Is ACCA essential for working internationally?

Hi guys,

I understand that ACCA is the internationally recognized chartered accountancy body, but is it absolutely necessary to train through them to allow for the possibility to work abroad?

Short term I'd have certainly thought it was necessary, but long term would practical experience make the actual qualification and its specific details a redundant factor to an overseas employer?

Or do you at all know if it's easy enough to simply 'transfer' to the ACCA body? I'd have thought there's be a lot of exam exceptions if I had the ICAEW ACA qualification. I ask this as most on the job training vacancies offer ACA (correct me if I'm wrong though!)

Thanks for any advice

IFAC Bodies grant each other credits for prior studies.
You have to be a bit specific like the name of the other country and do you want to go for Audit/TLS/Risk Advisory?

If I was going to work abroad one day it'd be Canada or the USA (most likely Canada). As for which area, at the moment I can't say I have any idea.

I have recently registered for the CFAB so I can show on my CV I have the dedication to become an accountant (I also decided to start self studying as I have a 2.2 degree so showing the dedication is a little more important) - maybe it was a little hasty to jump straight in with ICAEW, but if it turns out I'd get a load of exemptions for ACCA I wouldn't mind too much, and if I do have to change I'm not too bothered about wasting the money on signing up for the CFAB anyway, if it keeps the door for overseas work open.

Thanks

Hi guys,

I understand that ACCA is the internationally recognized chartered accountancy body, but is it absolutely necessary to train through them to allow for the possibility to work abroad?

Short term I'd have certainly thought it was necessary, but long term would practical experience make the actual qualification and its specific details a redundant factor to an overseas employer?

Or do you at all know if it's easy enough to simply 'transfer' to the ACCA body? I'd have thought there's be a lot of exam exceptions if I had the ICAEW ACA qualification. I ask this as most on the job training vacancies offer ACA (correct me if I'm wrong though!)

Thanks for any advice

Right, let's get rid of some myths here. For a start, the idea that ACCA is essential for working internationally is dead wrong. First of all, CIMA and the ICAEW have just as many international alliances as ACCA do. Second, and much more devastating for ACCA, large parts of the English speaking world require that they do further study to call themselves accountants:

1) In Australia, if you're CIMA you can join the CPAA. If you're ACA, you can join ICAA. ACCAs have to do further study to be a member of an Australian body.

2) In New Zealand, ACAs can join NZICA. Again, nothing for ACCA.

3) In Canada, CIMA and ACAs can join CICA. ACCAs have to do further study.

4) In the United States, only ACAs can join AICPA without further study.

ACCA got its international reputation by hawking its qualification to the third world to make money. If you have a lifelong dream to life in Sierra Leone then yes, I would probably say ACCA is better than the ACA to achieve your dreams.

However, only the ICAEW is recognised across the English speaking world and is also taken by students in several significant economies such as China and Russia. ACCA might have been more popular in China, were it not for the fact that it makes far more sense for Chinese students to study Australian qualifications (CPAA is very popular there).

I've been quite harsh on ACCA here but only because I have a particular loathing for false marketing. I am not a member of any accounting body myself (I am a member of ICSA) and I generally subscribe to the view that ACCA and the ACA offer much the same qualification and should merge. However, for the time being, they're separate bodies and ACCA's claims of being the international body has far more to do with making money by selling exams to students in the third world than the portability of its UK students.

Hi guys,

I understand that ACCA is the internationally recognized chartered accountancy body

4) In the United States, only ACAs can join AICPA without further study.

ACCA got its international reputation by hawking its qualification to the third world to make money. If you have a lifelong dream to life in Sierra Leone then yes, I would probably say ACCA is better than the ACA to achieve your dreams.

However, only the ICAEW is recognised across the English speaking world and is also taken by students in several significant economies such as China and Russia. ACCA might have been more popular in China, were it not for the fact that it makes far more sense for Chinese students to study Australian qualifications (CPAA is very popular there).

I've been quite harsh on ACCA here but only because I have a particular loathing for false marketing. I am not a member of any accounting body myself (I am a member of ICSA) and I generally subscribe to the view that ACCA and the ACA offer much the same qualification and should merge. However, for the time being, they're separate bodies and ACCA's claims of being the international body has far more to do with making money by selling exams to students in the third world than the portability of its UK students.

I'd declare an interest here in being an ICAS member myself, but from a brief look around the AICPA and ACAUS websites, I believe that ICAS is held in equal standing in terms of becoming both an AICPA International Affiliate and an ACAUS member, while also having similar levels of recognition in the UK as the ICAEW.

http://www.aicpa.org/membership/join/pages/internationalassoc.aspx

Right, let's get rid of some myths here. For a start, the idea that ACCA is essential for working internationally is dead wrong. First of all, CIMA and the ICAEW have just as many international alliances as ACCA do. Second, and much more devastating for ACCA, large parts of the English speaking world require that they do further study to call themselves accountants:

1) In Australia, if you're CIMA you can join the CPAA. If you're ACA, you can join ICAA. ACCAs have to do further study to be a member of an Australian body.

2) In New Zealand, ACAs can join NZICA. Again, nothing for ACCA.

3) In Canada, CIMA and ACAs can join CICA. ACCAs have to do further study.

4) In the United States, only ACAs can join AICPA without further study.

ACCA got its international reputation by hawking its qualification to the third world to make money. If you have a lifelong dream to life in Sierra Leone then yes, I would probably say ACCA is better than the ACA to achieve your dreams.

