好消息！ACCA可以申请英国硕士学位了

发布时间：2020-02-02

考ACCA真的可以申请英国硕士学位吗？答案是肯定的。但是如何才能申请英国硕士？接下来51题库考试学习网将为大家分享相关内容，详情如下：

1、如果你是ACCA学员——ACCA专业阶段前2门核心课程将获伦敦大学认可，学生在学习或通过这2门核心课程时就有资格申请伦敦大学该硕士学位;    2、如果你是ACCA会员/准会员——需要成功完成“财会专业人士的全球议题”和战略财务项目，方可获得这一学位。

申请英国硕士，要准备的材料具体如下：      

1. 申请时必须递交的材料：已有成绩单，在读证明，两封推荐信，个人陈述  2.申请时可以不递交但必须在入学前递交的材料：雅思成绩单，护照信息页

2. 其他材料：CV、GRE/GMAT证书，获奖证书，实习证明，作品等。   

准备申请的流程：      

1. 把握最佳申请时间，可提高申请成功率      

英国硕士课程每年9月底正式开学，提前一年开始接受申请。建议申请者在每年9月到次年3月递交申请。不过，学生要留意个别大学或专业特别提出的申请截止日期，英国留学讲的是先到先得，一旦人数招满，随时关闭申请，即使学生条件再优秀，也只得再等一年。      

2. 全方位考量，确定大学和专业方向      

学生要准确客观评估自身情况，综合考虑排名、专业水平、留学费用、地理位置、交通等情况，结合自己的本科专业、喜爱程度、未来的职业发展等情况选择适合自己的学校。学校一般可以同时申请3-5所，应按照高中低的层次合理分配。  3.注重文书写作，用个人魅力打动招生官      

英国大学除了看重学生本科学校背景、本科平均成绩、雅思成绩、本科专业与所申请专业是否相关这些硬性条件外，还非常看重申请者的自述信、推荐信、简历等软材料。他们更希望看到体现申请者个性、爱好、独特素质、实习工作经历的文书。这些申请文书，对于英国硕士申请，特别是名校申请，往往关系到申请的成败。      

3. 良好语言水平是硬道理，无雅思可先申请      

关于英国硕士申请的雅思条件，商科、社会学、文史类专业要求雅思达到6.0-7.0，理工科专业要求雅思达到6.0-6.5.如果在申请时已有雅思成绩为最佳。如未考雅思，也可先申请大学的有条件录取。达不到语言要求的学生可以提前1-2个月到学校读语言课程，然后就可以直接入读硕士课程。部分学校语言课程的名额也相当紧张，所以也要尽早申请。

好啦，今天的分享到这里就结束了，以上就是51题库考试学习网为大家分享的ACCA考试的相关内容，不知道有没有帮助到你呢？还有疑问的小伙伴请多多关注51题库考试学习网，我们会持续更新。

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。

(ii) Briefly discuss THREE disadvantages of using EVA? in the measurement of financial performance.

(3 marks)

正确答案：
(ii) Disadvantages of an EVA approach to the measurement of financial performance include:
(i) The calculation of EVA may be complicated due to the number of adjustments required.
(ii) It is difficult to use EVA for inter-firm and inter-divisional comparisons because it is not a ratio measure.
(iii) Economic depreciation is difficult to estimate and conflicts with generally accepted accounting principles.
Note: Other relevant discussion would be acceptable.

3 You are the manager responsible for the audit of Keffler Co, a private limited company engaged in the manufacture of

plastic products. The draft financial statements for the year ended 31 March 2006 show revenue of $47·4 million

(2005 – $43·9 million), profit before taxation of $2 million (2005 – $2·4 million) and total assets of $33·8 million

(2005 – $25·7 million).

The following issues arising during the final audit have been noted on a schedule of points for your attention:

(a) In April 2005, Keffler bought the right to use a landfill site for a period of 15 years for $1·1 million. Keffler

expects that the amount of waste that it will need to dump will increase annually and that the site will be

completely filled after just ten years. Keffler has charged the following amounts to the income statement for the

year to 31 March 2006:

– $20,000 licence amortisation calculated on a sum-of-digits basis to increase the charge over the useful life

of the site; and

– $100,000 annual provision for restoring the land in 15 years’ time. (9 marks)

Required:

For each of the above issues:

(i) comment on the matters that you should consider; and

(ii) state the audit evidence that you should expect to find,

in undertaking your review of the audit working papers and financial statements of Keffler Co for the year ended

31 March 2006.

NOTE: The mark allocation is shown against each of the three issues.

