一起来看看吧!考ACCA对于英语水平有什么要求

发布时间:2020-04-25


ACCA对于英语水平有什么要求?接下来就跟随51题库考试学习网一起来看看具体内容吧。

ACCA是全球统一的全英文考试,需要考13门科目,报名费较贵,考试跨度时间较长,大学期间可以考试。ACCA考试分为两个阶段,F阶段与P阶段。F阶段是P阶段的基础,P阶段是F阶段的延伸与提高,所以P阶段难度也比F较段稍高。可以先学F阶段,对英语答题环境有所了解。一般的话,学员需要有大学英语考试六级左右的英文程度,当然这也是因人而易的,有很多四级没通过的小伙伴也可以一路过关斩将杀到P阶段的哦。

并且,从2001年起,ACCA对报考ACCA专业资格考试的人员的英语水平没有硬性要求,即不要求提供英语水平证书,只要申请人认为自己的英语水平可以胜任ACCA的考试就可以。在OBU项目改革后,也不需要提供英文成绩证明了。要知道,在没有改革之前,如果学员在注册时选择参加牛津·布鲁克斯大学学位项目(即希望在通过前9门课程后申请该大学的应用会计理学士学位),则应按该大学的要求提供ACCA认可的英语水平证明,如cet-6toeflgmatielts证书等哦。所以在改革后不需要英语证明了,也是对英语成绩不太好的小伙伴是一个非常大的福利。不但可以通过学习ACCA来提升自己的专业水平和英语水平,也可以选择申请OBU学位,来提升自己的学位了。

会计ACCA的就业前景:需求大

第一、从数量上来说,ACCA相对于其他专业人士的数目来说,人数稀少,但需求量大。ACCA会员目前在国内尚少,而作为高层管理高端型人才,以及越来越多的企业趋于国际化全球化的大变革中,企业对于ACCA的需求量是极大的。

会计ACCA的就业前景:英语优势

第二、从语言上来说,ACCA是纯英文教材与考试,优势明显。

尽管由于ACCA的纯英文教材和纯英文考试使得很多中国学生有些却步,然而也正是因为有纯英文这个门槛,使得ACCA的优势凸显。对于趋于国际化全球化的国内企业,一方面,企业做大就需要上市,通晓其他的会计制度以及税法商法的ACCA就很容易驾驭,帮助企业按照不同需求来做不同的上市准备。另一方面,即便企业没有做大到需要上市,但是对于死守国内市场已不是发展的现状,走出国门,做国外市场或者与外资企业合作就成了必经之路。

会计ACCA的就业前景:职业发展

第三、从个人职业发展来说,ACCA属于宏观统筹型人才。

相对于传统会计,ACCA更偏重于管理以及统筹、预测及规划企业走向及企业未来发展。这对于中国传统的应试教育来说是个非常好的互补,在获取知识用以解决实际问题这方面对于传统教学教育出来的学生是一次拓展思维训练的机会。调查中发现,在招聘网站中,大部分要求具有ACCA资格的职位有财务总监(CFO)、总经理助理、董事长助理以及首席财务官。这些职位要求应聘者不仅需要计算财务方面的专业知识,还需要有对于财务分析、部门配合、以及做出专业的报告让非财务人员理解并执行的能力。且多数外企要求CFO需具备中英文两种语言能力,这对于中国学生来说也是极大的优势。

好的,以上就是今天51题库考试学习网为大家分享的全部内容,想了解更多内容,敬请关注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。

(b) Discuss the view that fair value is a more relevant measure to use in corporate reporting than historical cost.

(12 marks)

正确答案:
(b) The main disagreement over a shift to fair value measurement is the debate over relevance versus reliability. It is argued that
historical cost financial statements are not relevant because they do not provide information about current exchange values
for the entity’s assets which to some extent determine the value of the shares of the entity. However, the information provided
by fair values may be unreliable because it may not be based on arm’s-length transactions. Proponents of fair value
accounting argue that this measurement is more relevant to decision makers even if it is less reliable and would produce
balance sheets that are more representative of a company’s value. However it can be argued that relevant information that is
unreliable is of no use to an investor. One advantage of historical cost financial information is that it produces earnings
numbers that are not based on appraisals or other valuation techniques. Therefore, the income statement is less likely to be
subject to manipulation by management. In addition, historical cost balance sheet figures comprise actual purchase prices,
not estimates of current values that can be altered to improve various financial ratios. Because historical cost statements rely
less on estimates and more on ‘hard’ numbers, it can be said that historical cost financial statements are more reliable than
fair value financial statements. Furthermore, fair value measurements may be less reliable than historical costs measures
because fair value accounting provides management with the opportunity to manipulate the reported profit for the period.
Developing reliable methods of measuring fair value so that investors trust the information reported in financial statements is
critical.
Fair value measurement could be said to be more relevant than historical cost as it is based on market values and not entity
specific measurement on initial recognition, so long as fair values can be reliably measured. Generally the fair value of the
consideration given or received (effectively historical cost) also represents the fair value of the item at the date of initial
recognition. However there are many cases where significant differences between historical cost and fair value can arise on
initial recognition.
Historical cost does not purport to measure the value received. It cannot be assumed that the price paid can be recovered in
the market place. Hence the need for some additional measure of recoverable value and impairment testing of assets.
Historical cost can be an entity specific measurement. The recorded historical cost can be lower or higher than its fair value.
For example the valuation of inventory is determined by the costing method adopted by the entity and this can vary from
entity to entity. Historical cost often requires the allocation of costs to an asset or liability. These costs are attributed to assets,
liabilities and expenses, and are often allocated arbitrarily. An example of this is self constructed assets. Rules set out in
accounting standards help produce some consistency of historical cost measurements but such rules cannot improve
representational faithfulness.
Another problem with historical cost arises as regards costs incurred prior to an asset being recognised. Historical costs
recorded from development expenditure cannot be capitalised if they are incurred prior to the asset meeting the recognition
criteria in IAS38 ‘Intangible Assets’. Thus the historical cost amount does not represent the fair value of the consideration
given to create the asset.
The relevance of historical cost has traditionally been based on a cost/revenue matching principle. The objective has been to
expense the cost of the asset when the revenue to which the asset has contributed is recognised. If the historical cost of the
asset differs from its fair value on initial recognition then the matching process in future periods becomes arbitrary. The
measurement of assets at fair value will enhance the matching objective. Historical cost may have use in predicting future
net reported income but does not have any necessary implications for future cash flows. Fair value does embody the market’s
expectations for those future cash flows.
However, historical cost is grounded in actual transaction amounts and has existed for many years to the extent that it is
supported by practical experience and familiarity. Historical cost is accepted as a reliable measure especially where no other
relevant measurement basis can be applied.

