及时查看:怎么报名ACCA机考考试?

发布时间:2020-03-21


大家都在问怎么报名ACCA机考考试?,今天51题库考试学习网就为大家分享了关于考试的报名流程,请各位考生仔细阅读。

acca机考报名流程步骤如下:

1、登陆ACCA官网,然后进入MY ACCA(未注册ACCA的同学请到官网注册一下)

2、在登录界面输入ACCA注册号以及密码

3、登陆到MY ACCA之后点击进入左边的EXAM ENTRY

4、点击“EXAM ENTRY”后出现的是考试费情况,点击Enter for Exams

5、选择考试季,点击下拉框选择考试季,显示如下点击“Apply for Exam session

6、选择ACCA考试科目,在select exam下面的方框打钩,exam type选择“computer basedorpaper based“,没有选项的默认为paper based,选择考试国家和地点,然后点击next

7、再次确认考试信息和支付金额,如果有欠费,或是年费,在myACCA account balance due后面会显示金额

8、在方框处打钩,点击“proceed topayment

9、选择支付方式,支付宝or信用卡(1)选择信用卡,填写Card Number(卡号)Card Holder Name(持卡人姓名)Card expiry Date(有效期)CVC(安全码)、点击“next

ACCA机考流程:

1.考生直接到机考中心缴纳考试费。

2.机考考试前,机考中心会公布具体的考试时间,考生可以根据时间来安排自己的考试报名。

3.机考考试时,考生须携带ACCA学员号,身份证等证件参加。

4.机考考试开始前,监考人员会宣读考场纪律;考生需要在电脑上输入个人信息,监考人员会核对考生的身份;身份核对后,电脑上会显示出3页考试操作指南,考生仔细阅读,得到监考人员的允许后才可点击考试科目,开始考试。

5.机考考试开始时,题目会直接在屏幕上显示,请直接在电脑上输入答案。

6.机考考试结束后,需要打印2份考试成绩通知单,自己保留一份,机考中心保留一份。

7.机考中心会在考试结束后上传考试成绩,72小时内成绩会上传到考生的MYACCA成绩记录中。

ACCA机考报名与ACCA笔试报名的区别

首先,ACCA机考报名不是通过ACCA官网进行报名,而是直接通过ACCA机考中心进行报名和付费的。

其次,机考考试与笔试不同,笔试一年只能有四次报考机会,分别在36,9,12月。机考是每个月都可以报名,只需要提前跟ACCA机考中心预约报名即可。

最后,ACCA机考的成绩是当场就能够知道的,而ACCA笔试的成绩一般在考试以后一个月左右时间才能够知道。

以上就是51题库考试学习网为大家分享的关于考试的考试流程,大家看完肯定对考试的报名流程十分熟悉了,那就抓紧时间报名吧。


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。

The town of Brighttown in Euraria has a mayor (elected every five years by the people in the town) who is responsible for, amongst other things, the transport policy of the town.

A year ago, the mayor (acting as project sponsor) instigated a ‘traffic lite’ project to reduce traffic congestion at traffic lights in the town. Rather than relying on fixed timings, he suggested that a system should be implemented which made the traffic lights sensitive to traffic flow. So, if a queue built up, then the lights would automatically change to green (go). The mayor suggested that this would have a number of benefits. Firstly, it would reduce harmful emissions at the areas near traffic lights and, secondly, it would improve the journey times for all vehicles, leading to drivers ‘being less stressed’. He also cited evidence from cities overseas where predictable journey times had been attractive to flexible companies who could set themselves up anywhere in the country. He felt that the new system would attract such companies to the town.

The Eurarian government has a transport regulation agency called OfRoad. Part of OfRoad’s responsibilities is to monitor transport investments and it was originally critical of the Brighttown ‘traffic lite’ project because the project’s benefits were intangible and lacked credibility. The business case did not include a quantitative cost/benefit analysis. OfRoad has itself published a benefits management process which classifies benefits in the following way.

