不清楚怎么在网上报名acca考试,那就来看看本篇文章内容吧!
发布时间:2020-04-29
要想报考ACCA,需要先注册成为ACCA学员。注册ACCA时,可以通过ACCA官网完成在线注册报名,全程只需10分钟便可完成整个在线注册申请流程并通过信用卡在线交纳注册费用,ACCA将在15个工作日内处理您的注册申请。接下来,跟随51题库考试学习网看看具体申请步骤吧。
中国学生ACCA官网申请步骤
1.请登陆注册网站,点击register
online for the ACCA Qualification。
2.选择ACCA
Qualification之后,点击Next。
3.如果以前没有注册过ACCA
Professional Examination Route (PER), 请选择No,否则选Yes, 点击Next。
4.选择所在国家,ACCA跟所列的国家有Joint Scheme,中国不包括在内,点击NEXT。
5.选择的Title, 在Surname or Family name:
一栏填写姓名的拼音,姓在前,空一格后填名字, 例如:Zhang Xiaoming, 在Date of Birth一栏选择出生日期,Gender一栏选择性别,Nationality
一栏选择Chinese, 点击Next。
6.通信地址务必写清楚,除非您知道准确的、正规的英文地址翻译,否则请按由小到大的顺序填写。
7.根据的情况选择的状态,选项包括在职、无业或在校生。如果不想透露的雇主的地址,请选择 no employer address, ACCA要求学员每年做一次工作经验的报告,如果不能进行网上交报告,选择 No Internet Access, 点击 next。
8.如果您有毕业证/ 学位证/ 中国注册会计师全科合格证或执业证/ 英文水平证明(CET-6,TOEFL 500, GMAT 550, IELTS 6),请按要求填写。
9.免考科目可以不选,点击Next。
10.根据的个人情况选择,依次为:不申请免试的学员选择ACCA Qualification without exemptions,申请免试的学员选择ACCA Qualification with exemptions, 成人注册方式的选择Mature Student Entry。之后,点击Next。
11.Tax/Law Variant:ACCA灵活的为不同国家和地区的学员设置了40多种当地法律和税务的试卷。中国学员可以选考英国(English)或中国(China)的法律和税务试卷。
12.如果不申请Oxford
Brookes 大学的学士学位,请选择Do not include me in the CCA/Oxford
Brookes University Programme,点击Next。
13. 如果有什么健康问题会影响的学习,请,否则点击Next。
14.如果曾经加入过ACCA的其他项目,请输入的客户号码,否则点击Next。
15. 输入的email地址,并进行如下选择,注:(4选1)
不希望收到电子邮件
希望收到一对一的回复性电子邮件
希望收到关于ACCA信息电子邮件
愿意将E-mail地址给予ACCA
所认可的第三方,并获取更多信息,E-Client 选择,如果选择该项,ACCA会在的网站个人信息处看到各种ACCA的更新信息。如果不希望收到CD Rom, 而是希望收到纸质的学员手册,请选择,点击Next。
16.如果同意,ACCA会把的信息透露给现在或将来的雇主,培训机构等,同意请选择I consent to ACCA giving out this information, 如果愿意ACCA把的名字放在毕业生名单中公布,请选择If you wish you name
and details of examination passes to be published on the Affiliate list, please
indicate your express consent。
17.请选择通过什么方式了解到的ACCA:广告、ACCA出版物、同事、学校、雇主、朋友。点击Next。
18.Ethnic Origin,选择Asian
Chinese, 点击Next。
19.付款方式:
(1) 用汇票支付,请选择Crossed
GBP cheque or bank draft drawn on a UK bank(2) 用国际信用卡支付,请选择相应的信用卡名称,点击Next。
20.出现一页总结性的信息页面,仔细核对所填信息是否无误,然后点击Next。
21.仔细阅读Declaration后,打“ü”,点击submit,打印网上注册确认函(pdf文件)。
好的,以上就是今天51题库考试学习网为大家分享的全部内容,想了解更多内容,敬请关注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。
(b) Briefly describe the way in which a ‘person specification’ differs from a ‘job description’. (3 marks)
Part (b):
The difference between a person specification and a job description is that a person specification sets out the qualities of an ideal
candidate whereas a job description defines the duties and responsibilities of the job.
