国际注册会计师ACCA考试报名需要哪些条件？

发布时间：2021-07-01

国际注册会计师ACCA考试报名需要哪些条件？

最佳答案

国际注册会计师ACCA考试报名条件：
(1）凡具有教育部承认的大专以上学历，即可报名成为ACCA的正式学员；
(2）教育部认可的高等院校在校生，顺利完成所有课程考试，即可报名成为ACCA的正式学员；
(3）未符合以上报名资格的申请者，而年龄在21岁以上，可循成年考生(MSER)途径申请入会。该途径允许学员作为ACCA校外进修生，在两年内通过F2和F3两门课程，便能以正式学员的身份继续考其他科目。
(4）未符合1、2项报名资格的申请者，也可以先申请参加CAT资格考试。获得CAT资格证书后可豁免ACCA F1-F3三门课程的考试，直接进入技能课程的考试。

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。

(c) Mentoring. (3 marks)

正确答案：
(c) Mentoring, not to be confused with coaching, involves training on a wider range of activities, often aimed at career development of employees at supervisory or management level. The trainee is provided with a development programme and is under close supervision. The mentor should not be the trainee’s immediate supervisor or manager.

3 You are the manager responsible for the audit of Lamont Co. The company’s principal activity is wholesaling frozen

fish. The draft consolidated financial statements for the year ended 31 March 2007 show revenue of $67·0 million

(2006 – $62·3 million), profit before taxation of $11·9 million (2006 – $14·2 million) and total assets of

$48·0 million (2006 – $36·4 million).

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

(a) In early 2007 a chemical leakage from refrigeration units owned by Lamont caused contamination of some of its

property. Lamont has incurred $0·3 million in clean up costs, $0·6 million in modernisation of the units to

prevent future leakage and a $30,000 fine to a regulatory agency. Apart from the fine, which has been expensed,

these costs have been capitalised as improvements. (7 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 Lamont Co for the year ended

31 March 2007.

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

正确答案：
3 LAMONT CO
(a) Chemical leakage
(i) Matters
■ $30,000 fine is very immaterial (just 1/4% profit before tax). This is revenue expenditure and it is correct that it
has been expensed to the income statement.
■ $0·3 million represents 0·6% total assets and 2·5% profit before tax and is not material on its own. $0·6 million
represents 1·2% total assets and 5% profit before tax and is therefore material to the financial statements.
■ The $0·3 million clean-up costs should not have been capitalised as the condition of the property is not improved
as compared with its condition before the leakage occurred. Although not material in isolation this amount should
be adjusted for and expensed, thereby reducing the aggregate of uncorrected misstatements.
■ It may be correct that $0·6 million incurred in modernising the refrigeration units should be capitalised as a major
overhaul (IAS 16 Property, Plant and Equipment). However, any parts scrapped as a result of the modernisation
should be treated as disposals (i.e. written off to the income statement).
■ The carrying amount of the refrigeration units at 31 March 2007, including the $0·6 million for modernisation,
should not exceed recoverable amount (i.e. the higher of value in use and fair value less costs to sell). If it does,
an allowance for the impairment loss arising must be recognised in accordance with IAS 36 Impairment of Assets.
(ii) Audit evidence
■ A breakdown/analysis of costs incurred on the clean-up and modernisation amounting to $0·3 million and
$0·6 million respectively.
■ Agreement of largest amounts to invoices from suppliers/consultants/sub-contractors, etc and settlement thereof
traced from the cash book to the bank statement.
■ Physical inspection of the refrigeration units to confirm their modernisation and that they are in working order. (Do
they contain frozen fish?)
■ Sample of components selected from the non-current asset register traced to the refrigeration units and inspected
to ensure continuing existence.
■ $30,000 penalty notice from the regulatory agency and corresponding cash book payment/payment per the bank
statement.
■ Written management representation that there are no further penalties that should be provided for or disclosed other
than the $30,000 that has been accounted for.

The following information is relevant for questions 9 and 10

A company’s draft financial statements for 2005 showed a profit of $630,000. However, the trial balance did not agree,

and a suspense account appeared in the company’s draft balance sheet.

Subsequent checking revealed the following errors:

(1) The cost of an item of plant $48,000 had been entered in the cash book and in the plant account as $4,800.

Depreciation at the rate of 10% per year ($480) had been charged.

(2) Bank charges of $440 appeared in the bank statement in December 2005 but had not been entered in the

company’s records.

(3) One of the directors of the company paid $800 due to a supplier in the company’s payables ledger by a personal

cheque. The bookkeeper recorded a debit in the supplier’s ledger account but did not complete the double entry

for the transaction. (The company does not maintain a payables ledger control account).

(4) The payments side of the cash book had been understated by $10,000.

9 Which of the above items would require an entry to the suspense account in correcting them?

A All four items

B 3 and 4 only

C 2 and 3 only

D 1, 2 and 4 only

正确答案：B

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