带你了解ACCA持证会员没有签字权

发布时间：2020-01-05

ACCA持证会员没有签字权？你知道吗？很多的小伙伴都还不知道，下面就跟着51题库考试学习网一起来看看吧！

中国注册会计师CPA在国内的地位不言而喻，因为它具有国内最高的审计签字权。因此有人会说，除了CPA国内没有一个证书是有用的。真的是这样吗？其实，不然。在国内除了CPA，ACCA资格同样深受欢迎。那么，ACCA有没有签字权呢？

签字权其实就是注册会计师在审计报告上签字的权利，不具备签字权的会计师是没有资格在审计报告上签字的，这是属于注册会计师的专属标志和权利，在国内有且只有国内的注册会计师才有这一权利。那么，ACCA证书是不是就在国内毫无用处？

ACCA是英国的会计师资格，受国家法律法规的限制，在中国自然没有签字权。当你考过ACCA的FR之后，就可以在英联邦国家获得签字权。就目前的发展来说，ACCA在国际上是学员最多，发展最快的会计师资格，它在全球180个国家通用，并且在全球拥有近8000个大型企业雇主。在国内的各大投资银行/咨询/金融等企业当中，都会优先考虑ACCA持证会员。

因此，ACCA没有签字权这件事，要看在学员所在的地区。

成绩查询：

ACCA成绩查询方式

1、电子邮件(e-mail)—— 您可在myACCA内选择通过email接收考试成绩。

2、在线查看考试成绩—所有在ACCA全球网站上登记的考生都可在线查看自己的考试成绩。

3、手机短信——可以在myACCA中设置短信接收考试成绩。

考试规则：

FIA不能参加技能阶段的考试，必须先转为正式ACCA学员。

不可以跨阶段报考，但在一个阶段中可以选择任意顺序报考。（ACCA建议在一个阶段中也按照顺序报考）

前两个阶段只有机试。

前9门考试成绩有效期不限；高级阶段考试年限为7年，从通过第一门专业阶段考试之日算起。

学位申请：

ACCA在2000年和牛津布鲁克斯大学建立了合作关系，使学员在学习ACCA专业资格的同时，有机会获得该校应用会计的理学学士学位。学员在通过ACCA前九门课程的考试后，向该校提交一份研究和分析报告及主要能力陈述书供校方评估，就有机会获得上述学士学位。

如果学员FR、AA和FM这三门获得了免试，他们就不能申请该学位。在此情况下，为了获得该学位，学员可以放弃这三门的免试，参加并通过考试。另外，学员还必须达到英语方面的最低要求，如CET六级、TOFEL500分、GMAT550分、IELTS6.5分。且必须在通过FR、AA、FM任意一门前提交英语能力证明。

以上就是关于考试的全部内容了，如果想要了解更多关于考试的信息，大家可以关注51题库考试学习网哦！

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。

1 The scientists in the research laboratories of Swan Hill Company (SHC, a public listed company) recently made a very

important discovery about the process that manufactured its major product. The scientific director, Dr Sonja Rainbow,

informed the board that the breakthrough was called the ‘sink method’. She explained that the sink method would

enable SHC to produce its major product at a lower unit cost and in much higher volumes than the current process.

It would also produce lower unit environmental emissions and would substantially improve product quality compared

to its current process and indeed compared to all of the other competitors in the industry.

SHC currently has 30% of the global market with its nearest competitor having 25% and the other twelve producers

sharing the remainder. The company, based in the town of Swan Hill, has a paternalistic management approach and

has always valued its relationship with the local community. Its website says that SHC has always sought to maximise

the benefit to the workforce and community in all of its business decisions and feels a great sense of loyalty to the

Swan Hill locality which is where it started in 1900 and has been based ever since.

As the board considered the implications of the discovery of the sink method, chief executive Nelson Cobar asked

whether Sonja Rainbow was certain that SHC was the only company in the industry that had made the discovery and

she said that she was. She also said that she was certain that the competitors were ‘some years’ behind SHC in their

research.

It quickly became clear that the discovery of the sink method was so important and far reaching that it had the

potential to give SHC an unassailable competitive advantage in its industry. Chief executive Nelson Cobar told board

colleagues that they should clearly understand that the discovery had the potential to put all of SHC’s competitors out

of business and make SHC the single global supplier. He said that as the board considered the options, members

should bear in mind the seriousness of the implications upon the rest of the industry.

