2020年ACCA免考的大学都有哪些,本文为你详细介绍!
发布时间:2020-03-14
2020年ACCA免考的大学都有哪些,大家知道吗?想留学的小伙伴们要仔细看了,都是干货满满!
华威大学
华威大学在1960年间为了增加英国大学数量而新建的,建校后就快速发展为英国顶级院校之一,提供一系列广泛的传统课程。
大学设有三所学院:文科学院、理科学院、社会学院。华威是英国地位领先的研究类大学,在最近的教学和研究品质评估中一直得分很高,其中纯数学、计算机科学、历史在研究评分中获5级得分
专业:BSc Accounting and Finance
免考科目:8门(F1-F4,F4-F6,F7F9)
巴斯大学
成立于1966年,无论在学校的建筑外观和发展前景上,大学都非常明确地力争现代化。多年来,巴斯大学始终在独立评审机构编排的英国大学排行榜中名列前茅。
巴斯大学开设的课程有科学、勤务员、管理、教育、现代语言及社会科学。大多数的课程可根据不同行业的需要安排厂校交替的实习课程。
专业:BSc(Hons)Accounting and Finance
MScAccounting and Finance
免考科目:6门(F1-F4F7F9)/5门(F1-F4,F7)
卡迪夫大学
卡迪夫大学又名加迪夫大学(英语:Cardiff
University,威尔士语:Prifysgol Caerdydd)是一所位于英国威尔士卡迪夫凯西公园(Cathays Park)的顶尖大学。
高质量的研究成果使其在全英优秀的城市大学中名列前茅,卡迪夫大学的城市与地区研究,机械制造,工程学,药剂学等12门学科均达到最高的5级标准。
专业:BSc Accounting/Accounting and Finance
免考科目:8门(F1-F4,F5-F6,F8-F9)
牛津布鲁克斯大学
成立于1865年的牛津布鲁克斯大学(Oxford
Brookes University)以其授课和课程的不断创新和高质量而享有国际声誉。其在25年前倡导的模块学位课程现已陆续被新老大学所采用。大学提供以下领域的从预科到本科再到研究生的课程:建筑、艺术、生物和分子学、商业、计算机和数学科学、结构和地球科学、教育、工程、健康护理、饭店管理、人文学、语言、法律、音乐、策划、出版印刷、房地产管理、社会科学。
专业:MSc Accounting
免考科目:9门(F1-F9)
邓迪大学
邓迪大学(University of Dundee)的前身为创建于1881年的圣安德鲁斯大学邓迪学院。邓迪大学从生命科学领域到设计领域在国际上都久享盛誉。
该大学的生命科学、法律、设计专业享有世界级美誉。具有突出研究实力的专业包括生物化学、土木工程、数学、法律、计算机、艺术设计、会计金融专业。
专业:MSC Professional Accountancy
免考科目:9门(F1-F9)
以上就是今天51题库考试学习网为大家带来的全部内容了,如果大家还想了解更多关于考试的资讯,请关注51题库考试学习网,51题库考试学习网祝您生活愉快!
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) Compare and contrast Gray, Owen and Adams’s ‘pristine capitalist’ position with the ‘social contractarian’
position. Explain how these positions would affect responses to stakeholder concerns in the new stadium
project. (8 marks)
The finance director of Blod Co, Uma Thorton, has requested that your firm type the financial statements in the form
to be presented to shareholders at the forthcoming company general meeting. Uma has also commented that the
previous auditors did not use a liability disclaimer in their audit report, and would like more information about the use
of liability disclaimer paragraphs.
Required:
(b) Discuss the ethical issues raised by the request for your firm to type the financial statements of Blod Co.
(3 marks)
(b) It is not uncommon for audit firms to word process and typeset the financial statements of their clients, especially where the
client is a relatively small entity, which may lack the resources and skills to perform. this task. It is not prohibited by ethical
standards.
However, there could be a perceived threat to independence, with risk magnified in the case of Blod Co, which is a listed
company. The auditors could be perceived to be involved with the preparation of the financial statements of a listed client
company, which is prohibited by ethical standards. IFAC’s Code of Ethics for Professional Accountants states that for a listed
client, the audit firm should not be involved with the preparation of financial statements, which would create a self-review
threat so severe that safeguards could not reduce the threat to an acceptable level. Although the typing of financial statements
itself is not prohibited by ethical guidance, the risk is that providing such a service could be perceived to be an element of
the preparation of the financial statements.
It is possible that during the process of typing the financial statements, decisions and judgments would be made. This could
be perceived as making management decisions in relation to the financial statements, a clear breach of independence.
Therefore to eliminate any risk exposure, the prudent decision would be not to type the financial statements, ensuring that
Blod Co appreciates the ethical problems that this would cause.
Tutorial note: This is an area not specifically covered by ethical guides, where different audit firms may have different views
on whether it is acceptable to provide a typing service for the financial statements of their clients. Credit will be awarded for
sensible discussion of the issues raised bearing in mind other options for the audit firm, for example, it could be argued that
it is acceptable to offer the typing service provided that it is performed by people independent of the audit team, and that
the matter has been discussed with the audit committee/those charged with governance
3 Mary Hobbes joined the board of Rosh and Company, a large retailer, as finance director earlier this year. Whilst she
was glad to have finally been given the chance to become finance director after several years as a financial
accountant, she also quickly realised that the new appointment would offer her a lot of challenges. In the first board
meeting, she realised that not only was she the only woman but she was also the youngest by many years.