In January 2008 Arti entered in a contractual agreement with Bee Ltd to write a study manual for an international accountancy body’s award. The manual was to cover the period from September 2008 till June 2009, and it was a term of the contract that the text be supplied by 30 June 2008 so that it could be printed in time for September. By 30 May, Arti had not yet started on the text and indeed he had written to Bee Ltd stating that he was too busy to write the text.
Bee Ltd was extremely perturbed by the news, especially as it had acquired the contract to supply all of the
accountancy body’s study manuals and had already incurred extensive preliminary expenses in relation to the publication of the new manual.
Required:
In the context of the law of contract, advise Bee Ltd whether they can take any action against Arti.
(10 marks)
The essential issues to be disentangled from the problem scenario relate to breach of contract and the remedies available for such breach.
There seems to be no doubt that there is a contractual agreement between Arti and Bee Ltd. Normally breach of a contract occurs where one of the parties to the agreement fails to comply, either completely or satisfactorily, with their obligations under it. However, such a definition does not appear to apply in this case as the time has not yet come when Arti has to produce the text. He has merely indicated that he has no intention of doing so. This is an example of the operation of the doctrine of anticipatory breach.
This arises precisely where one party, prior to the actual due date of performance, demonstrates an intention not to perform. their contractual obligations. The intention not to fulfil the contract can be either express or implied.
Express anticipatory breach occurs where a party actually states that they will not perform. their contractual obligations (Hochster v De La Tour (1853)). Implied anticipatory breach occurs where a party carries out some act which makes performance impossible
Omnium Enterprises v Sutherland (1919)).
When anticipatory breach takes place the innocent party can sue for damages immediately on receipt of the notification of the other party’s intention to repudiate the contract, without waiting for the actual contractual date of performance as in Hochster v De La Tour. Alternatively, they can wait until the actual time for performance before taking action. In the latter instance, they are entitled to make preparations for performance, and claim the agreed contract price (White and Carter (Councils) v McGregor (1961)).
It would appear that Arti’s action is clearly an instance of express anticipatory breach and that Bee Ltd has the right either to accept the repudiation immediately or affirm the contract and take action against Arti at the time for performance (Vitol SA v Norelf Ltd (1996)). In any event Arti is bound to complete his contractual promise or suffer the consequences of his breach of contract.
Remedies for breach of contract
(i) Specific performance It will sometimes suit a party to break their contractual obligations, even if they have to pay damages. In such circumstances the court can make an order for specific performance to require the party in breach to complete their part of the contract. However, as specific performance is not available in respect of contracts of employment or personal service Arti cannot be legally required to write the book for Bee Ltd (Ryan v Mutual Tontine Westminster Chambers Association (1893)). This means that the only remedy against Arti lies in the award of damages.
(ii) Damages A breach of contract will result in the innocent party being able to sue for damages.
Bee Ltd, therefore, can sue Bob for damages, but the important issue relates to the extent of such damages.
The estimation of what damages are to be paid by a party in breach of contract can be divided into two parts: remoteness and measure.
Remoteness of damage
The rule in Hadley v Baxendale (1845) states that damages will only be awarded in respect of losses which arise naturally, or which both parties may reasonably be supposed to have contemplated when the contract was made, as a probable result of its breach.
The effect of the first part of the rule in Hadley v Baxendale is that the party in breach is deemed to expect the normal consequences of the breach, whether they actually expected them or not. Under the second part of the rule, however, the party in breach can only be held liable for abnormal consequences where they have actual knowledge that the abnormal consequences might follow (Victoria Laundry Ltd v Newham Industries Ltd (1949)).
Measure of damages
Damages in contract are intended to compensate an injured party for any financial loss sustained as a consequence of another party’s breach. The object is not to punish the party in breach, so the amount of damages awarded can never be greater than the actual loss suffered. The aim is to put the injured party in the same position they would have been in had the contract been properly performed. In order to achieve this end the claimant is placed under a duty to mitigate losses. This means that the injured party has to take all reasonable steps to minimise their loss (Payzu v Saunders (1919)). Although such a duty did not appear to apply in relation to anticipatory breach as decided in White and Carter (Councils) v McGregor (1961)(above).
