2020年河南省7月ACCA考试成绩查询时间

发布时间:2020-08-12


2020年河南省7月ACCA考试成绩查询时间,大家知道吗?下面51题库考试学习网就带领大家一起来了解了解吧,关于河南省2020年ACCA考试成绩查询相关内容,想要知道的小伙伴赶紧来围观吧。

根据官网消息,20207ACCA考试成绩预计将于81日公布。

2020ACCA成绩查询方式与流程

ACCA成绩查询方式

1.电子邮件(e-mail---您可在MYACCA内选择通过e-mail接收考试成绩。

2.短信通知---ACCA可采用短信通知考试成绩,但由于跨国服务较为复杂,可能不能接收短信。

3.网站查看考试成绩ACCA官网注册过的所有学生都能登录官网查看自己的成绩。

官网成绩查询的步骤:

1、登录

点击myACCA,输入学员账ID和密码,

2、点击exam entry

查看自己的考试报名结果。

3、下载

确认好考试报名的信息后,一定要确认自己的身份信息,考试科目以及考试地点。点击“Download”j进行准考证的下载。

ACCA成绩查询结果显示:

ACCA全球官方网站http://www.accaglobal.com/;点击Myacca登陆,点左面框架里的“EXAMS”进入页面,中间有一段:

EXAM STATUS REPORT Your status report provides details of the ACCA exams you have already passed and those you have still to complete

EXAM STATUS REPORT Your status report provides details of the ACCA exams you have already passed and those you have still to complete

View your status report————这个是超级链接,点进去就是你全部的考试分数记录了。

2020年ACCA成绩合格标准:

ACCA考试是百分制,50分为及格线。这意味着考生需要单科考试分数至少需要达到50分才算通过了考试。

成绩有效期:

ACCA 应用课程(F阶段)成绩有效期为无限期,战略课程(P阶段)成绩有效期为7

ACCA考试期限跟CPA一样实行轮废制,即需要在一定的时间里面考完规定的科目,否则成绩将会无效。

时间计算:

根据以前的规则,学员必须在首次报名注册后10年内通过所有考试,否则将注销其学员资格。而后ACCA对时限做出了重要调整即:F段成绩永久有效,P段要在7年内考完。根据新规则,专业阶段考试的时限将为7年。因此,国际财会基础资格(Foundations in Accountancy,简称FIA)的考试以及ACCA资格考试的基础阶段F1-F9考试将不再有通过时限。

7年政策”意味着从你通过P阶段的第一门科目开始,7年内需完成P阶段所要求的所有ACCA考试科目。否则,从第8年开始,你第1年所考过的P阶段科目成绩将会被视为过期作废,须重新考试。

另外,需要说明的是——此政策实行滚动式废除,也就是说不会在第8年时把你之前7年所有考过的P阶段科目成绩都废除,只会废除你第1年考过的P阶段科目成绩,第9年会废除你前2年所通过的P阶段科目成绩,以此类推。

以上是关于河南省20207ACCA考试成绩查询相关内容,小伙伴们都了解了吗?如果大家对于ACCA考试还有别的问题,可以多多关注51题库考试学习网,我们将继续为大家答疑解惑!


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) What advantages and disadvantages might result from outsourcing Global Imaging’s HR function?

(8 marks)

正确答案:
(b) It is important to note that there is nothing in the nature of the activities carried out by HR staff and departments that prevents
outsourcing being looked at as a serious option. Indeed, amongst larger companies the outsourcing of some parts of the HR
function is already well under way, with one source estimating that HR outsourcing is growing by 27% each year. Paul,
therefore, needs to look at the HR activities identified above and assess the advantages and disadvantages of outsourcing a
particular HR activity. Outsourcing certain parts of the recruitment process has long been accepted, with professional
recruitment agencies and ‘head-hunters’ being heavily involved in the advertising and short listing of candidates for senior
management positions. Some HR specialists argue that outsourcing much of the routine personnel work, including
maintaining employees’ records, frees the HR specialist to make a real contribution to the strategic planning process. One
study argues that ‘HR should become a partner with senior and line managers in strategy execution’.
If Paul is able to outsource the routine HR activities this will free him to contribute to the development of the growth strategy
and the critical people needs that strategy will require. In many ways the HR specialist is in a unique position to assess current
skills and capabilities of existing staff and the extent to which these can be ‘leveraged’ to achieve the desired strategy. In
Hamel and Prahalad’s terms this strategy is likely to ‘stretch’ the people resources of the company and require the recruitment
of additional staff with the relevant capabilities. Paul needs to show how long it will take to develop the necessary staff
resources as this will significantly influence the time needed to achieve the growth strategy.
Outsourcing passes on to the provider the heavy investment needed if the company sets up its own internal HR services with
much of this investment now going into web-based systems. The benefits are reduced costs and improved service quality.
The downside is a perceived loss of control and a reduced ability to differentiate the HR function from that of competitors.
Issues of employee confidentiality are also relevant in the decision to outsource.

