面对会计行业如此多的证书,是先考ACCA还是CPA?

发布时间:2020-04-09


面对会计行业如此多的证书,如何抉择,成为很多考生的困惑。很因为精力有限,很多同学总是会在ACCACPA两大热门证书中择其一,那么ACCACPA 这两大证书究竟要怎么选择成了一大难题。51题库考试学习网今天就来和大家讨论一下。

一、CPAACCA地位

CPA在国内的认可程度很高,含金量自然也不容置疑。CPA是毕业后才可以报名参加考试,应届毕业生也可以报名参加考试。

ACCA在国际上存在的时间比较长,而且国际认可度非常高,拥有很多个国家的注册会计师签字权。

二、CPA ACCA的报考要求

符合下列条件的中国公民,可以申请参加注册会计师全国统一考试的专业阶段考试:

1. 具有完全民事行为能力;

2.具有高等专科以上学校毕业学历,或者具有会计或者相关专业中级以上技术职称。

符合下列条件的中国公民,可以申请参加注册会计师全国统一考试综合阶段考试:

1. 具有完全民事行为能力;

2. 已取得财政部注册会计师考试委员会颁发的注册会计师全国统一考试专业阶段考试合格证并且在有效期内。

报名注册ACCA 考试,具备以下条件之一即可:

1. 凡具有教育部承认的大专以上学历,即可报名成为ACCA 的正式学员;

2. 教育部认可的高等院校在校生,顺利完成大一的课程考试,即可报名成为ACCA 的正式学员;

3. 未符合12项报名资格的16周岁以上的申请者,也可以先申请参加FIA基础财务资格考试。在完成基础商业会计、基础管理会计、基础财务会计3门课程,并完成ACCA 基础职业模块,可获得ACCA 商业会计师资格证书,资格证书后可豁免ACCAF1-F3 三门课程的考试,直接进入技能课程的考试。

三、CPA ACCA 的薪资待遇

CPA待遇非常好,在一线城市,考过CPA的应届生一般是8000左右,如果具备1-3年的工作经验,年薪可以达到20万以上,具备5年工作经验,年薪一般都在30-100万左右

ACCA会员的年薪主要在10万至80万之间,远高于一般市场上的财务人员的收入。国际证书会员中26-30岁的会员中主要薪资范围集中在10-30万,起薪都在5万以上。

那么,问题来了,CPAACCA,究竟先考哪个呢?

先考CPA

做审计师,CPA的说服力更大。所以为了早一点入行,先考CPA相当必要。根据ACCA官方规定,拿下CPA后再考ACCA,可以免试前9科,只需要再考5科。这样一来对于考下双证,无疑可以节省大量的时间。CPA是中文证书,先考可以更好地理解会计学知识。

先考ACCA       

ACCA科目比CPA难度略低,对新手更友好。CPA难度较大,通常新手去考CPA所需的时间约为45年。

所以说先考ACCA,在难度上对新手更为友好。并且,在没毕业的时候是没有办法去考CPA 的,此时选择ACCA无疑是你最好的选择,毕业后再去参加CPA 考试,不仅在知识上面有衔接,能够让你更快通过CPA 考试,并且时间也并不冲突。先考ACCA的好处是在拿下几个科目后就能拿着简历去找工作,一边上班一边复习,相对来说可以减少脱产考证的时间。 

 当然,说了这么多,选择权还是在自己的手里,每个人情况不同,做好选择然后一直向前,别辜负想要不断变优秀的自己就好!

好了,以上就是今天分享的内容,如果还想了解更多信息,欢迎来51题库考试学习网留言。


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。

4 At an academic conference, a debate took place on the implementation of corporate governance practices in

developing countries. Professor James West from North America argued that one of the key needs for developing

countries was to implement rigorous systems of corporate governance to underpin investor confidence in businesses

in those countries. If they did not, he warned, there would be no lasting economic growth as potential foreign inward

investors would be discouraged from investing.

In reply, Professor Amy Leroi, herself from a developing country, reported that many developing countries are

discussing these issues at governmental level. One issue, she said, was about whether to adopt a rules-based or a

principles-based approach. She pointed to evidence highlighting a reduced number of small and medium sized initial

public offerings in New York compared to significant growth in London. She suggested that this change could be

attributed to the costs of complying with Sarbanes-Oxley in the United States and that over-regulation would be the

last thing that a developing country would need. She concluded that a principles-based approach, such as in the

United Kingdom, was preferable for developing countries.

Professor Leroi drew attention to an important section of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act to illustrate her point. The key

requirement of that section was to externally report on – and have attested (verified) – internal controls. This was, she

argued, far too ambitious for small and medium companies that tended to dominate the economies of developing

countries.

Professor West countered by saying that whilst Sarbanes-Oxley may have had some problems, it remained the case

that it regulated corporate governance in the ‘largest and most successful economy in the world’. He said that rules

will sometimes be hard to follow but that is no reason to abandon them in favour of what he referred to as ‘softer’

approaches.

