来看看!对于财务人去快消品行业能做哪些工作?
发布时间:2020-05-21
大家想知道对于财务人去快消品行业能做哪些工作?这也是一个火热的问题,接下来我们一起来看看吧!
如今正直毕业季,很多在校大学生都走出校园,走向了社会。一些会计相关专业的同学会选择四大会计师事务所作为未来职业规划的第一步,还有一些同学会选择券商或者银行等入职。
快速消费品是指使用寿命较短,消费速度较快的消费品,涵盖包装食品饮料、日化用品、烟酒类等。快消企业有很多部门:市场部、销售部、研发部、供应部、财务部、人力资源部、信息技术部。
但是适合会计专业的当属财务部门,快消企业的财务部非常庞大,财务管控的重点是费用控制及绩效分析。
大致可分为品牌财务、销售财务、供应链财务、公司财务等板块。【品牌财务】指按照产品品牌分类,负责某一品牌的战略、上市、预算管理等。
【销售财务】主要对接客户,负责客户生意发展,给出促销及盈利建议。【供应链财务】注重优化供应链,减少生产过程中的损耗,投资新生产线时做好战略规划。
【公司财务】则指公司层面的财务工作,包括会计、税务、财务分析、内部审计、合规等。对于初入财务行业的菜鸟来说,进企业先从基础会计入手,然后晋升到管理会计,最后是到财务管理岗位。
对于ACCA报名考试所需费用要一次交清吗?
不是的,要是一次缴清费用,那你就要荷包大出血了!估计连土都吃不起了,ACCA注册报名时只需交注册费,以后再逐项交纳免试费、年费、考试费。
考生可以随时关注自己的账单,并且注册后未及时上缴年费,会收到催缴邮件,补上就可以了。考试费用根据每次的报考科目和报考时间段来进行缴费。
现在想想,也不太可能让你一次交清,毕竟,很难完全打包票,在ACCA考试13个科目中,没有一个科目挂科,每一科都能一把过,如果没有通过,那么,下一个考季还要继续报名考试,还要递交考试费用。
不同考生注册ACCA时间的不同,导致年费缴纳的时间不同。考试费受考试阶段和ACCA报考时间影响,所以准备报考的考生抓紧时间报名。
报名以后,也比较有压力和动力,推着你每天做好计划,努力复习,积极应考。3.关于ACCA考试报名付款问题有些ACCA考试小伙伴反映,银行卡已划款,但MY ACCA10分钟内尚未入账,或者注册时仍旧提示需要付款。
以上内容分享到这里就告一段落了,如果还想了解更多信息,也可关注51题库考试学习网或进入其他官网探讨咨询吧。
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。
(c) Maxwell Co is audited by Lead & Co, a firm of Chartered Certified Accountants. Leo Sabat has enquired as to
whether your firm would be prepared to conduct a joint audit in cooperation with Lead & Co, on the future
financial statements of Maxwell Co if the acquisition goes ahead. Leo Sabat thinks that this would enable your
firm to improve group audit efficiency, without losing the cumulative experience that Lead & Co has built up while
acting as auditor to Maxwell Co.
Required:
Define ‘joint audit’, and assess the advantages and disadvantages of the audit of Maxwell Co being conducted
on a ‘joint basis’. (7 marks)
(c) A joint audit is when two or more audit firms are jointly responsible for giving the audit opinion. This is very common in a
group situation where the principal auditor is appointed jointly with the auditor of a subsidiary to provide a joint opinion on
the subsidiary’s financial statements. There are several advantages and disadvantages in a joint audit being performed.
Advantages
It can be beneficial in terms of audit efficiency for a joint audit to be conducted, especially in the case of a new subsidiary.
In this case, Lead & Co will have built up an understanding of Maxwell Co’s business, systems and controls, and financial
statement issues. It will be time efficient for the two firms of auditors to work together in order for Chien & Co to build up
knowledge of the new subsidiary. This is a key issue, as Chien & Co need to acquire a thorough understanding of the
subsidiary in order to assess any risks inherent in the company which could impact on the overall assessment of risk within
the group. Lead & Co will be able to provide a good insight into the company, and advise Chien & Co of the key risk areas
they have previously identified.
On the practical side, it seems that Maxwell Co is a significant addition to the group, as it is expected to increase operating
facilities by 40%. If Chien & Co were appointed as sole auditors to Maxwell Co it may be difficult for the audit firm to provide
adequate resources to conduct the audit at the same time as auditing the other group companies. A joint audit will allow
sufficient resources to be allocated to the audit of Maxwell Co, assuring the quality of the opinion provided.
If there is a tight deadline, as is common with the audit of subsidiaries, which should be completed before the group audit
commences, then having access to two firms’ resources should enable the audit to be completed in good time.