Mr Cobar said there were two strategic options. Option one was to press ahead with the huge investment of new plant

necessary to introduce the sink method into the factory whilst, as far as possible, keeping the nature of the sink

technology secret from competitors (the ‘secrecy option’). A patent disclosing the nature of the technology would not

be filed so as to keep the technology secret within SHC. Option two was to file a patent and then offer the use of the

discovery to competitors under a licensing arrangement where SHC would receive substantial royalties for the twentyyear

legal lifetime of the patent (the ‘licensing option’). This would also involve new investment but at a slower pace

in line with competitors. The licence contract would, Mr Cobar explained, include an ‘improvement sharing’

requirement where licensees would be required to inform. SHC of any improvements discovered that made the sink

method more efficient or effective.

The sales director, Edwin Kiama, argued strongly in favour of the secrecy option. He said that the board owed it to

SHC’s shareholders to take the option that would maximise shareholder value. He argued that business strategy was

all about gaining competitive advantage and this was a chance to do exactly that. Accordingly, he argued, the sink

method should not be licensed to competitors and should be pursued as fast as possible. The operations director said

that to gain the full benefits of the sink method with either option would require a complete refitting of the factory and

the largest capital investment that SHC had ever undertaken.

The financial director, Sean Nyngan, advised the board that pressing ahead with investment under the secrecy option

was not without risks. First, he said, he would have to finance the investment, probably initially through debt, and

second, there were risks associated with any large investment. He also informed the board that the licensing option

would, over many years, involve the inflow of ‘massive’ funds in royalty payments from competitors using the SHC’s

patented sink method. By pursuing the licensing option, Sean Nyngan said that they could retain their market

leadership in the short term without incurring risk, whilst increasing their industry dominance in the future through

careful investment of the royalty payments.

The non-executive chairman, Alison Manilla, said that she was looking at the issue from an ethical perspective. She

asked whether SHC had the right, even if it had the ability, to put competitors out of business.

Required:

(a) Assess the secrecy option using Tucker’s model for decision-making. (10 marks)

正确答案：
(a) Tucker’s framework
Is the decision:
Profitable? For SHC, the answer to this question is yes. Profits would potentially be substantially increased by the loss of all
of its competitors and the emergence of SHC, in the short to medium term at least, as a near monopolist.
Legal? The secrecy option poses no legal problems as it is a part of normal competitive behaviour in industries. In some
jurisdictions, legislation forbids monopolies existing in some industries but there is no indication from the case that this
restriction applies to Swan Hill Company.
Fair? The fairness of the secrecy option is a moral judgment. It is probably fair when judged from the perspective of SHC’s
shareholders but the question is the extent to which it is fair to the employees and shareholders of SHC’s competitors.
Right? Again, a question of ethical perspective. Is it right to pursue the subjugation of competitors and the domination of an
industry regardless of the consequences to competitors? The secrecy option may be of the most benefit to the local community
of Swan Hill that the company has traditionally valued.
Sustainable or environmentally sound? The case says that the sink method emits at a lower rate per unit of output than the
existing process but this has little to do with the secrecy option as the rates of emissions would apply if SHC licensed the
process. This is also an argument for the licensing option, however, as environmental emissions would be lower if other
competitors switched to the sink method as well. There may be environmental implications in decommissioning the old plant
to make way for the new sink method investment.

(d) Prepare the statement for Mr Markovnikoff to read out at the AGM. The statement you construct should

contain the following.

(i) A definition and brief explanation of ‘sustainable development’; (3 marks)

正确答案：
(d) Chairman’s statement at AGM
Thank you for coming to the annual general meeting of Rowlands & Mendeleev. I would like to make a statement in response
to the concerns that a number of our investors have made in respect to our appointment as the principal contractor for the
prestigious and internationally important Giant Dam Project. We are very pleased and honoured to have won the contract but
as several have observed, this does leave us in a position of having a number of issues and risks to manage.
As a project with obvious environmental implications, the board and I wish to reassure investors that we are aware of these
implications and have taken them into account in our overall assessment of risks associated with the project.
(i) A definition of ‘sustainable development’
One investor asked if we could explain the sustainability issues and I begin with addressing that issue. According to the
well-established Brundtland definition, sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present
without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.
This definition has implications for energy, land use, natural resources and waste emissions. In a sustainable
development, all of these should be consumed or produced at the same rate they can be renewed or absorbed so as to
prevent leaving future generations with an unwanted legacy of today’s economic activity. We believe that our involvement
in the Giant Dam Project has implications for environmental sustainability and it is to these matters that I now turn.
Tutorial note: other relevant definitions of sustainability will be equally acceptable.