(a) There are arguments for both rules and principles-based approaches to corporate governance.

Required:

(i) Describe the essential features of a rules-based approach to corporate governance; (3 marks)

正确答案:
(a) (i) Describe rules-based
In a rules-based jurisdiction, corporate governance provisions are legally binding and enforceable in law.
Non-compliance is punishable by fines or ultimately (in extremis) by delisting and director prosecutions.
There is limited latitude for interpretation of the provisions to match individual circumstances (‘one size fits all’). Some
have described this as a ‘box ticking’ exercise as companies seek to comply despite some provisions applying to their
individual circumstances more than others.
Investor confidence is underpinned by the quality of the legislation rather than the degree of compliance (which will be
total for the most part).

3 (a) Leigh, a public limited company, purchased the whole of the share capital of Hash, a limited company, on 1 June

2006. The whole of the share capital of Hash was formerly owned by the five directors of Hash and under the

terms of the purchase agreement, the five directors were to receive a total of three million ordinary shares of $1

of Leigh on 1 June 2006 (market value $6 million) and a further 5,000 shares per director on 31 May 2007,

if they were still employed by Leigh on that date. All of the directors were still employed by Leigh at 31 May

2007.

Leigh granted and issued fully paid shares to its own employees on 31 May 2007. Normally share options issued

to employees would vest over a three year period, but these shares were given as a bonus because of the

company’s exceptional performance over the period. The shares in Leigh had a market value of $3 million

(one million ordinary shares of $1 at $3 per share) on 31 May 2007 and an average fair value of

$2·5 million (one million ordinary shares of $1 at $2·50 per share) for the year ended 31 May 2007. It is

expected that Leigh’s share price will rise to $6 per share over the next three years. (10 marks)

Required:

Discuss with suitable computations how the above share based transactions should be accounted for in the

financial statements of Leigh for the year ended 31 May 2007.

正确答案:
(a) The shares issued to the management of Hash by Leigh (three million ordinary shares of $1) for the purchase of the company
would not be accounted for under IFRS2 ‘Share-based payment’ but would be dealt with under IFRS3 ‘Business
Combinations’.
The cost of the business combination will be the total of the fair values of the consideration given by the acquirer plus any
attributable cost. In this case the shares of Leigh will be fair valued at $6 million with $3 million being shown as share capital
and $3million as share premium. However, the shares issued as contingent consideration may be accounted for under IFRS2.
The terms of the issuance of shares will need to be examined. Where part of the consideration may be reliant on uncertain
future events, and it is probable that the additional consideration is payable and can be measured reliably, then it is included
in the cost of the business consideration at the acquisition date. However, the question to be answered in the case of the
additional 5,000 shares per director is whether the shares are compensation or part of the purchase price. There is a need
to understand why the acquisition agreement includes a provision for a contingent payment. It is possible that the price paid
initially by Leigh was quite low and, therefore, this then represents a further purchase consideration. However, in this instance
the additional payment is linked to continuing employment and, therefore, it would be argued that because of the link between
the contingent consideration and continuing employment that it represents a compensation arrangement which should be
included within the scope of IFRS2.
Thus as there is a performance condition, (the performance condition will apply as it is not a market condition) the substance
of the agreement is that the shares are compensation, then they will be fair valued at the grant date and not when the shares
vest. Therefore, the share price of $2 per share will be used to give compensation of $50,000 (5 x 5,000 x $2). (Under
IFRS3, fair value is measured at the date the consideration is provided and discounted to presented value. No guidance is
provided on what the appropriate discount rate might be. Thus the fair value used would have been $3 per share at 31 May
2007.) The compensation will be charged to the income statement and included in equity.
The shares issued to the employees of Leigh will be accounted for under IFRS2. The issuance of fully paid shares will be
presumed to relate to past service. The normal vesting period for share options is irrelevant, as is the average fair value of the
shares during the period. The shares would be expensed at a value of $3 million with a corresponding increase in equity.
Goods or services acquired in a share based payment transaction should be recognised when they are received. In the case
of goods then this will be when this occurs. However, it is somewhat more difficult sometimes to determine when services
are received. In a case of goods the vesting date is not really relevant, however, it is highly relevant for employee services. If
shares are issued that vest immediately then there is a presumption that these are a consideration for past employee services.

Under certain circumstances, profits made on transactions between members of a group need to be eliminated from the consolidated financial statements under IFRS.

Which of the following statements about intra-group profits in consolidated financial statements is/are correct?

(i) The profit made by a parent on the sale of goods to a subsidiary is only realised when the subsidiary sells the goods to a third party

(ii) Eliminating intra-group unrealised profits never affects non-controlling interests

(iii) The profit element of goods supplied by the parent to an associate and held in year-end inventory must be eliminated in full

A.(i) only

B.(i) and (ii)

C.(ii) and (iii)

D.(iii) only

正确答案:A

(i) is the only correct elimination required by IFRS.


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。