正确答案：
3 KEFFLER CO
Tutorial note: None of the issues have any bearing on revenue. Therefore any materiality calculations assessed on revenue are
inappropriate and will not be awarded marks.
(a) Landfill site
(i) Matters
■ $1·1m cost of the right represents 3·3% of total assets and is therefore material.
■ The right should be amortised over its useful life, that is just 10 years, rather than the 15-year period for which
the right has been granted.
Tutorial note: Recalculation on the stated basis (see audit evidence) shows that a 10-year amortisation has been
correctly used.
■ The amortisation charge represents 1% of profit before tax (PBT) and is not material.
■ The amortisation method used should reflect the pattern in which the future economic benefits of the right are
expected to be consumed by Keffler. If that pattern cannot be determined reliably, the straight-line method must
be used (IAS 38 ‘Intangible Assets’).
■ Using an increasing sum-of-digits will ‘end-load’ the amortisation charge (i.e. least charge in the first year, highest
charge in the last year). However, according to IAS 38 there is rarely, if ever, persuasive evidence to support an
amortisation method that results in accumulated amortisation lower than that under the straight-line method.
Tutorial note: Over the first half of the asset’s life, depreciation will be lower than under the straight-line basis
(and higher over the second half of the asset’s life).
■ On a straight line basis the annual amortisation charge would be $0·11m, an increase of $90,000. Although this
difference is just below materiality (4·5% PBT) the cumulative effect (of undercharging amortisation) will become
material.
■ Also, when account is taken of the understatement of cost (see below), the undercharging of amortisation will be
material.
■ The sum-of-digits method might be suitable as an approximation to the unit-of-production method if Keffler has
evidence to show that use of the landfill site will increase annually.
■ However, in the absence of such evidence, the audit opinion should be qualified ‘except for’ disagreement with the
amortisation method (resulting in intangible asset overstatement/amortisation expense understatement).
■ The annual restoration provision represents 5% of PBT and 0·3% of total assets. Although this is only borderline
material (in terms of profit), there will be a cumulative impact.
■ Annual provisioning is contrary to IAS 37 ‘Provisions, Contingent Liabilities and Contingent Assets’.
■ The estimate of the future restoration cost is (presumably) $1·5m (i.e. $0·1 × 15). The present value of this
amount should have been provided in full in the current year and included in the cost of the right.
■ Thus the amortisation being charged on the cost of the right (including the restoration cost) is currently understated
(on any basis).
Tutorial note: A 15-year discount factor at 10% (say) is 0·239. $1·5m × 0·239 is approximately $0·36m. The
resulting present value (of the future cost) would be added to the cost of the right. Amortisation over 10 years
on a straight-line basis would then be increased by $36,000, increasing the difference between amortisation
charged and that which should be charged. The lower the discount rate, the greater the understatement of
amortisation expense.
Total amount expensed ($120k) is less than what should have been expensed (say $146k amortisation + $36k
unwinding of discount). However, this is not material.
■ Whether Keffler will wait until the right is about to expire before restoring the land or might restore earlier (if the
site is completely filled in 10 years).
(ii) Audit evidence
■ Written agreement for purchase of right and contractual terms therein (e.g. to make restoration in 15 years’ time).
■ Cash book/bank statement entries in April 2005 for $1·1m payment.
■ Physical inspection of the landfill site to confirm Keffler’s use of it.
■ Annual dump budget/projection over next 10 years and comparison with sum-of-digits proportions.
■ Amount actually dumped in the year (per dump records) compared with budget and as a percentage/proportion of
the total available.
■ Recalculation of current year’s amortisation based on sum-of-digits. That is, $1·1m ÷ 55 = $20,000.
Tutorial note: The sum-of-digits from 1 to 10 may be calculated long-hand or using the formula n(n+1)/2 i.e.
(10 × 11)/2 = 55.
■ The basis of the calculation of the estimated restoration costs and principal assumptions made.
■ If estimated by a quantity surveyor/other expert then a copy of the expert’s report.
■ Written management representation confirming the planned timing of the restoration in 15 years (or sooner).

