential investors. (4 marks)

(ii) Discuss whether a Mudaraba contract would be an appropriate method of financing the investment and discuss why the bank may have concerns about providing finance by this method. (4 marks)

正确答案：

(a) An annual cash flow account compares the estimated cash flows receivable from the property against the liabilities within the securitisation process. The swap introduces leverage into the arrangement.

The holders of the certificates are expected to receive $3·17million on $18 million, giving them a return of 17·6%. If the cash flows are 5% lower than the non-executive director has predicted, annual revenue received will fall to $20·90 million, reducing the balance available for the subordinated certificates to $2·07 million, giving a return of 11·5% on the subordinated certificates, which is below the returns offered on the B and C-rated loan notes. The point at which the holders of the certificates will receive nothing and below which the holders of the C-rated loan notes will not receive their full income will be an annual income of $18·83 million (a return of 9·4%), which is 14·4% less than the income that the non-executive director has forecast.

(b) Benefits

The finance costs of the securitisation may be lower than the finance costs of ordinary loan capital. The cash flows from the commercial property development may be regarded as lower risk than Moonstar Co’s other revenue streams. This will impact upon the rates that Moonstar Co is able to offer borrowers.

The securitisation matches the assets of the future cash flows to the liabilities to loan note holders. The non-executive director is assuming a steady stream of lease income over the next 10 years, with the development probably being close to being fully occupied over that period.

The securitisation means that Moonstar Co is no longer concerned with the risk that the level of earnings from the properties will be insufficient to pay the finance costs. Risks have effectively been transferred to the loan note holders.

Risks

Not all of the tranches may appeal to investors. The risk-return relationship on the subordinated certificates does not look very appealing, with the return quite likely to be below what is received on the C-rated loan notes. Even the C-rated loan note holders may question the relationship between the risk and return if there is continued uncertainty in the property sector.

If Moonstar Co seeks funding from other sources for other developments, transferring out a lower risk income stream means that the residual risks associated with the rest of Moonstar Co’s portfolio will be higher. This may affect the availability and terms of other borrowing.

It appears that the size of the securitisation should be large enough for the costs to be bearable. However Moonstar Co may face unforeseen costs, possibly unexpected management or legal expenses.

(c) (i) Sukuk finance could be appropriate for the securitisation of the leasing portfolio. An asset-backed Sukuk would be the same kind of arrangement as the securitisation, where assets are transferred to a special purpose vehicle and the returns and repayments are directly financed by the income from the assets. The Sukuk holders would bear the risks and returns of the relationship.

The other type of Sukuk would be more like a sale and leaseback of the development. Here the Sukuk holders would be guaranteed a rental, so it would seem less appropriate for Moonstar Co if there is significant uncertainty about the returns from the development.

The main issue with the asset-backed Sukuk finance is whether it would be as appealing as certainly the A-tranche of the securitisation arrangement which the non-executive director has proposed. The safer income that the securitisation offers A-tranche investors may be more appealing to investors than a marginally better return from the Sukuk. There will also be costs involved in establishing and gaining approval for the Sukuk, although these costs may be less than for the securitisation arrangement described above.

(ii) A Mudaraba contract would involve the bank providing capital for Moonstar Co to invest in the development. Moonstar Co would manage the investment which the capital funded. Profits from the investment would be shared with the bank, but losses would be solely borne by the bank. A Mudaraba contract is essentially an equity partnership, so Moonstar Co might not face the threat to its credit rating which it would if it obtained ordinary loan finance for the development. A Mudaraba contract would also represent a diversification of sources of finance. It would not require the commitment to pay interest that loan finance would involve.

Moonstar Co would maintain control over the running of the project. A Mudaraba contract would offer a method of obtaining equity funding without the dilution of control which an issue of shares to external shareholders would bring. This is likely to make it appealing to Moonstar Co’s directors, given their desire to maintain a dominant influence over the business.

The bank would be concerned about the uncertainties regarding the rental income from the development. Although the lack of involvement by the bank might appeal to Moonstar Co's directors, the bank might not find it so attractive. The bank might be concerned about information asymmetry – that Moonstar Co’s management might be reluctant to supply the bank with the information it needs to judge how well its investment is performing.

