速看!本文带你了解美国注会与ACCA证书间的区别!

发布时间:2020-05-06


美国注册会计师(简称USCPA),有时候又被称之为AICPA,是美国国内的注册会计师资格,与我国国内的注会(CICPA)相同,是国际中非常有影响力的证书之一,而ACCA在我国又被叫做国际注册会计师,是全球财经领域里的通行证,很多人会问:美国CPAACCA有什么区别,应该考哪个,接下来大家一起跟随51题库考试学习网来了解一下吧。

1、职业发展前景的区别

首先,ACCA作为当今的国际性会计师组织之一,ACCA会员资格得到欧盟立法以及许多国家公司法的承认。ACCA在国际上的认可度也很高,截至目前,ACCA在中国的认可雇主企业超过700家,ACCA认可雇主会给予公司职员报考ACCA考试费用,带薪休假参加考试等支持,还会对ACCA会员优先录用。

同时,ACCA在全球范围内得到众多大学的认可,在英国,如邓迪大学、埃克赛特大学、赫尔大学、布拉德福德大学等众多财经名校均认可ACCA,其专业教学课程与ACCA展开了紧密结合,ACCA学员可以向这些院校递交深造申请。学生可赴英国1-2年完成本科、硕士阶段ACCA-金融专业ACCA-国际管理、ACCA-国际商务、ACCA-工商管理、ACCA-国际会计专业学习,并获得学士学位、硕士学位。

而美国是世界经济体,相应的财务要求高,USCPA是美国的注册会计师,GAAP准则一直引领国际会计的发展趋势,且具备签字权。在美国有很好的发展前景,也是一个非常不错的选择。

2、考试政策的差别

ACCAUSCPA都是全英文考试,对学员英语水平有一定要求,通常具有英语四六级水平即可。但是在考试内容上面各有不同:

(1)考试科目不同:

ACCA考试科目为13门,分为两个部分,第一部分为基础阶段,共9门,主要涉及财务会计和管理会计方面的核心知识;第二部分为专业阶段,共5门,引入了作为未来的高级会计师所必须的更高级的职业技能和知识技能,相当于硕士阶段的课程难度。

USCPA的考试科目相对简单,只考4门:Auditing&Attestation审计、Financial Accounting&Reporting财务会计与报告、REGRegulation法规和Business Environment&Concepts商业环境,考试形式为机考,都是单项选择题组(85%)和模拟案例题组。只要有相关会计及审计经验的,考起来都不算太难。

(2)会计准则不同:

ACCA适用于英国会计准则和国际会计准则;USCPA适用的是GAAP准则(美国会计准则),由于美资公司在世界分布广泛,GAAP准则一直引领着国际会计的发展趋势,也有着非常广泛的作用,而ACCA则有过之而无不及。也正因如此,我国国内才称之为国际注册会计师

今天为大家分享的内容就到此结束了,看完以上内容的小伙伴们是否有所收获呢?如还有其他疑问,敬请关注51题库考试学习网,51题库考试学习网将为你分享更多的考试资讯。


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) The Superior Fitness Co (SFC), which is well established in Mayland, operates nine centres. Each of SFC’s

centres is similar in size to those of HFG. SFC also provides dietary plans and fitness programmes to its clients.

The directors of HFG have decided that they wish to benchmark the performance of HFG with that of SFC.

Required:

Discuss the problems that the directors of HFG might experience in their wish to benchmark the performance

of HFG with the performance of SFC, and recommend how such problems might be successfully addressed.

(7 marks)

正确答案:
(b) There are a number of potential problems which the directors of HFG need to recognise. These are as follows:
(i) There needs to exist a sufficient incentive for SFO to share their information with HFG as the success of any
benchmarking programme is dependent upon obtaining accurate information about the comparator organisation. This is
not an easy task to accomplish, as many organisations are reluctant to reveal confidential information to competitors.
The directors of HFG must be able to convince the directors of SFO that entering into a benchmarking arrangement is a
potential ‘win-win situation’.
(ii) The value of the exercise must be sufficient to justify the cost involved. Also, it is inevitable that behavioural issues will
need to be addressed in any benchmarking programme. Management should give priority to the need to communicate
the reasons for undertaking a programme of benchmarking in order to gain the full co-operation of its personnel whilst
reducing the potential level of resistance to change.
(iii) Management need to handle the ethical implications relating to the introduction of benchmarking in a sensitive manner
and should endeavour, insofar as possible, to provide reassurance to employees that their status, remuneration and
working conditions will not suffer as a consequence of the introduction of any benchmarking initiatives.