(b) What are the advantages and disadvantages of using a balanced scorecard to better assess the overall

performance of Lawson Engineering? (8 marks)

正确答案：
(b) In many ways Lawson Engineering and its performance explains why Kaplan and Norton developed the balanced scorecard
to overcome the reliance on traditional, and they would argue flawed, financial measures of performance such as return on
capital employed (ROCE). Lawson Engineering as a privately owned company does not have the same pressure to maximise
shareholder wealth, which is the overarching long-term goal of publicly quoted companies. The intangible resources discussed
above – both internal and external – reflect the success of the company in meeting the expectations of the other key
stakeholders in the business, namely customers, employees and suppliers. In terms of the other measures of performance
used in the balanced scorecard the customer perspective seems to be very much a positive area of performance. Lawson
Engineering has developed a clear niche strategy based on the excellence of its products. Market share as a measure of
customer satisfaction is not too relevant as the company has chosen to develop its own markets and is not looking for large
volumes and a dominant market share. The growth of the company suggests that it is both retaining its existing customer
base and acquiring new ones. Clearly there need to be measures in place to show where its growth is coming from. Customer
acquisition is usually an expensive but necessary activity and cutomer retention a more positive route to profitability. Today
there is increasing emphasis on customer relationship management (CRM) and measures to show the share of a particular
customer’s business the company has, rather than the overall market share the company has achieved. Michael Porter has
drawn attention to the fact that having the biggest market share is not necessarily associated with being the most profitable
company in that market. Customer acquisition and retention are both useful indicators of customer satisfaction which many
companies have problems in measuring. Finally, knowing which customers are profitable ones is a key requirement.
Surprisingly there is a lot of evidence to suggest that many companies are unsure which of their products and which
customers actually contribute to their profits.
The third measure in the balanced scorecard is an internal one – the effectiveness or otherwise of the firm’s internal processes.
In turn there are three areas where performance should be measured – innovation, operational processes and after sales
service (where appropriate). Innovation itself is a result of effective internal processes and Lawson Engineering through its
patents and awards has tangible evidence of its success. Many firms are measuring the contribution of products introduced
in the last three or four years – 3M, a global manufacturer of consumer and industrial products looks to achieve 30% of its
sales from products that are less than four years old. Equally important in a company such as Lawson Engineering is the time
taken to develop and get new products to their customers. The strategy of being ‘first to market’ can be a very effective
competitive strategy.
Equally important for the customers are the operational processes that produce and deliver the inputs from their suppliers.
The introduction of JIT and the use of technology to shorten and simplify the links between supplier and customer are ways
of shortening lead times and increasing customer satisfaction. Lawson Engineering has looked to innovate its processes as
well as its products and can look to develop measures of key areas of operational performance. Finally it is worth stressing
that financial performance, customer satisfaction and effective internal processes are all dependent on the people who make
things happen in the firm. Employees and the way they learn and grow in their jobs will determine whether or not the firm
succeeds. Again there is evidence to suggest that Lawson Engineering’s employees are being trained and developed and as
a consequence are well motivated.
The balanced scorecard has been criticised on a number of accounts. Firstly, such a comprehensive set of performance
measures will take considerable time and commitment on the part of senior management to develop. There is a need to avoid
over-complexity and assess the costs and benefits of the process. Secondly, there is the question of whether all the key
stakeholders have shared goals and expectations and whether the measures are focused on short-, medium- or long-term
performance. Thirdly, its focus on internal and external processes may not come easily to firms that have organised themselves
on traditional lines. Most organisations have retained departments within which functional specialists are located, e.g.
production, marketing etc. Changing the way performance is measured may need a radical change in culture and meetsignificant resistance.

(a) The following information relates to Crosswire a publicly listed company.

Summarised statements of financial position as at:

The following information is available:

(i) During the year to 30 September 2009, Crosswire embarked on a replacement and expansion programme for its non-current assets. The details of this programme are:

On 1 October 2008 Crosswire acquired a platinum mine at a cost of $5 million. A condition of mining the

platinum is a requirement to landscape the mining site at the end of its estimated life of ten years. The

present value of this cost at the date of the purchase was calculated at $3 million (in addition to the

purchase price of the mine of $5 million).

Also on 1 October 2008 Crosswire revalued its freehold land for the first time. The credit in the revaluation

reserve is the net amount of the revaluation after a transfer to deferred tax on the gain. The tax rate applicable to Crosswire for deferred tax is 20% per annum.

On 1 April 2009 Crosswire took out a finance lease for some new plant. The fair value of the plant was

$10 million. The lease agreement provided for an initial payment on 1 April 2009 of $2·4 million followed

by eight six-monthly payments of $1·2 million commencing 30 September 2009.

Plant disposed of during the year had a carrying amount of $500,000 and was sold for $1·2 million. The

remaining movement on the property, plant and equipment, after charging depreciation of $3 million, was

the cost of replacing plant.

