2020年重庆市ACCA国际会计师考场规则，可以带计算器！

发布时间：2020-01-09

ACCA考场规则是什么呢？跟国内考试的规定有区别吗？这些问题是许多即将参加2020年3月份ACCA考试的同学们最关心的问题，害怕自己辛辛苦苦准备了几个月之久的考试就因为一个不小心触犯了相关的规定，那就得不偿失了。接下来，51题库考试学习网为大家盘点历年来ACCA考试的相关规定，希望大家引以为戒，小心不要触犯哟~

具体点来说，ACCA考试的考场规则主要分为两部分，一个就是进入考场前，另一个就是进入考场之后 

ACCA考前规则：

1.考生须在开始考试之前30分钟到达ACCA考试地点，以免在出现突发情况。监考老师对考生进行核查考生本人身份证、ACCA注册号。

2.考生可选择开考前进行网上测试(见机考中心通知)，也可选择开考前1小时到达考点，在机考中心进行测试，熟悉机考流程。（建议考生最好选择前者，后者可能出现在机考中心测试的人数太多而不能及时测试导致不熟悉机考流程的情况）

3.考生在考试开始前15分钟经过监考老师批准方可进入考场。逾时不得再进入考场。

4. 考生在到达考场并进行签到后，如因特殊原因需要离场，请主动联系监考人员，不得擅自离开，经过监考老师允许之后才可以离开。

5. 最好不要携带贵重物品前往考场，丢失了后果自负的。

注意：ACCA机考必须带那些东西

首先是自行在官网上打印的准考证其次就是身份证再是可以携带不带有记忆存储功能的计算器。（如考生有携带手机、包包等私人物品，请将其放至监考老师指定区域。）

进入考场后的规则

1.考生进入考场后必须把考试相关书籍材料等放到指定位置，并将手机等通讯设备关闭。考生只允许携带考试规定携带的东西进入考场，例如本人身份证、笔、单功能计算器进入考场，一经发现，按作弊处理。

2.考试开始前，监考人员会宣读考场纪律；考生需要在电脑上输入个人信息，监考人员会核对考生的身份；身份核对后，电脑上会显示出3页考试操作指南，考生仔细阅读，阅读完毕之后，举手向监控人员请示，得到监考人员的允许后才可点击考试科目，开始考试。

3.考试开始时，题目会直接在屏幕上显示，请直接在电脑上输入答案。不能点开电脑里的其他软件

4.考试结束后，需要打印2份考试成绩通知单，自己保留一份，机考中心保留一份。

5.机考中心会在考试结束后上传考试成绩，72小时内成绩会上传到考生的MYACCA成绩记录中。

6.考试费用一旦交付，如因考生自身原因缺考，作弃权处理，不须考虑退款事宜。因此建议各位考生要谨慎报名，毕竟考试费用也是一笔不小的费用。

7.ACCA机考中心保留因不可抗力因素(如网络问题，停电等)调整机考时间或取消考试的权力。出现了以上情况，及时向监考人员反映，他们会为你解决问题。

迟到及提早交卷规定：

在开考后1小时内到达的迟到考生可以入场，但不能补偿考试时间。简单的来说就是即便是晚到1小时，你的考试时间也不会往后延时1小时，交卷铃声响起你同样得交卷。而开考1小时以后到达的考生就算做放弃此次考试，不能入场。

这些考场规则有没有帮助到各位ACCAer们呀？相信大家看了之后或多或少对ACCA考场规则都有了一定的了解，51题库考试学习网提醒大家，认真阅读考场规则，如果和上面所述的规则有一定的出入，各地的相关考场规则以各地的为准，最后51题库考试学习网预祝大家考试顺利上岸~

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。

2 Your audit client, Prescott Co, is a national hotel group with substantial cash resources. Its accounting functions are

well managed and the group accounting policies are rigorously applied. The company’s financial year end is

31 December.

Prescott has been seeking to acquire a construction company for some time in order to bring in-house the building

and refurbishment of hotels and related leisure facilities (e.g. swimming pools, squash courts and restaurants).

Prescott’s management has recently identified Robson Construction Co as a potential target and has urgently requested

that you undertake a limited due diligence review lasting two days next week.

Further to their preliminary talks with Robson’s management, Prescott has provided you with the following brief on

Robson Construction Co:

The chief executive, managing director and finance director are all family members and major shareholders. The

company name has an established reputation for quality constructions.

Due to a recession in the building trade the company has been operating at its overdraft limit for the last 18

months and has been close to breaching debt covenants on several occasions.

Robson’s accounting policies are generally less prudent than those of Prescott (e.g. assets are depreciated over

longer estimated useful lives).

Contract revenue is recognised on the percentage of completion method, measured by reference to costs incurred

to date. Provisions are made for loss-making contracts.

The company’s management team includes a qualified and experienced quantity surveyor. His main

responsibilities include:

(1) supervising quarterly physical counts at major construction sites;

(2) comparing costs to date against quarterly rolling budgets; and

(3) determining profits and losses by contract at each financial year end.

Although much of the labour is provided under subcontracts all construction work is supervised by full-time site

managers.

In August 2005, Robson received a claim that a site on which it built a housing development in 2002 was not

properly drained and is now subsiding. Residents are demanding rectification and claiming damages. Robson

has referred the matter to its lawyers and denied all liability, as the site preparation was subcontracted to Sarwar

Services Co. No provisions have been made in respect of the claims, nor has any disclosure been made.