Financial: A financial benefit can be confidently allocated in advance of the project. Thus if the investment will save $90,000 per year in staff costs then this is a financial benefit.

Quantifiable: A quantifiable benefit is a benefit where there is sufficient credible evidence to suggest, in advance, how much benefit will result from the project. This benefit may be financial or non-financial. For example, energy savings from a new building might be credibly predicted in advance. However, the exact amount of savings cannot be accurately forecast.

Measurable benefit: A measurable benefit is a benefit which can only be confidently assessed post-implementation, and so cannot be reliably predicted in advance. Increase in sales from a particular initiative is an example of a measurable benefit. Measurable benefits may either be financial or non-financial.

Observable benefit: An observable benefit is a benefit which a specific individual or group will decide, using agreed criteria, has been realised or not. Such benefits are usually non-financial. Improved staff morale might be an example of an observable benefit.

One month ago, the mayoral elections saw the election of a new mayor with a completely distinct transport policy with different objectives. She wishes to address traffic congestion by attracting commuters away from their cars and onto public transport. Part of her policy is a traffic light system which gives priority to buses. The town council owns the buses which operate in the town and they have invested heavily in buses which are comfortable and have significantly lower emissions than the conventional cars used by most people in the town. The new mayor wishes to improve the frequency, punctuality and convenience of these buses, so that they tempt people away from using their cars. This will require more buses and more bus crews, a requirement which the mayor presents as ‘being good for the unemployment rate in this town’. It will also help the bus service meet the punctuality service level which it published three years ago, but has never yet met. ‘A reduction in cars and an increase in buses will help us meet our target’, the mayor claims.

The mayor has also suggested a number of initiatives to discourage people from taking their cars into the town. She intends to sell two car parks for housing land (raising $325,000) and this will reduce car park capacity from 1,000 to 800 car spaces per day. She also intends to raise the daily parking fee from $3 to $4. Car park occupancy currently stands at 95% (it is difficult to achieve 100% for technical reasons) and the same occupancy rate is expected when the car park capacity is reduced.

The new mayor believes that her policy signals the fact that Brighttown is serious about its green credentials. ‘This’, she says, ‘will attract green consumers to come and live in our town and green companies to set up here. These companies and consumers will bring great benefit to our community.’ To emphasise this, she has set up a Go Green team to encourage green initiatives in the town.

The ‘traffic lite’ project to tackle congestion proposed by the former mayor is still in the development stage. The new mayor believes that this project can be modified to deliver her vision and still be ready on the date promised by her predecessor.

Required:

(a) A ‘terms of reference’ (project initiation document, project charter) was developed for the ‘traffic lite’ project to reduce traffic congestion.

Discuss what changes will have to be made to this ‘terms of reference’ (project initiation document, project charter) to reflect the new mayor’s vision of the project. (5 marks)

(b) The new mayor wishes to re-define the business case for the project, using the benefits categorisation suggested by OfRoad. Identify costs and benefits for the revised project, classifying each benefit using the guidance provided by OfRoad. (14 marks)

(c) Stakeholder management is the prime responsibility of the project manager.

Discuss the appropriate management of each of the following three stakeholders identified in the revised (modified) project.

(i) The new mayor;

(ii) OfRoad;

(iii) A private motorist in Brighttown who uses his vehicle to commute to his job in the town. (6 marks)

正确答案:

(a) Objectives and scope

From the perspective of the ‘traffic lite’ project, the change in mayor has led to an immediate change in the objectives driving the project. This illustrates how public sector projects are susceptible to sudden external environmental changes outside their control. The project initially proposed to reduce traffic congestion by making traffic lights sensitive to traffic flow. It was suggested that this would improve journey times for all vehicles using the roads of Brighttown. However, the incoming mayor now wishes to reduce traffic congestion by attracting car users onto public transport. Consequently she wants to develop a traffic light system which will give priority to buses. This should ensure that buses run on time. The project is no longer concerned with reducing journey times for all users. Indeed, congestion for private cars may get worse and this could further encourage car users to switch to public transport.