(c) Using the information contained in Appendix 1.2, compare the performance of HLP and MAS incorporating

relevant percentage and ratio statistics under the following headings:

(i) Competitiveness; (5 marks)

正确答案：

4 The International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) has begun a joint project to revisit its conceptual framework for

financial accounting and reporting. The goals of the project are to build on the existing frameworks and converge them

into a common framework.

Required:

(a) Discuss why there is a need to develop an agreed international conceptual framework and the extent to which

an agreed international conceptual framework can be used to resolve practical accounting issues.

(13 marks)

正确答案：
(a) The IASB wish their standards to be ‘principles-based’ and in order for this to be the case, the standards must be based on
fundamental concepts. These concepts need to constitute a framework which is sound, comprehensive and internally
consistent. Without agreement on a framework, standard setting is based upon the personal conceptual frameworks of the
individual standard setters which may change as the membership of the body changes and results in standards that are not
consistent with each other. Such a framework is designed not only to assist standard setters, but also preparers of financial
statements, auditors and users.
A common goal of the IASB is to converge their standards with national standard setters. The IASB will encounter difficulties
converging their standards if decisions are based on different frameworks. The IASB has been pursuing a number of projects
that are aimed at achieving short term convergence on certain issues with national standard setters as well as major projects
with them. Convergence will be difficult if there is no consistency in the underlying framework being used.
Frameworks differ in their authoritative status. The IASB’s Framework requires management to expressly consider the
Framework if no standard or interpretation specifically applies or deals with a similar and related issue. However, certain
frameworks have a lower standing. For example, entities are not required to consider the concepts embodied in certain
national frameworks in preparing financial statements. Thus the development of an agreed framework would eliminate
differences in the authoritative standing of conceptual frameworks and lead to greater consistency in financial statements
internationally.
The existing concepts within most frameworks are quite similar. However, these concepts need revising to reflect changes in
markets, business practices and the economic environment since the concepts were developed. The existing frameworks need
developing to reflect these changes and to fill gaps in the frameworks. For example, the IASB’s Framework does not contain
a definition of the reporting entity. An agreed international framework could deal with this problem, especially if priority was
given to the issues likely to give short-term standard setting benefits.
Many standard setting bodies attempted initially to resolve accounting and reporting problems by developing accounting
standards without an accepted theoretical frame. of reference. The result has been inconsistency in the development of
standards both nationally and internationally. The frameworks were developed when several of their current standards were
in existence. In the absence of an agreed conceptual framework the same theoretical issues are revisited on several occasions
by standard setters. The result is inconsistencies and incompatible concepts. Examples of this are substance over form. and
matching versus prudence. Some standard setters such as the IASB permit two methods of accounting for the same set of
circumstances. An example is the accounting for joint ventures where the equity method and proportionate consolidation are
allowed.
Additionally there have been differences in the way that standard setters have practically used the principles in the framework.
Some national standard setters have produced a large number of highly detailed accounting rules with less emphasis on
general principles. A robust framework might reduce the need for detailed rules although some companies operate in a
different legal and statutory context than other entities. It is important that a framework must result in standards that account
appropriately for actual business practice.
An agreed framework will not solve all accounting issues, nor will it obviate the need for judgement to be exercised in resolving
accounting issues. It can provide a framework within which those judgements can be made.
A framework provides standard setters with both a foundation for setting standards, and concepts to use as tools for resolving
accounting and reporting issues. A framework provides a basic reasoning on which to consider the merits of alternatives. It
does not provide all the answers, but narrows the range of alternatives to be considered by eliminating some that are
inconsistent with it. It, thereby, contributes to greater efficiency in the standard setting process by avoiding the necessity of
having to redebate fundamental issues and facilitates any debate about specific technical issues. A framework should also
reduce political pressures in making accounting judgements. The use of a framework reduces the influence of personal biases
in accounting decisions.
However, concepts statements are by their nature very general and theoretical in their wording, which leads to alternative
conclusions being drawn. Whilst individual standards should be consistent with the Framework, in the absence of a specific
standard, it does not follow that concepts will provide practical solutions. IAS8 ‘Accounting Policies, Changes in Accounting
Estimates and Errors’ sets out a hierarchy of authoritative guidance that should be considered in the absence of a standard.
In this case, management can use its judgement in developing and applying an accounting policy, albeit by considering the
IASB framework, but can also use accounting standards issued by other bodies. Thus an international framework may nottotally provide solutions to practical accounting problems.

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