5 The directors of Blaina Packaging Co (BPC), a well-established manufacturer of cardboard boxes, are currently

considering whether to enter the cardboard tube market. Cardboard tubes are purchased by customers whose

products are wound around tubes of various sizes ranging from large tubes on which carpets are wound, to small

tubes around which films and paper products are wound. The cardboard tubes are usually purchased in very large

quantities by customers. On average, the cardboard tubes comprise between 1% and 2% of the total cost of the

customers’ finished product.

The directors have gathered the following information:

(1) The cardboard tubes are manufactured on machines which vary in size and speed. The lowest cost machine is

priced at $30,000 and requires only one operative for its operation. A one-day training course is required in order

that an unskilled person can then operate such a machine in an efficient and effective manner.

(2) The cardboard tubes are made from specially formulated paper which, at times during recent years, has been in

short supply.

(3) At present, four major manufacturers of cardboard tubes have an aggregate market share of 80%. The current

market leader has a 26% market share. The market shares of the other three major manufacturers, one of which

is JOL Co, are equal in size. The product ranges offered by the four major manufacturers are similar in terms of

size and quality. The market has grown by 2% per annum during recent years.

(4) A recent report on the activities of a foreign-based multinational company revealed that consideration was being

given to expanding operations in their packaging division overseas. The division possesses large-scale automated

machinery for the manufacture of cardboard tubes of any size.

(5) Another company, Plastic Tubes Co (PTC) produces a narrow, but increasing, range of plastic tubes which are

capable of housing small products such as film and paper-based products. At present, these tubes are on average

30% more expensive than the equivalent sized cardboard tubes sold in the marketplace.

Required:

(a) Using Porter’s five forces model, assess the attractiveness of the option to enter the market for cardboard

tubes as a performance improvement strategy for BPC. (10 marks)

正确答案：
(a) In order to assess the attractiveness of the option to enter the market for spirally-wound paper tubes, the directors of BPC
could make use of Michael Porter’s ‘five forces model’.
In applying this model to the given scenario one might conclude that the relatively low cost of the machine together with the
fact that an unskilled person would only require one day’s training in order to be able to operate a machine, constitute
relatively low costs of entry to the market. Therefore one might reasonably conclude that the threat of new entrants might be
high. This is especially the case where the market is highly fragmented.
The fact that products are usually purchased in very large quantities by customers together with the fact that there is little real
difference between the products of alternative suppliers suggests that customer (buyer) power might well be very high. The
fact that the paper tubes on average only comprise between 1% and 2% of the total cost of the purchaser’s finished product
also suggests that buyer power may well be very high.
The threat from suppliers could be high due to the fact that the specially formulated paper from which the tubes are made is
sometimes in short supply. Hence suppliers might increase their prices with consequential diminution in gross margin of the
firms in the marketplace.
The threat from competitive rivals will be strong as the four major players in the market are of similar size and that the market
is a slow growing market. The market leader currently has 26% of the market and the three nearest competitors hold
approximately 18% of the market.
The fact that Plastic Tubes Co (PTC) produces a narrow range of plastic tubes constitutes a threat from a substitute product.
This threat will increase if the product range of PTC is extended and the price of plastic tubes is reduced.
The fact that a foreign-based multinational company is considering entering this market represents a significant threat from a
potential new entrant as it would appear that the multinational company might well be able to derive economies of scale from
large scale automated machinery and has manufacturing flexibility.
Low capital barriers to entry might appeal to BPC but they would also appeal to other potential entrants. The low growth
market, the ease of entry, the existence of established competitors, a credible threat of backward vertical integration by
suppliers, the imminent entry by a multi-national, a struggling established competitor and the difficulty of differentiating an
industrial commodity should call into question the potential of BPC to achieve any sort of competitive advantage. If BPC can
achieve the position of lowest cost producer within the industry then entry into the market might be a good move. In order
to assess whether this is possible BPC must consider any potential synergies that would exist between its cardboard business
and that of the tubes operation.
From the information available, the option to enter the market for cardboard tubes appears to be unattractive. The directors
of BPC should seek alternative performance improvement strategies.

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