ACCA考试哪些题型一定不能丢分?
发布时间:2021-03-05
很多备考ACCA考试的考生对ACCA考试题型和应试技巧并不了解,接下来和51题库考试学习网一起去了解下吧!
F1-F4科目
2018年3月以后,F1-F4阶段的考试形式为机考,考试内容分为Section A&Section B,Section B多以任务题为主,题目会引入较长的案例分析,有时还会辅以图表,单选题目的选项数量也超过了四个,难度较大并不容易拿到分值。Section A包括了单选题、判断题和多选题。单选题四选一,单选和判断都是选对得分,选错不得分也不扣分。多选题全对才得分,选错或漏选不得分。通过以上得分规则,我们也能看出单选题和判断题更加注重基础知识的考察,相比较而言容易得分。因此在Section A部分单选和判断最好不要丢分。
F5-F9科目
F5-F9科目目前也均为机考的形式,案例分析题目占比较高。机考中对于做表格的题目或涉及到大量重复计算的题目,一定要设置好表格的公式,添加好数值间interlink,不要粗心大意,设置上出现问题,案例分析题得分率低对通过考试的影响非常大。
P阶段
P阶段难度是大于F阶段的,全部为主观题考查,对英语能力和专业知识的综合运用能力都提出了新的挑战,因此要想通过P阶段考试,一定要对主观题做好充足的准备,减少主观题的丢分。同时要科学规划时间把题目做完,答案可以参考notes,不要一道题写的太多。
以上就是51题库考试学习网给大家带来的关于ACCA考试哪些题型不能丢分的相关分享,希望能够帮到大家!如果想要了解更多考试资讯,请持续关注51题库考试学习网!
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。
5 (a) IFAC’s ‘Code of Ethics for Professional Accountants’ is divided into three parts:
Part A – Applicable to All Professional Accountants
Part B – Applicable to Professional Accountants in Public Practice
Part C – Applicable to Employed Professional Accountants
Required:
Distinguish between ‘Professional Accountants’, ‘Professional Accountants in Public Practice’ and ‘Employed
Professional Accountants’. (3 marks)
5 BOLEYN & CO
(a) Professional Accountants
■ Professional Accountants are members of an IFAC member body. They may be:
– in public practice or employed professionals;
– a sole practitioner, partnership or corporate body.
■ Professional Accountants in Public Practice (‘practitioners’) are:
– each partner (or person occupying a position similar to that of a partner); and
– each employee in a practice providing professional services to a client irrespective of their functional classification
(e.g. audit, tax or consulting); and
– professional accountants in a practice having managerial responsibilities.
This term is also used to refer to a firm of professional accountants in public practice.
■ Employed Professional Accountants are professional accountants employed in industry, commerce, the public sector or
education.
(d) Evaluate the effect on Gerard of the changes to be made by Fizz plc to its performance related bonus scheme.
You should ignore the effect of any pension contributions to be made by Gerard in the future, consider both
the value and timing of amounts received by Gerard and include relevant supporting calculations.
(5 marks)
Note: – You should assume that the income tax rates and allowances for the tax year 2006/07 apply throughout
this question.
(d) Implications for Gerard of the changes to Fizz plc’s bonus scheme
Value received
Under the existing scheme Gerard receives approximately £4,500 each year. This is subject to income tax at 40% and
national insurance contributions at 1% such that Gerard receives £2,655 (£4,500 x 59%) after all taxes.
Under the proposed share incentive plan (SIP), Gerard expects to receive free shares worth £3,500 (£2,100 + £1,400).
Provided the shares remain in the plan for at least five years there will be no income tax or national insurance contributions
in respect of the value received. Gerard’s base cost in the shares for the purposes of capital gains tax will be their value at
the time they are withdrawn from the scheme.
In addition, the amount he spends on partnership shares will be allowable for both income tax and national insurance such
that he will obtain shares with a value of £700 for a cost of only £413 (£700 x 59%).
Accordingly, Gerard will receive greater value under the SIP than he does under the existing bonus scheme. However, as noted
below, he will not be able to sell the free or matching shares until they have been in the scheme for at least three years by
which time they may have fallen in value.
Timing of receipt of benefit
Under the existing scheme Gerard receives a cash bonus each year.
The value of free and matching shares awarded under a SIP cannot be realised until the shares are withdrawn from the
scheme and sold. This withdrawal cannot take place until at least three years after the shares are awarded to Gerard.
Accordingly, Gerard will not have access to the value of the bonuses he receives under the SIP until the scheme has been in
operation for at least three years. In addition, if the shares are withdrawn within five years of being awarded, income tax and
national insurance contributions will become payable on the lower of their value at the time of the award and their value at
the time of withdrawal thus reducing the value of Gerard’s bonus.
(iv) critiques the performance measurement system at TSC. (5 marks
(iv) The performance measurement system used by TSC appears simplistic. However, it may be considered to be measuring
the right things since the specific measures used cover a range of dimensions designed to focus the organisation on
factors thought to be central to corporate success, and not confined to traditional financial measures.
Internal benchmarking is used at TSC in order to provide sets of absolute standards that all depots are expected to attain.
This should help to ensure that there is a continual focus upon the adoption of ‘best practice’ at all depots. Benchmarks
on delivery performance place an emphasis upon quality of service whereas benchmarks on profitability are focused
solely upon profitability!
Incentive schemes are used throughout the business, linking the achievement of company targets with financial rewards.
It might well be the case that the profit incentive would act as a powerful motivator to each depot management team.
However, what is required for the prosperity of TSC is a focus of management on the determinants of success as opposed
to the results of success.