(b) Briefly describe the way in which a ‘person specification’ differs from a ‘job description’. (3 marks)

正确答案:
Part (b):
The difference between a person specification and a job description is that a person specification sets out the qualities of an ideal
candidate whereas a job description defines the duties and responsibilities of the job.

6 Alasdair, aged 42, is single. He is considering investing in property, as he has heard that this represents a good

investment. In order to raise the funds to buy the property, he wants to extract cash from his personal company, Beezer

Limited, whose year end is 31 December.

Beezer Limited was formed on 1 May 1998 with £1,000 of capital issued as 1,000 £1 ordinary shares, and traded

until 1 January 2005 when Alasdair sold the trade and related assets. The company’s only asset is cash of

£120,000. Alasdair wants to extract this cash from the company with the minimum amount of tax payable. He is

considering either, paying himself a dividend of £120,000, on 31 March 2006, after which the company would have

no assets and be wound up or, leaving the cash in the company and then liquidating the company. Costs of liquidation

of £5,000 would then be incurred.

Since Beezer Limited ceased trading, Alasdair has been taken on as a partner at a marketing firm, Gallus & Co. He

estimates his profit share for the year of assessment 2005/06 will be £30,000. He has not made any capital disposals

in the current tax year.

Alasdair wishes to reinvest the cash extracted from Beezer Limited in property but is not sure whether he should invest

directly in residential or commercial property, or do so via some form. of collective investment. He is aware that Gallus

& Co are looking to rent a new warehouse which could be bought for £200,000. Alasdair thinks that he may be able

to buy the warehouse himself and lease it to his firm, but only if he can borrow the additional money to buy the

property.

Alasdair has a 25% shareholding in another company, Glaikit Limited, whose year end is 31 March. The remaining

shares in this company are held by his friend, Gill. Alasdair is considering borrowing £15,000 from Glaikit Limited

on 1 January 2006. He does not intend to pay any interest on the loan, which is likely to be written off some time

in 2007. Alasdair does not have any connection with Glaikit Limited other than his shareholding.

Required:

(a) Advise Alasdair whether or not a dividend payment will result in a higher after-tax cash sum than the

liquidation of Beezer Limited. Assume that either the dividend would be paid on 31 March 2006 or the

liquidation would take place on 31 March 2006. (9 marks)

Assume that Beezer Limited has always paid corporation tax at or above the small companies rate of 19%

and that the tax rates and allowances for 2004/05 apply throughout this part.

正确答案:

 


1 Your client, Island Co, is a manufacturer of machinery used in the coal extraction industry. You are currently planning

the audit of the financial statements for the year ended 30 November 2007. The draft financial statements show

revenue of $125 million (2006 – $103 million), profit before tax of $5·6 million (2006 – $5·1 million) and total

assets of $95 million (2006 – $90 million). Your firm was appointed as auditor to Island Co for the first time in June

2007.

Island Co designs, constructs and installs machinery for five key customers. Payment is due in three instalments: 50%

is due when the order is confirmed (stage one), 25% on delivery of the machinery (stage two), and 25% on successful

installation in the customer’s coal mine (stage three). Generally it takes six months from the order being finalised until

the final installation.

At 30 November, there is an amount outstanding of $2·85 million from Jacks Mine Co. The amount is a disputed

stage three payment. Jacks Mine Co is refusing to pay until the machinery, which was installed in August 2007, is

running at 100% efficiency.

One customer, Sawyer Co, communicated in November 2007, via its lawyers with Island Co, claiming damages for

injuries suffered by a drilling machine operator whose arm was severely injured when a machine malfunctioned. Kate

Shannon, the chief executive officer of Island Co, has told you that the claim is being ignored as it is generally known

that Sawyer Co has a poor health and safety record, and thus the accident was their fault. Two orders which were

placed by Sawyer Co in October 2007 have been cancelled.