(ii) Calculate the chargeable gain arising as a consequence of Jan accepting Jumper’s offer. (4 marks)

正确答案:

 


(b) Illustrate how you might use analytical procedures to provide audit evidence and reduce the level of detailed

substantive procedures. (7 marks)

正确答案:
(b) Illustration of use of analytical procedures as audit evidence
Tutorial note: Note that ‘as audit evidence’ requires consideration of substantive analytical procedures rather that the
identification of risks (relevant to part (a)).
Revenue
Analytical procedures may be used in testing revenue for completeness of recording (‘understatement’). The average selling
price of a vehicle in 2005 was $68,830 ($526·0 million ÷ 7,642 vehicles). Applying this to the number of vehicles sold
in 2006, might be projected to generate $698·8 million ($68,830 × 10,153) revenue from the sale of vehicles. The draft
financial statements therefore show a potential shortfall of $110·8 million ($(698·8 – 588·0) million) that is, 15·6%.
This should be investigated and substantiated through more detailed analytical procedures. For example, the number of
vehicles sold should be analysed into models and multiplied by the list price of each for a more accurate estimate of potential
revenue. The impact of discounts and other incentives (e.g. 0% finance) on the list prices should then be allowed for. If
recorded revenue for 2006 (as per draft income statement adjusted for cutoff and consignment inventories) is materially lower
than that calculated, detailed substantive procedures may be required in order to show that there is no material error.
‘Proof in total’/reasonableness tests
The material correctness, or otherwise, of income statement items (in particular) may be assessed through appropriate ‘proof
in total’ calculations (or ‘reasonableness’ tests). For example:
■ Employee benefits costs: the average number of employees by category (waged/salaried/apprenticed) × the average pay
rate for each might prove that in total $91·0 million (as adjusted to actual at 31 December 2006) is not materially
misstated. The average number of employees needs to be checked substantively (e.g. recalculated based on the number
of employees on each payroll) and the average pay rates (e.g. to rates agreed with employee representatives).
Tutorial note: An alternative reasonableness might be to take last year’s actual adjusted for 2006 numbers of
employees grossed-up for any pay increases during the year (pro-rated as necessary).
■ Depreciation: the cost (or net book value) of each category of asset × by the relevant straight-line (or reducing balance)
depreciation rate. If a ‘ballpark’ calculation for the year is materially different to the annual charge a more detailed
calculation can be made using monthly depreciation calculations. The cost (or net book value) on which depreciation
is calculated should be substantively tested, for example by agreeing brought forward balances to prior year working
papers and additions to purchase invoices (costings in respect of assets under construction).
Tutorial note: Alternatively, last year’s depreciation charge may be reconciled to this year’s by considering depreciation
rates applied to brought forward balances with adjustments for additions/disposals.
■ Interest income: an average interest rate for the year can be applied to the monthly balance invested (e.g. in deposit
accounts) and compared with the amount recognised for the year to 31 December 2006 (as adjusted for any accrued
interest per the bank letter for audit purposes). The monthly balances (or averages) on which the calculation is
performed should be substantiated to bank deposit statements.
■ Interest expense: if the cash balances do not go into overdraft then this may be similar expenses (e.g. prompt payment
discounts to customers). If this is to particular dealers then a proof in total might be to apply the discount rate to the
amounts invoiced to the dealer during the period.
Immaterial items
For immaterial items analytical procedures alone may provide sufficient audit evidence that amounts in the financial
statements are not materially misstated so that detailed substantive procedures are not required. For example, a comparison
of administration and distribution, maintenance and insurance costs for 2006 compared with 2005 may be sufficient to show
that material error is highly unlikely. If necessary, further reasonableness tests could be performed. For example, considering
insurance costs to value of assets insured or maintenance costs to costs of assets maintained.
Ratio analysis
Ratio analysis can provide substantive evidence that income statement and balance sheet items are not materially misstated
by considering their inter-relationships. For example:
■ Asset turnover: Based on the draft financial statements property, plant and equipment has turned over 5·2 times
($645·5/124·5) compared with 5·9 times in 2005. This again highlights that income may be overstated, or assets
overstated (e.g. if depreciation is understated).
■ Inventory turnover: Using cost of materials adjusted for changes in inventories this has remained stable at 10·9 times.
Tutorial note: This is to be expected as in (a) the cost in the income statement has increased by 9% and the value of
inventories by 8·5%.
Inventories represent the smallest asset value on the balance sheet at 31 December 2006 (7·8% of total assets).
Therefore substantive procedures may be limited to agreeing physical count of material items (vehicles) and agreeing
cutoff.
■ Average collection period: This has increased to 41 days (73·1/645·5 × 365) from 30 days. Further substantive analysis
is required, for example, separating out non-current amounts (for sales on 0% finance terms). Substantive procedures
may be limited to confirmation of amounts due from dealers (and/or receipt of after-date cash) and agreeing cutoff of
goods on consignment.
■ Payment periods: This has remained constant at 37 days (2005 – 38 days). Detailed substantive procedures may be
restricted to reconciling only major suppliers’ statements and agreeing the cutoff on parts purchased from them.

2 An important part of management is understanding the style. of leadership.

Required:

(a) Explain what Blake and Mouton’s Managerial Grid measures. (5 marks)

正确答案:
2 Overview:
The accountant is frequently the manager or group leader. An understanding of leadership theory and practice is therefore an
important part of an accountant’s training.
Part (a):
Robert Blake and Jane Mouton in their Ohio State Leadership Studies, observed two basic leadership dimensions that were
apparent from their studies; concern for the task and concern for people.
They recognised that it was possible for concern for the task to be independent of concern for people. It was therefore possible for
a leader to be strong on one and weak on the other, strong on both, weak on both or any variation in between.
They devised a series of questions, the answers to which enabled them to plot these two basic leadership dimensions. These two
dimensions were placed as the axes on a grid structure now known as the Managerial Grid. A person who scores 7 on ‘concern
for production’ (the x axis) and 5 on ‘concern for people’ (the y axis) is known as a 7,5 leader.

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。