来看看关于ACCA认可培训机构介绍有哪些？赶紧了解下！

发布时间：2020-05-20


现如今许多考生正在备考ACCA，那么来看看关于ACCA认可培训机构介绍有哪些？相信有许多考生想要知道的，接下来我们一起看看吧！

对于ACCA“认可培训机构项目”是对业内领先的考试培训机构为ACCA学员提供的优质培训和有力支持给予正式承认。

ACCA与认可培训机构通过这一平台实现互惠互利，为全球学员提供高效、创新的培训课程，以及一流的支持。并且与培训机构的关系是学员体系取得成功的基础。

无论学员身在何处，优质的培训都是帮助他们顺利通过考试的关键因素。 凡成为ACCA认可培训机构，均能满足我们所设定的绩效目标，代表了ACCA培训课程及考试辅导领域的全球最佳做法。 

对于“认可培训机构项目”旨在：·   对教学质量最高的培训机构给予承认。获认可机构在帮助学生顺利通过ACCA专业资格及基础阶段考试方面均取得不俗成绩。·   为培训机构提供支持，为学生开辟成功的途径。

级别认可分为三个级别：·   

 白银级认可：授予新开设的培训机构，或者尚未达到黄金级认可标准的培训机构·。

黄金级认可：

授予提供ACCA所有相关培训的机构。获得黄金级认可，培训机构需在各方面满足一系列严苛的绩效标准。

  白金级认可：仅授予提供ACCA专业资格培训的机构。白金级认可培训机构除达到黄金级认可的标准，还必须在最佳做法标准上合格，并满足具体的通过率要求。

关于 ACCA是英国特许公认会计师资格证书，又被我们称为国际注册会计师。ACCA证书的通行范围和认可雇主多达全球一百八十多个国家，7300企业，它还被被称为财经领域的MBA。

含金量如此之高的证书，它的报考门槛一定很高？

刚好相反， 据了解，在中国，无论是报考中、高级会计职称，还是CPA证书，必须要大专以上学历，且毕业后从事会计工作后方可申请，但ACCA却大不相同。

报考ACCA，仅需要满足以下三个条件之一者即可报考ACCA：    

1、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;    

2、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;    

3、年满16周岁，可先注册成为FLQ学员，在获得商业会计证书后转为ACCA学员，并可豁免AB、MA、FA三门课程。   

 与国内的各大会计证书、职称考试不同的是，ACCA还为在读的大学生们开放了报考的窗口，为尚未毕业的大学生提供就业优势，也正是因为如此，ACCA证书才更受大学生们的青睐和欢迎。

以上就是今天所要分享的内容，到这里就结束了，看完本篇内容是不是更加了解考试了，如果还有其他疑问，也可到帮考官网或者相关网站去搜索看看吧。


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。

(ii) The UK value added tax (VAT) implications for Razor Ltd of selling tools to and purchasing tools from

Cutlass Inc; (2 marks)

正确答案：
(ii) Value added tax (VAT)
Goods exported are zero-rated. Razor Ltd must retain appropriate documentary evidence that the export has taken place.
Razor Ltd must account for VAT on the value of the goods purchased from Cutlass Inc at the time the goods are brought
into the UK. The VAT payable should be included as deductible input tax on the company’s VAT return.

(c) Critically discuss FOUR principal roles of non-executive directors and explain the potential tensions between

these roles that WM’s non-executive directors may experience in advising on the disclosure of the

overestimation of the mallerite reserve. (12 marks)