The audit should also benefit from an improvement in quality. The two audit firms may have different points of view, and
would be able to discuss contentious issues throughout the audit process. In particular, the newly appointed audit team will
have a ‘fresh pair of eyes’ and be able to offer new insight to matters identified. It should be easier to challenge management
and therefore ensure that the auditors’ position is taken seriously.
Tutorial note: Candidates may have referred to the recent debate over whether joint audits increase competition in the
profession. In particular, joint audits have been proposed as a way for ‘mid tier’ audit firms to break into the market of
auditing large companies and groups, which at the moment is monopolised by the ‘Big 4’. Although this does not answer
the specific question set, credit will be awarded for demonstration of awareness of this topical issue.
Disadvantages
For the client, it is likely to be more expensive to engage two audit firms than to have the audit opinion provided by one firm.
From a cost/benefit point of view there is clearly no point in paying twice for one opinion to be provided. Despite the audit
workload being shared, both firms will have a high cost for being involved in the audit in terms of senior manager and partner
time. These costs will be passed on to the client within the audit fee.
The two audit firms may use very different audit approaches and terminology. This could make it difficult for the audit firms
to work closely together, negating some of the efficiency and cost benefits discussed above. Problems could arise in deciding
which firm’s method to use, for example, to calculate materiality, design and pick samples for audit procedures, or evaluate
controls within the accounting system. It may be impossible to reconcile two different methods and one firm’s methods may
end up dominating the audit process, which then eliminates the benefit of a joint audit being conducted. It could be time
consuming to develop a ‘joint’ audit approach, based on elements of each of the two firms’ methodologies, time which
obviously would not have been spent if a single firm was providing the audit.
There may be problems for the two audit firms to work together harmoniously. Lead & Co may feel that ultimately they will
be replaced by Chien & Co as audit provider, and therefore could be unwilling to offer assistance and help.
Potentially, problems could arise in terms of liability. In the event of litigation, because both firms have provided the audit
opinion, it follows that the firms would be jointly liable. The firms could blame each other for any negligence which was
discovered, making the litigation process more complex than if a single audit firm had provided the opinion. However, it could
be argued that joint liability is not necessarily a drawback, as the firms should both be covered by professional indemnity
insurance.
(c) Briefly describe the principal audit work to be performed in respect of the carrying amount of the following
items in the balance sheet:
(i) development expenditure on the Fox model; (3 marks)
(c) Principal audit work
(i) Development expenditure on the Fox model
■ Agree opening balance, $6·3 million, to prior year working papers.
■ Physically inspect assembly plant/factory where the Fox is being developed and any vehicles so far manufactured
(e.g. for testing).
■ Substantiate costs incurred during the year, for example:
– goods (e.g. components) and services (e.g. consultants) to purchase invoices;
– labour (e.g. design engineers/technicians, mechanics, test drivers) to the payroll analysis;
– overheads (e.g. depreciation of development buildings and equipment, power, consumables) to
management’s calculation of overhead absorption and underlying cost accounts.
■ Review of internal trials/test drive results (e.g. in reports to management and video recordings of events).
■ Reperform. management’s impairment test of development expenditure. In particular recalculate value in use.
Tutorial note: It is highly unlikely that a reasonable estimate of fair value less costs to sell could be made for so
unique an asset.
■ Substantiate the key assumptions made by management in calculating value in use. For example:
– the level of sales expected when the car is launched to advance orders (this may have fallen with the delay
in the launch);
– the discount rate used to Pavia’s cost of capital;
– projected growth in sales to actual sales growth seen last time a new model was launched.
(b) Explain why Oliver might legitimately feel he has a grievance against his manager and identify which aspects
of the formal disciplinary procedure David Morgan did not follow or allow in this case. (9 marks)
Part (b):
Oliver may feel he has a grievance as a consequence of treatment which he perceives as unfair. Proper disciplinary procedures are
essential for harmonious relationships between management and all staff. Oliver may feel that he has been singled out and that
David Morgan does not understand the need for equity in invoking disciplinary procedures.
David Morgan did not follow this procedure. No informal talk took place which might have resolved the problem, preferring to
deliver an oral warning, then moving to a written warning and dismissal. Oliver was not represented and his dismissal is likely to
lead to dissatisfaction with Oliver’s peers.
Oliver must now invoke the correct grievance procedure.
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
- 2020-01-10
- 2020-02-21
- 2020-01-09
- 2021-04-24
- 2020-04-28
- 2020-01-09
- 2020-05-15
- 2020-01-10
- 2021-07-28
- 2020-05-10
- 2020-04-18
- 2020-01-09
- 2020-04-21
- 2020-01-10
- 2020-04-19
- 2020-01-10
- 2020-05-06
- 2020-11-13
- 2020-04-14
- 2020-01-10
- 2020-01-10
- 2020-03-08
- 2020-01-31
- 2020-02-02
- 2020-04-07
- 2020-01-10
- 2020-01-28
- 2019-01-05
- 2019-12-28