An important first step would be to confirm that the new mayor wishes to be the project sponsor for the project, because the project has lost its sponsor, the former mayor. The project scope also needs to be reviewed. The initial project was essentially a self-contained technical project aimed at producing a system which reduced queuing traffic. The revised proposal has much wider political scope and is concerned with discouraging car use and improving public bus services. Thus there are also proposals to increase car parking charges, to reduce the number of car park spaces (by selling off certain car parks for housing development) and to increase the frequency, quality and punctuality of buses. The project scope appears to have been widened considerably, although this will have to be confirmed with the new project sponsor.

Only once the scope of the revised project been agreed can revised project objectives be agreed and a new project plan developed, allocating the resources available to the project to the tasks required to complete the project. It is at this stage that the project manager will be able to work out if the proposed delivery date (a project constraint) is still manageable. If it is not, then some kind of agreement will have to be forged with the project sponsor. This may be to reduce the scope of the project, add more resources, or some combination of the two.

(b) Cost benefit

The re-defined project will have much more tangible effects than its predecessor and these could be classified using the standard approach suggested in the scenario. Benefits would include:

– One-off financial benefit from selling certain car parks

– this appears to be a predictable financial benefit of $325,000 which can be confidently included in a cost/benefit analysis.

– Increased income from public bus use – this appears to be a measurable benefit, in that it is an aspect of performance which can be measured (for example, bus fares collected per day), but it is not possible to estimate how much income will actually increase until the project is completed. – Increased income from car parks

– this appears to be a quantifiable benefit if the assumption is made that usage of the car parks will stay at 95%. There may indeed be sufficient confidence to define it as a financial benefit. Car park places will be reduced from 1,000 to 800, but the increase in fees will compensate for this reduction in capacity. Current expected daily income is 1,000 x $3 x 0·95 = $2,850. Future expected income will be 800 x $4 x 0·95 = $3,040.

– Improved punctuality of buses – this will again be a measurable benefit. It will be defined in terms of a Service Level promised to the residents of Brighttown. Improved punctuality might also help tempt a number of vehicle users to use public transport instead.

– Reduced emissions – buses are more energy efficient and emit less carbon dioxide than the conventional vehicles used by most of the inhabitants of Brighttown. This benefit should again be measurable (but non-financial) and should benefit the whole of the town, not just areas around traffic lights.

– Improved perception of the town – the incoming mayor believes that her policy will help attract green consumers and green companies to the town. Difficulties in classifying what is meant by these terms makes this likely to be an observable benefit, where a group, such as the Go Green team, established by the council itself can decide (based on their judgement) whether the benefit has been realised or not.

The costs of implementing the project will also have to be re-assessed. These costs will now include:

– The cost of purchasing more buses to meet the increased demand and frequency of service.

– The operational costs of running more buses, including salary costs of more bus drivers.

– Costs associated with the disposal of car parks.

– Costs associated with slowing down drivers (both economic and emotional).

The technical implementation requirements of the project will also change and this is almost certain to have cost implications because a solution will have to be developed which allows buses to be prioritised. A feasibility study will have to be commissioned to examine whether such a solution is technically feasible and, if it is, the costs of the solution will have to be estimated and entered into the cost-benefit analysis.

(c) A stakeholder grid (Mendelow) provides a framework for understanding how project team members should communicate with each stakeholder or stakeholder group. The grid itself has two axes. One axis is concerned with the power or influence of the stakeholder in this particular project. The other axis is concerned with the stakeholder’s interest in the project.

