acca和CICPA有什么不同呢?
发布时间:2021-03-10
acca和CICPA有什么不同呢?
最佳答案
培养人才不同
中国注册会计师,顾名思义只在中国适用,培养的是专业执业的注册会计师,属于会计和审计的专业技术人才,一般做的是专业会计的工作。
ACCA培养的是复合型的高级财务管理人才,而非专注于某一领域的执业者。不管你去国企、外企、内资企业、私营企业,事务所、或机关单位都是可以的,而且是国际适用。
知识体系设置不同
CICPA考试专业六门,再加一门综合,分别是会计、审计、财务管理、税法、经济法、战略,这六门科目基本呈并列关系,难度相差不大,钻研得也很深。CPA太精,所以从业范围限于会计和审计几个领域。
ACCA包括财务呈报、审计、财务管理、法律和税收在内的十四门课程,这些课程分布在三个阶段,层层递进、逐渐深入,涵盖了本科财务教学的所有科目和硕士研究生教学的部分科目,能让你拥有一个很扎实的且具有国际性的财务知识框架。
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) Assuming that the acquisition proceeds, what steps will Datum Paper Products need to take to build a shared
culture in the two companies? (10 marks)
(b) Developing a shared culture will be one of the key determinants of whether the anticipated benefits of the acquisition actually
materialise. Due diligence procedures before the merger should have established the key people issues. This will include
reviewing the two management styles and cultures. Clearly these are very different, looking at internal communication pre
and post acquisition, understanding the nature of reward systems in the firm to be acquired, assessing the nature of training
programmes in the firm both before and after the acquisition and attempting to gauge existing employee attitudes towards
Papier Presse and the likely reaction to the acquisition. Reviewing areas where there have been significant staff problems and
consequent negotiations will also be an important clue as to employee attitudes and morale. ‘Hard’ people issues including
pensions, management rewards, health insurance and redundancy terms will need to be realistically assessed and the
implications for both the price paid for the company and subsequent integration fully understood. All too often the compelling
strategic vision for the enlarged company ignores the people costs involved and the time needed to develop shared HR
systems.
Many models on culture and culture management could help to achieve a successful transition. Mintzberg’s cultural or
organisational configuration model, which would facilitate an understanding of the difference in structures and systems, could
be a useful starting point. DPP comes from a divisionalised company where the middle line managers are given considerable
autonomy in achieving agreed levels of performance. Papier Presse, with its dominance by family ownership and
management, could be argued to be entrepreneurial in character, where the owner/managers at the strategic apex of the
company operate a ‘hands-on’ approach and direct control of subordinates. Reconciling these different cultures and structures
will not be an easy task.
Lewin’s 3-step model of change can be used in helping a positive culture emerge from the combining of the two companies.
There is a need to unfreeze the current situation in which employees of both organisations are likely to be reluctant or resistant
to change. There needs to be a clear understanding of who does what in the new organisation – leadership and the role of
the French owners will be a critical factor in successfully changing the culture. Robbins emphasises the need for positive top
management role models in promoting and communicating the need for a change in culture. Policies to affect change on both
the hard and soft factors referred to above need to be in place to move the integration forward. A clear timescale and vision
for change will be a key part of the change process. Finally the systems will need to be in place to re-freeze or rather reinforce
the attitudes and behaviours necessary to achieve success in the merged organisation. Operating across national borderscreates real culture issues to be solved as shown in studies by Hofstede and Bartlett and Ghoshal.
(b) The directors of Carver Ltd are aware that some of the company’s shareholders want to realise the value in their
shares immediately. Accordingly, instead of investing in the office building or the share portfolio they are
considering two alternative strategies whereby, following the sale of the company’s business, a payment will be
made to the company’s shareholders.
(i) Liquidate the company. The payment by the liquidator would be £126 per share.
(ii) The payment of a dividend of £125 per share following which a liquidator will be appointed. The payment
by the liquidator to the shareholders would then be £1 per share.
The company originally issued 20,000 £1 ordinary shares at par value to 19 members of the Cutler family.
Following a number of gifts and inheritances there are now 41 shareholders, all of whom are family members.
The directors have asked you to attend a meeting to set out the tax implications of these two alternative strategies
for each of the two main groups of shareholders: adults with shareholdings of more than 500 shares and children
with shareholdings of 200 shares or less.
Required:
Prepare notes explaining:
– the amount chargeable to tax; and
– the rates of tax that will apply
in respect of each of the two strategies for each of the two groups of shareholders ready for your meeting
with the directors of Carver Ltd. You should assume that none of the shareholders will have any capital
losses either in the tax year 2007/08 or brought forward as at 5 April 2007. (10 marks)
Note:
You should assume that the rates and allowances for the tax year 2006/07 will continue to apply for the
foreseeable future.
3 Assume that today’s date is 10 May 2005.
You have recently been approached by Fred Flop. Fred is the managing director and 100% shareholder of Flop
Limited, a UK trading company with one wholly owned subsidiary. Both companies have a 31 March year-end.