The auditor’s report on Robson’s financial statements for the year to 30 June 2005 was signed, without

modification, in March 2006.

Required:

(a) Identify and explain the specific matters to be clarified in the terms of engagement for this due diligence

review of Robson Construction Co. (6 marks)

正确答案：
2 PRESCOTT CO
(a) Terms of engagement – matters to be clarified
Tutorial note: This one-off assignment requires a separate letter of engagement. Note that, at this level, a standard list of
contents will earn few, if any, marks. Any ‘ideas list’ must be tailored to generate answer points specific to the due diligence
review of this target company.
■ Objective of the review: for example, to find and report facts relevant to Prescott’s decision whether to acquire Robson.
The terms should confirm whether Prescott’s interest is in acquiring the company (i.e. the share capital) or its trading
assets (say), as this will affect the nature and scope of the review.
Tutorial note: This is implied as Prescott ‘has been seeking to acquire ... to bring building … in-house’.
■ Prescott’s management will be solely responsible for any decision made (e.g. any offer price made to purchase Robson).
■ The nature and scope of the review and any standards/guidelines in accordance with which it will be conducted. That
investigation will consist of enquiry (e.g. of the directors and the quantity surveyor) and analytical procedures (e.g. on
budgeted information and prior period financial statements).
Tutorial note: This is not going to be a review of financial statements. The prior year financial statements have only
recently been audited and financial statements for the year end 30 June 2006 will not be available in time for the
review.
■ The level of assurance will be ‘negative’. That is, that the material subject to review is free of material misstatement. It
should be stated that an audit is not being performed and that an audit opinion will not be expressed.
■ The timeframe. for conducting the investigation (two days next week) and the deadline for reporting the findings.
■ The records, documentation and other information to which access will be unrestricted. This will be the subject of
agreement between Prescott and Robson.
■ A responsibility/liability disclaimer that the engagement cannot be relied upon to disclose errors, illegal acts or other
irregularities (e.g. fraudulent financial reporting or misappropriations of Robson’s assets).
Tutorial note: Third party reliance on the report seems unlikely as Prescott has ‘substantial cash resources’ and may not
need to obtain loan finance.

(b) Donald actually decided to operate as a sole trader. The first year’s results of his business were not as he had

hoped, and he made a trading loss of ￡8,000 in the year to 31 March 2007. However, trading is now improving,

and Donald has sufficient orders to ensure that the business will make profits of at least ￡30,000 in the year to

31 March 2008.

In order to raise funds to support his business over the last 15 months, Donald has sold a painting which was

given to him on the death of his grandmother in January 1998. The probate value of the painting was ￡3,200,

and Donald sold it for ￡8,084 (after deduction of 6% commission costs) in November 2006.

He also sold other assets in the year of assessment 2006/07, realising further chargeable gains of ￡8,775 (after

indexation of ￡249 and taper relief of ￡975).

Required:

(i) Calculate the chargeable gain on the disposal of the painting in November 2006. (4 marks)

正确答案：

 

(b) Assess the benefits of the separation of the roles of chief executive and chairman that Alliya Yongvanich

argued for and explain her belief that ‘accountability to shareholders’ is increased by the separation of these

roles. (12 marks)

正确答案：
(b) Separation of the roles of CEO and chairman
Benefits of separation of roles
The separation of the roles of chief executive and chairman was first provided for in the UK by the 1992 Cadbury provisions
although it has been included in all codes since. Most relevant to the case is the terms of the ICGN clause s.11 and OECD
VI (E) both of which provide for the separation of these roles. In the UK it is covered in the combined code section A2.
The separation of roles offers the benefit that it frees up the chief executive to fully concentrate on the management of the
organisation without the necessity to report to shareholders or otherwise become distracted from his or her executive
responsibilities. The arrangement provides a position (that of chairman) that is expected to represent shareholders’ interests
and that is the point of contact into the company for shareholders. Some codes also require the chairman to represent the
interests of other stakeholders such as employees.
Having two people rather than one at the head of a large organisation removes the risks of ‘unfettered powers’ being
concentrated in a single individual and this is an important safeguard for investors concerned with excessive secrecy or
lack of transparency and accountability. The case of Robert Maxwell is a good illustration of a single dominating
executive chairman operating unchallenged and, in so doing, acting illegally. Having the two roles separated reduces
the risk of a conflict of interest in a single person being responsible for company performance whilst also reporting on
that performance to markets. Finally, the chairman provides a conduit for the concerns of non-executive directors who,
in turn, provide an important external representation of external concerns on boards of directors.
Tutorial note: Reference to codes other than the UK is also acceptable. In all cases, detailed (clause number) knowledge
of code provisions is not required.
Accountability and separation of roles
In terms of the separation of roles assisting in the accountability to shareholders, four points can be made.
The chairman scrutinises the chief executive’s management performance on behalf of the shareholders and will be
involved in approving the design of the chief executive’s reward package. It is the responsibility of the chairman to hold
the chief executive to account on shareholders’ behalfs.
Shareholders have an identified person (chairman) to hold accountable for the performance of their investment. Whilst
day-to-day contact will normally be with the investor relations department (or its equivalent) they can ultimately hold
the chairman to account.
The presence of a separate chairman ensures that a system is in place to ensure NEDs have a person to report to outside the
executive structure. This encourages the freedom of expression of NEDs to the chairman and this, in turn, enables issues to
be raised and acted upon when necessary.
The chairman is legally accountable and, in most cases, an experienced person. He/she can be independent and more
dispassionate because he or she is not intimately involved with day-to-day management issues.

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