Applying these rules to the fact situation in the problem it is evident that as Arti has effected an anticipatory breach of his contract with Bee Ltd he will be liable to them for damages suffered as a consequence, if indeed they suffer damage as a result of his breach. As Bee Ltd will be under a duty to mitigate their losses, they will have to commit their best endeavours to find someone else to produce the required text on time. If they can do so at no further cost then they would suffer no loss, but any additional costs in producing the text will have to be borne by Arti.
However, if Bee Ltd is unable to produce the required text on time the situation becomes more complicated.
(i) As regards the profits from the contract to supply the accountancy body with all its text, the issue would be as to whether this was normal profit or amounted to an unexpected gain, as it was not part of Bee Ltd’s normal market when the contract was signed. If Victoria Laundry Ltd v Newham Industries Ltd were to be applied it is unlikely that Bee Ltd would be able to claim that loss of profit from Arti. However, it is equally plausible that the contract was an ordinary commercial one and that Arti would have to recompense Bee Ltd for any losses suffered from its failure to complete contractual performance.
(ii) As for the extensive preliminary expenses Arti would certainly be liable for them, as long as they were in the ordinary course of Bee Ltd’s business and were not excessive (Anglia Television v Reed (1972)).
(c) Assuming that she will survive until July 2009, advise on the lifetime inheritance tax (IHT) planning
measures that could be undertaken by Debbie, quantifying the savings that can be made. (7 marks)
For this question you should assume that the rates and allowances for 2004/05 apply throughout.
(c) Debbie survives until July 2009
Debbie should consider giving away some of her assets to her children, while ensuring that she still has enough to live on.
Such gifts would be categorised as PETs. Although Debbie will not survive seven years (at which point the gifts would fall out
of Debbie’s estate for IHT purposes), taper relief will reduce the amount chargeable to IHT. If gifts were made prior to July
2005, 40% taper relief would be available.
It is important to remember that Debbie’s annual exemptions will reduce the value of any PET when assets are gifted. Debbie
has not used her annual exemption for the last two years, and so she can gift £6,000 (2 x £3,000) in the current tax year
as well as £3,000 per year in future tax years. Debbie could therefore give away £18,000, saving tax of £7,200 (£18,000
x 40%). Debbie can also make small exempt gifts of up to £250 per donee per year.
Debbie should consider making gifts to Allison’s children instead of Allison (using, for example, an accumulation &
maintenance trust). This would ensure that the gifts were excluded from Allison’s estate.
It does not make sense for Debbie to gift shares in Dee Limited, as these qualify for full business property relief and therefore
are not subject to IHT.
As Andrew is shortly to be married, Debbie could give up to £5,000 in consideration of his marriage. This would save £2,000
in IHT.
Expenditure out of normal income is also exempt from IHT. This is where the transferor is left with sufficient income to
maintain his/her usual standard of living. Broadly, you need to demonstrate evidence of a prior commitment, or a settled
pattern of expenditure.
If substantial gifts are made, the donees would be advised to consider taking out insurance policies on Debbie’s life to cover
the potential tax liabilities that may arise on PETs in the event of her early death.
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。
- 2020-01-10
- 2020-01-08
- 2020-04-16
- 2020-03-19
- 2020-01-09
- 2020-04-16
- 2020-01-10
- 2020-01-10
- 2020-01-08
- 2020-02-11
- 2020-01-09
- 2020-01-10
- 2020-01-10
- 2020-01-08
- 2020-04-16
- 2020-03-05
- 2020-05-16
- 2020-04-16
- 2019-12-28
- 2020-04-28
- 2020-03-04
- 2020-05-20
- 2021-09-12
- 2020-01-09
- 2020-01-10
- 2020-04-17
- 2020-03-19
- 2020-01-09
- 2020-03-05
- 2021-08-29