(ii) From 1 October 2008 to 31 March 2009 a further $500,000 was spent completing the development

project at which date marketing and production started. The sales of the new product proved disappointing

and on 30 September 2009 the development costs were written down to $1 million via an impairment

charge.

(iii) During the year ended 30 September 2009, $4 million of the 10% convertible loan notes matured. The

loan note holders had the option of redemption at par in cash or to exchange them for equity shares on the

basis of 20 new shares for each $100 of loan notes. 75% of the loan-note holders chose the equity option.

Ignore any effect of this on the other equity reserve.

All the above items have been treated correctly according to International Financial Reporting Standards.

(iv) The finance costs are made up of:

Required:

(i) Prepare a statement of the movements in the carrying amount of Crosswire’s non-current assets for the

year ended 30 September 2009; (9 marks)

(ii) Calculate the amounts that would appear under the headings of ‘cash flows from investing activities’

and ‘cash flows from financing activities’ in the statement of cash flows for Crosswire for the year ended

30 September 2009.

Note: Crosswire includes finance costs paid as a financing activity. (8 marks)

(b) A substantial shareholder has written to the directors of Crosswire expressing particular concern over the

deterioration of the company’s return on capital employed (ROCE)

Required:

Calculate Crosswire’s ROCE for the two years ended 30 September 2008 and 2009 and comment on the

apparent cause of its deterioration.

Note: ROCE should be taken as profit before interest on long-term borrowings and tax as a percentage of equity plus loan notes and finance lease obligations (at the year end). (8 marks)

正确答案：
(i)Thecashelementsoftheincreaseinproperty,plantandequipmentare$5millionforthemine(thecapitalisedenvironmentalprovisionisnotacashflow)and$2·4millionforthereplacementplantmakingatotalof$7·4million.(ii)Ofthe$4millionconvertibleloannotes(5,000–1,000)thatwereredeemedduringtheyear,75%($3million)ofthesewereexchangedforequitysharesonthebasisof20newsharesforeach$100inloannotes.Thiswouldcreate600,000(3,000/100x20)newsharesof$1eachandsharepremiumof$2·4million(3,000–600).As1million(5,000–4,000)newshareswereissuedintotal,400,000musthavebeenforcash.Theremainingincrease(aftertheeffectoftheconversion)inthesharepremiumof$1·6million(6,000–2,000b/f–2,400conversion)mustrelatetothecashissueofshares,thuscashproceedsfromtheissueofsharesis$2million(400nominalvalue+1,600premium).(iii)Theinitialleaseobligationis$10million(thefairvalueoftheplant).At30September2009totalleaseobligationsare$6·8million(5,040+1,760),thusrepaymentsintheyearwere$3·2million(10,000–6,800).(b)TakingthedefinitionofROCEfromthequestion:Fromtheaboveitcanbeclearlyseenthatthe2009operatingmarginhasimprovedbynearly1%point,despitethe$2millionimpairmentchargeonthewritedownofthedevelopmentproject.ThismeansthedeteriorationintheROCEisduetopoorerassetturnover.Thisimpliestherehasbeenadecreaseintheefficiencyintheuseofthecompany’sassetsthisyearcomparedtolastyear.Lookingatthemovementinthenon-currentassetsduringtheyearrevealssomemitigatingpoints:Thelandrevaluationhasincreasedthecarryingamountofproperty,plantandequipmentwithoutanyphysicalincreaseincapacity.Thisunfavourablydistortsthecurrentyear’sassetturnoverandROCEfigures.TheacquisitionoftheplatinummineappearstobeanewareaofoperationforCrosswirewhichmayhaveadifferent(perhapslower)ROCEtootherpreviousactivitiesoritmaybethatitwilltakesometimefortheminetocometofullproductioncapacity.Thesubstantialacquisitionoftheleasedplantwashalf-waythroughtheyearandcanonlyhavecontributedtotheyear’sresultsforsixmonthsatbest.Infutureperiodsafullyear’scontributioncanbeexpectedfromthisnewinvestmentinplantandthisshouldimprovebothassetturnoverandROCE.Insummary,thefallintheROCEmaybeduelargelytotheabovefactors(effectivelythereplacementandexpansionprogramme),ratherthantopooroperatingperformance,andinfutureperiodsthismaybereversed.ItshouldalsobenotedthathadtheROCEbeencalculatedontheaveragecapitalemployedduringtheyear(ratherthantheyearendcapitalemployed),whichisarguablymorecorrect,thenthedeteriorationintheROCEwouldnothavebeenaspronounced.

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。

站内搜索
热门标签