正确答案：
(c) Non-executive directors
Roles of NEDs
Non-executive directors have four principal roles.
The strategy role recognises that NEDs are full members of the board and thus have the right and responsibility to contribute
to the strategic success of the organisation for the benefit of shareholders. The enterprise must have a clear strategic direction
and NEDs should be able to bring considerable experience from their lives and business experience to bear on ensuring that
chosen strategies are sound. In this role they may challenge any aspect of strategy they see fit and offer advice or input to
help to develop successful strategy.
In the scrutinising or performance role, NEDs are required to hold executive colleagues to account for decisions taken and
company performance. In this respect they are required to represent the shareholders’ interests against the possibility that
agency issues arise to reduce shareholder value.
The risk role involves NEDs ensuring the company has an adequate system of internal controls and systems of risk
management in place. This is often informed by prescribed codes (such as Turnbull in the UK) but some industries, such as
chemicals, have other systems in place, some of which fall under ISO standards. In this role, NEDs should satisfy themselves
on the integrity of financial information and that financial controls and systems of risk management are robust and defensible.
Finally, the ‘people’ role involves NEDs overseeing a range of responsibilities with regard to the management of the executive
members of the board. This typically involves issues on appointments and remuneration, but might also involve contractual
or disciplinary issues and succession planning.
Tutorial note: these four roles are as described in the UK Higgs Report and are also contained in the Combined Code 2003.
Tensions in NED roles in the case
This refers to a potential tension in the loyalties of the NEDs. Although the NED is accountable, through the chairman to the
shareholders and thus must always act in the economic best interests of the shareholders, he or she is also a part of the board
of the company and they may, in some situations, advise discretion. Withholding information might be judged correct because
of strategic considerations or longer-term shareholder interests. In most situations, NEDs will argue for greater transparency,
less concealment and more clarity of how and why a given action will be in the interests of shareholders.
The case of mallerite overestimation places the WM NEDs in a position of some tension. Any instinct to conceal the full extent
of the overestimate of the reserve for the possible protection of the company’s short-term value must be balanced against the
duty to serve longer-term strategic interests and the public interest. Whilst concealment would protect the company’s
reputation and share price in the short term, it would be a duty of the NEDs to point out that WM should observe transparency
as far as possible in its dealing with the shareholders and other capital market participants.

1 Rowlands & Medeleev (R&M), a major listed European civil engineering company, was successful in its bid to become

principal (lead) contractor to build the Giant Dam Project in an East Asian country. The board of R&M prided itself in

observing the highest standards of corporate governance. R&M’s client, the government of the East Asian country, had

taken into account several factors in appointing the principal contractor including each bidder’s track record in large

civil engineering projects, the value of the bid and a statement, required from each bidder, on how it would deal with

the ‘sensitive issues’ and publicity that might arise as a result of the project.

The Giant Dam Project was seen as vital to the East Asian country’s economic development as it would provide a

large amount of hydroelectric power. This was seen as a ‘clean energy’ driver of future economic growth. The

government was keen to point out that because hydroelectric power did not involve the burning of fossil fuels, the

power would be environmentally clean and would contribute to the East Asian country’s ability to meet its

internationally agreed carbon emission targets. This, in turn, would contribute to the reduction of greenhouse gases

in the environment. Critics, such as the environmental pressure group ‘Stop-the-dam’, however, argued that the

project was far too large and the cost to the local environment would be unacceptable. Stop-the-dam was highly

organised and, according to press reports in Europe, was capable of disrupting progress on the dam by measures such

as creating ‘human barriers’ to the site and hiding people in tunnels who would have to be physically removed before

proceeding. A spokesman for Stop-the-dam said it would definitely be attempting to resist the Giant Dam Project when

construction started.

The project was intended to dam one of the region’s largest rivers, thus creating a massive lake behind it. The lake

would, the critics claimed, not only displace an estimated 100,000 people from their homes, but would also flood

productive farmland and destroy several rare plant and animal habitats. A number of important archaeological sites

would also be lost. The largest community to be relocated was the indigenous First Nation people who had lived on

and farmed the land for an estimated thousand years. A spokesman for the First Nation community said that the ‘true

price’ of hydroelectric power was ‘misery and cruelty’. A press report said that whilst the First Nation would be unlikely

to disrupt the building of the dam, it was highly likely that they would protest and also attempt to mobilise opinion in

other parts of the world against the Giant Dam Project.

The board of R&M was fully aware of the controversy when it submitted its tender to build the dam. The finance

director, Sally Grignard, had insisted on putting an amount into the tender for the management of ‘local risks’. Sally

was also responsible for the financing of the project for R&M. Although the client was expected to release money in

several ‘interim payments’ as the various parts of the project were completed to strict time deadlines, she anticipated

a number of working capital challenges for R&M, especially near the beginning where a number of early stage costs

would need to be incurred. There would, she explained, also be financing issues in managing the cash flows to R&M’s

many subcontractors. Although the major banks financed the client through a lending syndicate, R&M’s usual bank

said it was wary of lending directly to R&M for the Giant Dam Project because of the potential negative publicity that

might result. Another bank said it would provide R&M with its early stage working capital needs on the understanding

that its involvement in financing R&M to undertake the Giant Dam Project was not disclosed. A press statement from

Stop-the-dam said that it would do all it could to discover R&M’s financial lenders and publicly expose them. Sally

told the R&M board that some debt financing would be essential until the first interim payments from the client

became available.