(Alternative relevant discussion would be acceptable)
(c) Mr Cobar, the chief executive of SHC, has decided to draft two alternative statements to explain both possible
outcomes of the secrecy/licensing decision to shareholders. Once the board has decided which one to pursue,
the relevant draft will be included in a voluntary section of the next corporate annual report.
Required:
(i) Draft a statement in the event that the board chooses the secrecy option. It should make a convincing
business case and put forward ethical arguments for the secrecy option. The ethical arguments should
be made from the stockholder (or pristine capitalist) perspective. (8 marks)
(ii) Draft a statement in the event that the board chooses the licensing option. It should make a convincing
business case and put forward ethical arguments for the licensing option. The ethical arguments should
be made from the wider stakeholder perspective. (8 marks)
(iii) Professional marks for the persuasiveness and logical flow of arguments: two marks per statement.
(4 marks)
(c) (i) For the secrecy option
Important developments at SHC
This is an exciting time for the management and shareholders of Swan Hill Company. The research and development
staff at SHC have made a groundbreaking discovery (called the ‘sink method’) that will enable your company to produce
its major product at lower cost, in higher volumes and at a much higher quality than our competitors will be able to
using, as they do, the existing production technology. The sink process also produces at a lower rate of environmental
emissions which, as I’m sure shareholders will agree, is a very welcome development.
When considering the options following the discovery, your board decided that we should press ahead with the
investment needed to transform. the production facilities without offering the use of the technology to competitors under
a licensing arrangement. This means that once the new sink production comes on stream, SHC shareholders can, your
board believes, look forward to a significant strengthening of our competitive position.
The business case for this option is overwhelming. By pushing ahead with the investment needed to implement the sink
method, the possibility exists to gain a substantial competitive advantage over all of SHC’s competitors. It will place SHC
in a near monopolist position in the short term and in a dominant position long term. This will, in turn, give the company
pricing power in the industry and the likelihood of superior profits for many years to come. We would expect SHC to
experience substantial ‘overnight’ growth and the returns from this will reward shareholders’ loyalty and significantly
increase the value of the company. Existing shareholders can reasonably expect a significant increase in the value of
their holdings over the very short term and also over the longer term.
Ethical implications of the secrecy option
In addition to the overwhelming business case, however, there is a strong ethical case for the secrecy option. SHC
recognises that it is the moral purpose of SHC to make profits in order to reward those who have risked their own money
to support it over many years. Whilst some companies pursue costly programmes intended to serve multiple stakeholder
interests, SHC recognises that it is required to comply with the demands of its legal owners, its shareholders, and not
to dilute those demands with other concerns that will reduce shareholder returns. This is an important part of the agency
relationship: the SHC board will always serve the best economic interests of its shareholders: its legal owners. The SHC
board believes that any action taken that renders shareholder returns suboptimal is a threat to shareholder value and an
abuse of the agency position. Your board will always seek to maximise shareholder wealth; hence our decision to pursue
the secrecy option in this case. The secrecy option offers the possibility of optimal shareholder value and because
shareholders invest in SHC to maximise returns, that is the only ethical action for the board to pursue. Happily, this
option will also protect the employees’ welfare in SHC’s hometown of Swan Hill and demonstrate its commitment to the
locality. This, in turn, will help to manage two of the key value-adding resources in the company, its employees and its
reputation. This will help in local recruitment and staff retention in future years.
(ii) For the licensing option
Important developments at SHC
Your board was recently faced with a very difficult business and ethical decision. After the discovery by SHC scientists
of the groundbreaking sink production method, we had a choice of keeping the new production technology secret or
sharing the breakthrough under a licensing arrangement with our competitors. After a lengthy discussion, your board
decided that we should pursue the licensing option and I would like to explain our reasons for this on both business and
ethical grounds.
In terms of the business case for licensing, I would like shareholders to understand that although the secrecy option may
have offered SHC the possibility of an unassailable competitive advantage, in reality, it would have incurred a number
of risks. Because of the speed with which we would have needed to have acted, it would have necessitated a large
increase in our borrowing, bringing about a substantial change in our financial structure. This would, in turn, increase
liquidity pressures and make us more vulnerable to rising interest rates. A second risk with the secrecy option would
involve the security of the sink technology ‘secret’. If the sink process was leaked or discovered by competitors and
subsequently copied, our lack of a legally binding patent would mean we would have no legal way to stop them
proceeding with their own version of the sink process.
As well as avoiding the risks, however, the licensing option offers a number of specific business advantages. The royalties
from the licences granted to competitors are expected to be very large indeed. These will be used over the coming years
to extend our existing competitive advantage in the future. Finally, the ‘improvement sharing’ clause in the licensing
contract will ensure that the sink process will be improved and perfected with several manufacturers using the
technology at the same time. SHC’s sink production may, in consequence, improve at a faster rate than would have
been the case were we to have pursued the secrecy option.
Ethical implications of the licensing option
In addition to the business case, there is also a powerful ethical case for the decision we have taken. As a good,
responsible corporate citizen, Swan Hill Company acknowledges its many stakeholders and recognises the impacts that
a business decision has on others. Your board recognises that in addition to external stakeholders having influence over
our operations, our decisions can also affect others. In this case, we have carefully considered the likelihood that keeping
the new technology a secret from our competitors would radically reshape the industry. The superior environmental
performance of the sink process over existing methods will also mean that when fully adopted, the environmental
emissions of the entire industry will be reduced. SHC is very proud of this contribution to this reduction in overall
environmental impact.
There seems little doubt that the secrecy option would have had far-reaching and unfortunate effects upon our industry
and our competitors. The licensing option will allow competitors, and their employees and shareholders, to survive. It
is a compassionate act on our part and shows mercy to the other competitors in the industry. It recognises the number
of impacts that a business decision has and would be the fairest (and most just) option given the number of people
affected.
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。