Rosh was established almost 100 years ago. Members of the Rosh family have occupied senior board positions since
the outset and even after the company’s flotation 20 years ago a member of the Rosh family has either been executive
chairman or chief executive. The current longstanding chairman, Timothy Rosh, has already prepared his slightly
younger brother, Geoffrey (also a longstanding member of the board) to succeed him in two years’ time when he plans
to retire. The Rosh family, who still own 40% of the shares, consider it their right to occupy the most senior positions
in the company so have never been very active in external recruitment. They only appointed Mary because they felt
they needed a qualified accountant on the board to deal with changes in international financial reporting standards.
Several former executive members have been recruited as non-executives immediately after they retired from full-time
service. A recent death, however, has reduced the number of non-executive directors to two. These sit alongside an
executive board of seven that, apart from Mary, have all been in post for over ten years.
Mary noted that board meetings very rarely contain any significant discussion of strategy and never involve any debate
or disagreement. When she asked why this was, she was told that the directors had all known each other for so long
that they knew how each other thought. All of the other directors came from similar backgrounds, she was told, and
had worked for the company for so long that they all knew what was ‘best’ for the company in any given situation.
Mary observed that notes on strategy were not presented at board meetings and she asked Timothy Rosh whether the
existing board was fully equipped to formulate strategy in the changing world of retailing. She did not receive a reply.
Required:
(a) Explain ‘agency’ in the context of corporate governance and criticise the governance arrangements of Rosh
and Company. (12 marks)
(a) Defining and explaining agency
Agency is defined in relation to a principal. A principal appoints an agent to act on his or her behalf. In the case of corporate
governance, the principal is a shareholder in a joint stock company and the agents (that have an agency relationship with
principals) are the directors. The directors remain accountable to the principals for the stewardship of their investment in the
company. In the case of Rosh, 60% of the shares are owned by shareholders external to the Rosh family and the board has
agency responsibility to those shareholders.
Criticisms of Rosh’s CG arrangements
The corporate governance arrangements at Rosh and Company are far from ideal. Five points can be made based on the
evidence in the case.
There are several issues associated with the non-executive directors (NEDs) at Rosh. It is doubtful whether two NEDs are
enough to bring sufficient scrutiny to the executive board. Some corporate governance codes require half of the board of larger
companies to be non-executive and Rosh would clearly be in breach of such a requirement. Perhaps of equal concern, there
is significant doubt over the independence of the current NEDs as they were recruited from retired executive members of the
board and presumably have relationships with existing executives going back many years. Some corporate governance codes
(such as the UK Combined Code) specify that NEDs should not have worked for the company within the last five years. Again,
Rosh would be in breach of this provision.
Succession planning for senior positions in the company seems to be based on Rosh family membership rather than any
meritocratic approach to appointments (there doesn’t appear to be a nominations committee). Whilst this may have been
acceptable before the flotation when the Rosh family owned all of the shares, the flotation introduced an important need for
external scrutiny of this arrangement. The lack of NED independence makes this difficult.
There is a poor (very narrow) diversity of backgrounds among board members. Whilst diversity can bring increased conflict,
it is generally assumed that it can also stimulate discussion and debate that is often helpful.
There is a somewhat entrenched executive board and Mary is the first new appointment to the board in many years (and is
the first woman). Whilst experience is very important on a board, the appointment of new members, in addition to seeding
the board with talent for the future, can also bring fresh ideas and helpful scrutiny of existing policies.
There is no discussion of strategy and there is evidence of a lack of preparation of strategic notes to the board. The assumption
seems to be that the ‘best’ option is obvious and so there is no need for discussion and debate. Procedures for preparing
briefing notes on strategy for board meetings appear to be absent. Most corporate governance codes place the discussion and
setting of strategy as a high priority for boards and Rosh would be in breach of such a provision.
There is no evidence of training for Mary to facilitate her introduction into the organisation and its systems. Thorough training
of new members and ongoing professional development of existing members is an important component of good governance.
The following information is relevant for questions 9 and 10
A company’s draft financial statements for 2005 showed a profit of $630,000. However, the trial balance did not agree,
and a suspense account appeared in the company’s draft balance sheet.
Subsequent checking revealed the following errors:
(1) The cost of an item of plant $48,000 had been entered in the cash book and in the plant account as $4,800.
Depreciation at the rate of 10% per year ($480) had been charged.
(2) Bank charges of $440 appeared in the bank statement in December 2005 but had not been entered in the
company’s records.
(3) One of the directors of the company paid $800 due to a supplier in the company’s payables ledger by a personal
cheque. The bookkeeper recorded a debit in the supplier’s ledger account but did not complete the double entry
for the transaction. (The company does not maintain a payables ledger control account).
(4) The payments side of the cash book had been understated by $10,000.
9 Which of the above items would require an entry to the suspense account in correcting them?
A All four items
B 3 and 4 only
C 2 and 3 only
D 1, 2 and 4 only
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。
- 2020-03-28
- 2020-04-09
- 2020-04-01
- 2020-05-14
- 2020-01-09
- 2020-01-09
- 2020-04-03
- 2020-05-10
- 2020-02-28
- 2020-04-07
- 2020-04-02
- 2020-01-09
- 2020-01-30
- 2020-02-15
- 2020-05-15
- 2020-01-09
- 2020-09-04
- 2020-03-12
- 2020-03-14
- 2020-04-19
- 2019-07-19
- 2019-12-28
- 2019-07-19
- 2019-07-19
- 2020-03-14
- 2020-05-14
- 2020-05-08
- 2020-05-10
- 2020-01-09
- 2020-01-09