(ii) The shares held in Date Inc and the dividend income received from that company. (7 marks)

正确答案:
(ii) Shares held in Date Inc and the related dividend income
Degrouping charge
There will be a degrouping charge in Nikau Ltd in the year ending 31 March 2008 in respect of the shares in Date Inc.
This is because Nikau Ltd has left the Facet Group within six years of the no gain, no loss transfer of the shares whilst
still owning them.
Nikau Ltd is treated as if it has sold the shares in Date Inc for their market value as at the time of the no gain, no loss
transfer. This will give rise to a gain, ignoring indexation allowance, of £201,000 (£338,000 – £137,000).
This gain will give rise to additional corporation tax of £60,300 (£201,000 x 30%).
Controlled foreign company
Date Inc is a controlled foreign company. The profits of such a company are normally attributed to its UK resident
shareholders such that they are subject to UK corporation tax.
However, none of the profits of Date Inc will be attributed to Nikau Ltd because Date Inc distributes more than 90%
(£115,000/£120,000 = 95·8%) of its chargeable profits to its shareholders.
Dividend income
Nikau Ltd is a UK resident company and is therefore subject to corporation tax on its worldwide income.
The dividend income will be grossed up in respect of the withholding tax giving rise to taxable income of £39,792
(£38,200 x 100/96). There is no underlying tax as there are no taxes on income or capital profits in Palladia.
The corporation tax of £11,938 (£39,792 x 30%) will be reduced by unilateral double tax relief equal to the withholding
tax suffered of £1,592 (£39,792 x 4%) resulting in corporation tax due of £10,346 (£11,938 – £1,592).

(d) Suggest a set of SIX performance measures which the directors of SSH could use in order to assess the

quality of service provided to its clients. (3 marks)

正确答案:
(d) The following performance measures which could be used to assess the quality of service provided to its clients:
– The reliability of staff in keeping to scheduled appointment times with clients
– The responsiveness of staff to client enquiries or requests for assistance
– The quality of communications between SSH and its clients
– The competence of its staff in providing training to its clients
– The access times to staff upon the request of clients
– The availability of staff to meet emergency needs of clients
– The security of the data of its client base.
Notes: (i) Only six performance measures were required
(ii) Other relevant performance measures would be acceptable.

(b) Peter, one of Linden Limited’s non-executive directors, having lived and worked in the UK for most of his adult

life, sold his home near London on 22 March 2006 and, together with his wife (a French citizen), moved to live

in a villa which she owns in the south of France. Peter is now demanding that the tax deducted from his director’s

fees, for the board meetings held on 18 April and 16 May 2006, be refunded, on the grounds that, as he is no

longer resident in the UK, he is no longer liable to UK income tax. All of the company’s board meetings are held

at its offices in Cambridge.

Despite Peter’s assurance that none of the other companies of which he is a director has disputed his change of

tax status, Damian is uncertain whether he should make the refunds requested. However, as Peter is a friend of

the company’s founder, Linden Limited’s managing director is urging him to do so, stating that if the tax does

have to be paid, then Linden Limited could always bear the cost.

Required:

Advise Damian whether Peter is correct in his assertion regarding his tax position and in the case that there

is a UK tax liability the implications of the managing director’s suggestion. You are not required to consider

national insurance (NIC) issues. (4 marks)

正确答案:
(b) Peter will have been resident and ordinarily resident in the UK. When such individuals leave the UK for a purpose other than
to take up full time employment abroad, they normally continue to still be so regarded unless their absence spans a complete
tax year. But, where someone intends to live permanently abroad or to do so for a period of at least three tax years, they may
be treated as non-resident and non-ordinarily resident from the day after the date of their departure, if they can provide
evidence to HMRC of that intention. Selling a residence in the UK and setting up home abroad will normally constitute such
evidence. However to retain non-resident status the intention must actually be fulfilled, and visits to the UK must not exceed
182 days in any tax year or average more than 90 days per year over a period of four tax years. Given that Peter would appear
to have several company directorships in the UK, it is possible that he might fail to satisfy the 90 day average ‘substantial
visits’ rule.
Even if Peter is classed as non-resident, any remuneration earned in the UK will still be liable to UK income tax, and subject
to PAYE, unless it is for duties incidental to an overseas employment, which is unlikely to be the case for fees paid to a nonexecutive
director for attending board meetings. Thus, income tax should still be deducted from the fees under PAYE. Where
PAYE should have been deducted from a director’s emoluments and it has not been, but the tax is nevertheless accounted
for by the company to HMRC, then to the extent that the tax is not reimbursed by the director, he will be treated as receiving
a benefit equivalent to the amount of tax.

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。