The incoming mayor: High power and high interest. The mayor is a key player in the project and should be carefully and actively managed throughout. The mayor is currently enthusiastic about the project and this enthusiasm has to be sustained. As the likely project sponsor, it will be the mayor’s responsibility to promote the project internally and to make resources available to it. It will also be up to her to ensure that the promised business benefits are actually delivered. However, she is also the person who can cancel the project at any time.

OfRoad – a government agency: OfRoad were critical of the previous mayor’s justification for the project. They felt that the business case was solely based on intangible benefits and lacked credibility. It is likely that they will be more supportive of the revised proposals for two reasons. Firstly, the proposal uses the classification of benefits which it has suggested. Secondly, the proposal includes tangible benefits which can confidently be included in a cost-benefit analysis. OfRoad is likely to have high power (because it can intervene in local transport decisions) but relatively low interest in this particular project as the town appears to be following its guidelines. An appropriate management strategy would be to keep watch and monitor the situation, making sure that nothing happens on the project which would cause the agency to take a sudden interest in it.

The private motorist of Brighttown: Most of these motorists will have a high interest in the project, because it impacts them directly; but, individually, they have very little power. Their chance to influence policy has just passed, and mayoral elections are not due for another five years. The suggested stakeholder management approach here is to keep them informed. However, their response will have to be monitored. If they organise themselves and band together as a group, they might be able to stage disruptive actions which might raise their power and have an impact on the project. This makes the point that stakeholder management is a continual process, as stakeholders may take up different positions in the grid as they organise themselves or as the project progresses.


(c) (i) Explain the inheritance tax (IHT) implications and benefits of Alvaro Pelorus varying the terms of his

father’s will such that part of Ray Pelorus’s estate is left to Vito and Sophie. State the date by which a

deed of variation would need to be made in order for it to be valid; (3 marks)

正确答案:
(c) (i) Variation of Ray’s will
The variation by Alvaro of Ray’s will, such that assets are left to Vito and Sophie, will not be regarded as a gift by Alvaro.
Instead, provided the deed states that it is intended to be effective for IHT purposes, it will be as if Ray had left the assets
to the children in his will.
This strategy, known as skipping a generation, will have no effect on the IHT due on Ray’s death but will reduce the
assets owned by Alvaro and thus his potential UK IHT liability. A deed of variation is more tax efficient than Alvaro
making gifts to the children as such gifts would be PETs and IHT may be due if Alvaro were to die within seven years.
The deed of variation must be entered into by 31 January 2009, i.e. within two years of the date of Ray’s death.

(b) Describe the principal audit procedures to be carried out in respect of the following:

(i) The measurement of the share-based payment expense; (6 marks)

正确答案:
(b) (i) Principal audit procedures – measurement of share-based payment expense
– Obtain management calculation of the expense and agree the following from the calculation to the contractual
terms of the scheme:
– Number of employees and executives granted options
– Number of options granted per employee
– The official grant date of the share options
– Vesting period for the scheme
– Required performance conditions attached to the options.
– Recalculate the expense and check that the fair value has been correctly spread over the stated vesting period.
– Agree fair value of share options to specialist’s report and calculation, and evaluate whether the specialist report is
a reliable source of evidence.
– Agree that the fair value calculated is at the grant date.
Tutorial note: A specialist such as a chartered financial analyst would commonly be used to calculate the fair value
of non-traded share options at the grant date, using models such as the Black-Scholes Model.
– Obtain and review a forecast of staffing levels or employee turnover rates for the duration of the vesting period, and
scrutinise the assumptions used to predict level of staff turnover.
– Discuss previous levels of staff turnover with a representative of the human resources department and query why
0% staff turnover has been predicted for the next three years.
– Check the sensitivity of the calculations to a change in the assumptions used in the valuation, focusing on the
assumption of 0% staff turnover.
– Obtain written representation from management confirming that the assumptions used in measuring the expense
are reasonable.
Tutorial note: A high degree of scepticism must be used by the auditor when conducting the final three procedures
due to the management assumption of 0% staff turnover during the vesting period.

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。