Fred informs you that he is experiencing problems in dealing with aspects of his company tax returns. The company
accountant has been unable to keep up to date with matters, and Fred also believes that mistakes have been made
in the past. Fred needs assistance and tells you the following:
Year ended 31 March 2003
The corporation tax return for this period was not submitted until 2 November 2004, and corporation tax of £123,500
was paid at the same time. Profits chargeable to corporation tax were stated as £704,300.
A formal notice (CT203) requiring the company to file a self-assessment corporation tax return (dated 1 February
2004) had been received by the company on 4 February 2004.
A detailed examination of the accounts and tax computation has revealed the following.
– Computer equipment totalling £50,000 had been expensed in the accounts. No adjustment has been made in
the tax computation.
– A provision of £10,000 was made for repairs, but there is no evidence of supporting information.
– Legal and professional fees totalling £46,500 were allowed in full without any explanation. Fred has
subsequently produced the following analysis:
Analysis of legal & professional fees
£
Legal fees on a failed attempt to secure a trading loan 15,000
Debt collection agency fees 12,800
Obtaining planning consent for building extension 15,700
Accountant’s fees for preparing accounts 14,000
Legal fees relating to a trade dispute 19,000
– No enquiry has yet been raised by the Inland Revenue.
– Flop Ltd was a large company in terms of the Companies Act definition for the year in question.
– Flop Ltd had taxable profits of £595,000 in the previous year.
Year ended 31 March 2004
The corporation tax return has not yet been submitted for this year. The accounts are late and nearing completion,
with only one change still to be made. A notice requiring the company to file a self-assessment corporation tax return
(CT203) dated 27 July 2004 was received on 1 August 2004. No corporation tax has yet been paid.
1 – The computation currently shows profits chargeable to corporation tax of £815,000 before accounting
adjustments, and any adjustments for prior years.
– A company owing Flop Ltd £50,000 (excluding VAT) has gone into liquidation, and it is unlikely that any of this
money will be paid. The money has been outstanding since 3 September 2003, and the bad debt will need to
be included in the accounts.
1 Fred also believes there are problems in relation to the company’s VAT administration. The VAT return for the quarter
ended 31 March 2005 was submitted on 5 May 2005, and VAT of £24,000 was paid at the same time. The previous
return to 31 December 2004 was also submitted late. In addition, no account has been made for the VAT on the bad
debt. The VAT return for 30 June 2005 may also be late. Fred estimates the VAT liability for that quarter to be £8,250.
Required:
(a) (i) Calculate the revised corporation tax (CT) payable for the accounting periods ending 31 March 2003
and 2004 respectively. Your answer should include an explanation of the adjustments made as a result
of the information which has now come to light. (7 marks)
(ii) State, giving reasons, the due payment date of the corporation tax (CT) and the filing date of the
corporation tax return for each period, and identify any interest and penalties which may have arisen to
date. (8 marks)
(a) Calculation of corporation tax
Year ended 31 March 2003
Corporation tax payable
There are three adjusting items:.
(i) The computers are capital items, as they have an enduring benefit. These need to be added back in the Schedule D
Case I calculation, and capital allowances claimed instead. The company is not small or medium by Companies Act
definitions and therefore no first year allowances are available. Allowances of £12,500 (50,000 x 25%) can be claimed,
leaving a TWDV of £37,500.
(ii) The provision appears to be general in nature. In addition there is insufficient information to justify the provision and it
should be disallowed until such times as it is released or utilised.
(iii) Costs relating to trading loan relationships are allowable, as are costs relating to the trade (debt collection, trade disputes
and accounting work). Costs relating to capital items (£5,700) are not allowable so will have to be added back.
Total profit chargeable to corporation tax is therefore £704,300 + 50,000 – 12,500 + 10,000 + 5,700 = 757,500. There are two associates, and therefore the 30% tax rate starts at £1,500,000/2 = £750,000. Corporation tax payable is 30% x£757,500 = £227,250.
Payment date
Although the rate of tax is 30% and the company ‘large’, quarterly payments will not apply, as the company was not large in the previous year. The due date for payment of tax is therefore nine months and one day after the end of the tax accounting period (31 March 2003) i.e. 1 January 2004.
Filing date
This is the later of:
– 12 months after the end of the period of account: 31 March 2004
– 3 months after the date of the notice requiring the return 1 May 2004
i.e. 1 May 2004.
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。
- 2021-03-11
- 2021-05-11
- 2021-03-10
- 2021-03-10
- 2021-05-24
- 2021-04-15
- 2021-03-10
- 2021-07-14
- 2021-03-10
- 2021-03-12
- 2021-03-11
- 2021-03-11
- 2021-06-12
- 2021-04-24
- 2021-03-10
- 2021-04-24
- 2021-03-12
- 2021-06-05
- 2021-06-09
- 2021-01-06
- 2021-04-14
- 2021-03-10
- 2021-11-30
- 2021-03-10
- 2021-03-11
- 2021-04-15
- 2021-04-24
- 2021-03-12
- 2021-01-01
- 2021-03-10