Work in progress is valued at $8·5 million at 30 November 2007. A physical inventory count was held on

17 November 2007. The chief engineer estimated the stage of completion of each machine at that date. One of the

major components included in the coal extracting machinery is now being sourced from overseas. The new supplier,

Locke Co, is located in Spain and invoices Island Co in euros. There is a trade payable of $1·5 million owing to Locke

Co recorded within current liabilities.

All machines are supplied carrying a one year warranty. A warranty provision is recognised on the balance sheet at

$2·5 million (2006 – $2·4 million). Kate Shannon estimates the cost of repairing defective machinery reported by

customers, and this estimate forms the basis of the provision.

Kate Shannon owns 60% of the shares in Island Co. She also owns 55% of Pacific Co, which leases a head office to

Island Co. Kate is considering selling some of her shares in Island Co in late January 2008, and would like the audit

to be finished by that time.

Required:

(a) Using the information provided, identify and explain the principal audit risks, and any other matters to be

considered when planning the final audit for Island Co for the year ended 30 November 2007.

Note: your answer should be presented in the format of briefing notes to be used at a planning meeting.

Requirement (a) includes 2 professional marks. (13 marks)

正确答案:
1 ISLAND CO
(a) Briefing Notes
Subject: Principal Audit Risks – Island Co
Revenue Recognition – timing
Island Co raises sales invoices in three stages. There is potential for breach of IAS 18 Revenue, which states that revenue
should only be recognised once the seller has the right to receive it, in other words the seller has performed its contractual
obligations. This right does not necessarily correspond to amounts falling due for payment in accordance with an invoice
schedule agreed with a customer as part of a contract. Island Co appears to receive payment from its customers in advance
of performing any obligation, as the stage one invoice is raised when an order is confirmed i.e. before any work has actually
taken place. This creates the potential for revenue to be recognised too early, in advance of any performance of contractual
obligation. When a payment is received in advance of performance, a liability should be recognised equal to the amount
received, representing the obligation under the contract. Therefore a significant risk is that revenue is overstated and liabilities
understated.
Tutorial note: Equivalent guidance is also provided in IAS 11 Construction Contracts and credit will be awarded where
candidates discuss revenue recognition under IAS 11 as Island Co is providing a single substantial asset for a customer
under the terms of a contract.
Disputed receivable
The amount owed from Jacks Mine Co is highly material as it represents 50·9% of profit before tax, 2·3% of revenue, and
3% of total assets. The risk is that the receivable is overstated if no impairment of the disputed receivable is recognised.
Legal claim
The claim should be investigated seriously by Island Co. The chief executive officer’s (CEO) opinion that the claim will not
result in any financial consequence for Island Co is na?ve and flippant. Damages could be awarded against Island Co if it is
found that the machinery is faulty. The recurring high level of warranty provision implies that machinery faults are fairly
common and therefore the accident could be the result of a defective machine being supplied to Sawyer Co. The risk is that
no provision is created for the potential damages under IAS 37 Provisions, Contingent Liabilities and Contingent Assets, if the
likelihood of paying damages is considered probable. Alternatively, if the likelihood of damages being paid to Sawyer Co is
considered a possibility then a disclosure note should be made in the financial statements describing the nature and possible
financial effect of the contingent liability. As discussed below, the CEO, Kate Shannon, has an incentive not to make a
provision or disclose a contingent liability due to the planned share sale post year end.
A further risk is that any legal fees associated with the claim have not been accrued within the financial statements. As the
claim has arisen during the year, the expense must be included in this year’s income statement, even if the claim is still ongoing
at the year end.
The fact that the legal claim is effectively being ignored may cast doubts on the overall integrity of senior management, and
on the integrity of the financial statements. Management representations should be approached with a degree of professional
scepticism during the audit.
Sawyer Co has cancelled two orders. If the amounts are still outstanding at the year end then it is highly likely that Sawyer
Co will not pay the invoiced amounts, and thus receivables are overstated. If the stage one payments have already been made,
then Sawyer Co may claim a refund, in which case a provision should be made to repay the amount, or a contingent liability
disclosed in a note to the financial statements.
Sawyer Co is one of only five major customers, and losing this customer could have future going concern implications for
Island Co if a new source of revenue cannot be found to replace the lost income stream from Sawyer Co. If the legal claim
becomes public knowledge, and if Island Co is found to have supplied faulty machinery, then it will be difficult to attract new
customers.
A case of this nature could bring bad publicity to Island Co, a potential going concern issue if it results in any of the five key