When it was announced that R&M had won the contract to build the Giant Dam Project, some of its institutional

shareholders contacted Richard Markovnikoff, the chairman. They wanted reassurance that the company had fully

taken the environmental issues and other risks into account. One fund manager asked if Mr Markovnikoff could

explain the sustainability implications of the project to assess whether R&M shares were still suitable for his

environmentally sensitive clients. Mr Markovnikoff said, through the company’s investor relations department, that he

intended to give a statement at the next annual general meeting (AGM) that he hoped would address these

environmental concerns. He would also, he said, make a statement on the importance of confidentiality in the

financing of the early stage working capital needs.

(a) Any large project such as the Giant Dam Project has a number of stakeholders.

Required:

(i) Define the terms ‘stakeholder’ and ‘stakeholder claim’, and identify from the case FOUR of R&M’s

external stakeholders as it carries out the Giant Dam Project; (6 marks)

正确答案：
(a) (i) Stakeholders
A stakeholder can be defined as any person or group that can affect or be affected by an entity. In this case, stakeholders
are those that can affect or be affected by the building of the Giant Dam Project. Stakeholding is thus bi-directional.
Stakeholders can be those (voluntarily or involuntarily) affected by the activities of an organisation or the stakeholder
may be seeking to influence the organisation in some way.
All stakeholding is characterised by the making of ‘claims’ upon an organisation. Put simply, stakeholders ‘want
something’ although in some cases, the ‘want’ may not be known by the stakeholder (such as future generations). It is
the task of management to decide on the strengths of each stakeholder’s claim in formulating strategy and in making
decisions. In most situations it is likely that some stakeholder claims will be privileged over others.
R&M’s external stakeholders include:
– The client (the government of the East Asian country)
– Stop-the-dam pressure group
– First Nation (the indigenous people group)
– The banks that will be financing R&M’s initial working capital
– Shareholders

Jewel Co is setting up an online business importing and selling jewellery headphones. The cost of each set of headphones varies depending on the number purchased, although they can only be purchased in batches of 1,000 units. It also has to pay import taxes which vary according to the quantity purchased.

Jewel Co has already carried out some market research and identified that sales quantities are expected to vary depending on the price charged. Consequently, the following data has been established for the first month:

Required:

(a) Calculate how many batches Jewel Co should import and sell. (6 marks)

(b) Explain why Jewel Co could not use the algebraic method to establish the optimum price for its product.

(4 marks)

正确答案：
(b)Thealgebraicmodelrequiresseveralassumptionstobetrue.First,theremustbeaconsistentrelationshipbetweenprice(P)anddemand(Q),sothatademandequationcanbeestablished,usuallyintheform.P=a–bQ.Here,althoughthereisaclearrelationshipbetweenthetwo,itisnotaperfectlylinearrelationshipandsomorecomplicatedtechniquesarerequiredtocalculatethedemandequation.ItalsocannotbeassumedthatalinearrelationshipwillholdforallvaluesofPandQotherthanthefivegiven.Similarly,theremustbeaclearrelationshipbetweendemandandmarginalcost,usuallysatisfiedbyconstantvariablecostperunitandconstantfixedcosts.Thechangingvariablecostsperunitagaincomplicatetheissue,butitisthechangesinfixedcostswhichmakethealgebraicmethodlessusefulinJewel’scase.Thealgebraicmodelisonlysuitableforcompaniesoperatinginamonopolyanditisnotclearherewhetherthisisthecase,butitseemsunlikely,soany‘optimum’pricemightbecomeirrelevantifJewel’scompetitorschargesignificantlylowerprices.Othermoregeneralfactorsnotconsideredbythealgebraicmodelarepoliticalfactorswhichmightaffectimports,socialfactorswhichmayaffectcustomertastesandeconomicfactorswhichmayaffectexchangeratesorcustomerspendingpower.Thereliabilityoftheestimatesthemselves–forsalesprices,variablecostsandfixedcosts–couldalsobecalledintoquestion.

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