customers terminating orders with Island Co. The auditors should plan to extend the going concern work programme to
incorporate the issues noted above.
Inventories
Work in progress is material to the financial statements, representing 8·9% of total assets. The inventory count was held two
weeks prior to the year end. There is an inherent risk that the valuation has not been correctly rolled forward to a year end
position.
The key risk is the estimation of the stage of completion of work in progress. This is subjective, and knowledge appears to
be confined to the chief engineer. Inventory could be overvalued if the machines are assessed to be more complete than they
actually are at the year end. Absorption of labour costs and overheads into each machine is a complex calculation and must
be done consistently with previous years.
It will also be important that consumable inventories not yet utilised on a machine, e.g. screws, nuts and bolts, are correctly
valued and included as inventories of raw materials within current assets.
Overseas supplier
As the supplier is new, controls may not yet have been established over the recording of foreign currency transactions.
Inherent risk is high as the trade payable should be retranslated using the year end exchange rate per IAS 21 The Effects of
Changes in Foreign Exchange Rates. If the retranslation is not performed at the year end, the trade payable could be
significantly over or under valued, depending on the movement of the dollar to euro exchange rate between the purchase date
and the year end. The components should remain at historic cost within inventory valuation and should not be retranslated
at the year end.
Warranty provision
The warranty provision is material at 2·6% of total assets (2006 – 2·7%). The provision has increased by only $100,000,
an increase of 4·2%, compared to a revenue increase of 21·4%. This could indicate an underprovision as the percentage
change in revenue would be expected to be in line with the percentage change in the warranty provision, unless significant
improvements had been made to the quality of machines installed for customers during the year. This appears unlikely given
the legal claim by Sawyer Co, and the machines installed at Jacks Mine Co operating inefficiently. The basis of the estimate
could be understated to avoid charging the increase in the provision as an expense through the income statement. This is of
special concern given that it is the CEO and majority shareholder who estimates the warranty provision.
Majority shareholder
Kate Shannon exerts control over Island Co via a majority shareholding, and by holding the position of CEO. This greatly
increases the inherent risk that the financial statements could be deliberately misstated, i.e. overvaluation of assets,
undervaluation of liabilities, and thus overstatement of profits. The risk is severe at this year end as Kate Shannon is hoping
to sell some Island Co shares post year end. As the price that she receives for these shares will be to a large extent influenced
by the balance sheet position of the company at 30 November 2007, she has a definite interest in manipulating the financial
statements for her own personal benefit. For example:
– Not recognising a provision or contingent liability for the legal claim from Sawyer Co
– Not providing for the potentially irrecoverable receivable from Jacks Mines Co
– Not increasing the warranty provision
– Recognising revenue earlier than permitted by IAS 18 Revenue.
Related party transactions
Kate Shannon controls Island Co and also controls Pacific Co. Transactions between the two companies should be disclosed
per IAS 24 Related Party Disclosures. There is risk that not all transactions have been disclosed, or that a transaction has
been disclosed at an inappropriate value. Details of the lease contract between the two companies should be disclosed within
a note to the financial statements, in particular, any amounts owed from Island Co to Pacific Co at 30 November 2007 should
be disclosed.
Other issues
– Kate Shannon wants the audit to be completed as soon as possible, which brings forward the deadline for completion
of the audit. The audit team may not have time to complete all necessary procedures, or there may not be time for
adequate reviews to be carried out on the work performed. Detection risk, and thus audit risk is increased, and the
overall quality of the audit could be jeopardised.
– This is especially important given that this is the first year audit and therefore the audit team will be working with a
steep learning curve. Audit procedures may take longer than originally planned, yet there is little time to extend
procedures where necessary.
– Kate Shannon may also exert considerable influence on the members of the audit team to ensure that the financial
statements show the best possible position of Island Co in view of her share sale. It is crucial that the audit team
members adhere strictly to ethical guidelines and that independence is beyond question.
– Due to the seriousness of the matters noted above, a final matter to be considered at the planning stage is that a second
partner review (Engagement Quality Control Review) should be considered for the audit this year end. A suitable
independent reviewer should be indentified, and time planned and budgeted for at the end of the assignment.
Conclusion
From the range of issues discussed in these briefing notes, it can be seen that the audit of Island Co will be a relatively high
risk engagement.

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。