However, only the ICAEW is recognised across the English speaking world and is also taken by students in several significant economies such as China and Russia. ACCA might have been more popular in China, were it not for the fact that it makes far more sense for Chinese students to study Australian qualifications (CPAA is very popular there).

I've been quite harsh on ACCA here but only because I have a particular loathing for false marketing. I am not a member of any accounting body myself (I am a member of ICSA) and I generally subscribe to the view that ACCA and the ACA offer much the same qualification and should merge. However, for the time being, they're separate bodies and ACCA's claims of being the international body has far more to do with making money by selling exams to students in the third world than the portability of its UK students.

Yes, as a member of the Global Accounting Alliance, the same would be true for ICAS and ICAI members as it is for ICAEW.

I thought as much - thanks. Not quite "only" the ICAEW/ACAs then : Either way, the key point is the difference in recognition between the ACCA and ICAEW/ICAS, etc. - but I believe that even then there are often additional qualification requirements by state.

Right, let's get rid of some myths here. For a start, the idea that ACCA is essential for working internationally is dead wrong. First of all, CIMA and the ICAEW have just as many international alliances as ACCA do. Second, and much more devastating for ACCA, large parts of the English speaking world require that they do further study to call themselves accountants:

1) In Australia, if you're CIMA you can join the CPAA. If you're ACA, you can join ICAA. ACCAs have to do further study to be a member of an Australian body.

2) In New Zealand, ACAs can join NZICA. Again, nothing for ACCA.

3) In Canada, CIMA and ACAs can join CICA. ACCAs have to do further study.

4) In the United States, only ACAs can join AICPA without further study.

ACCA got its international reputation by hawking its qualification to the third world to make money. If you have a lifelong dream to life in Sierra Leone then yes, I would probably say ACCA is better than the ACA to achieve your dreams.

However, only the ICAEW is recognised across the English speaking world and is also taken by students in several significant economies such as China and Russia. ACCA might have been more popular in China, were it not for the fact that it makes far more sense for Chinese students to study Australian qualifications (CPAA is very popular there).

I've been quite harsh on ACCA here but only because I have a particular loathing for false marketing. I am not a member of any accounting body myself (I am a member of ICSA) and I generally subscribe to the view that ACCA and the ACA offer much the same qualification and should merge. However, for the time being, they're separate bodies and ACCA's claims of being the international body has far more to do with making money by selling exams to students in the third world than the portability of its UK students.

True, ACA and other major developped commonwealth local bodies formed the so called GAA, which is a "Firewall" designed specifically to hinder ACCA's growth strategy globally. And it played very well! If my memory serves me right, traitors like "SAICA, NZICA, and HKICPA" ditched ACCA the moment when ACA extended the GAA package. Particularly for the HKICPA, which was practically brought up by ACCA through numerous syllabus design and other collorations.

As for ACCA not have MRA even with CPAA, if my memory serves right, it is because ACCA actively withhold the MRA from CPAA. The reason is not clear. Maybe because both bodies compete severely in Asian countries (particularly the South East ones, with ACCA gaining the upper hand).

ACCA has a MRA with CGA in Canada, but due to CGA's decision to merger with CICA and CMA Canada, and the MRA expiring in 2015, chances are low that the new found CPA Canada will renew the MRA with ACCA, since CICA's hostile attitude towards ACCA.

None of the three UK chartered bodies have MRA with AICPA in the USA. So you will have to sit the AICPA exams. Though be aware that there is a 150 credit threshold for the AICPA sitting qualification. Mostly a bachelor degree may not have the sufficient credits and you may have to seek a graduate degree in accounting or MBA to satisfy the AICPA sitting requirement.

ACCA is partially recognised by NZICA (needs to sit for some papers), while CIMA does not have MRA. But the situation may change quickly as NZICA has merged with CA Aus, and the latter does not grant any paper exemptions to ACCA currently. So whether new institute will grant papers is still a question.

Now come the positive ones for ACCA. The emerging markets in Asia and Gulf countries, these are the countries that ACCA is more advantageous. ACCA is prominent in China, HK, SG, UKE in the Gulf. Even in HK, ACCA is still prominent due to early involvment. The current relationship between ACCA and HKICPA may be luckwarm, but in the commerical sector, ACCA is still looked up to by employers.
As for in China, ACCA is without question, the biggest player in the market, if we leave the local CICPA out. ACCA is very popular in multinational companies in Shanghai/Beijing, etc. So due to China's giant size market wise and the complexity of the business there, you will gain greatly there in career.

As for ACCA selling exams to third world country students, it depends on what definition is selling. If you mean ACCA lowers the marking criteria, then this is not right.

If you mean ACCA is luring students by selling off the bright image, then so is ICAEW and CIMA.

Also we must consier ACCA's mission, which states it offers high standard accounting education to students with merit and ability, without false barrier, which we often see with those CA lot. If students aspire to be working in the accounting and finance career, but due to various reason (might lack the opportunity studying in Uni or study a different subject, or want to switch careers later in life), cannot or lack the chance to have a training contract, why he should be discouraged to go after this ladder?

True enough but it doesn't get away from the fact that they pulled it off and now it takes more work to become recognised as an accountant in those countries than it does for an ACA. That's not snobbishness on my part, I think it utterly ridiculous that there are two bodies in the first place and both train people to a similar if not identical standard. But that doesn't take away from the fact that one is more portable than the other.

I wouldn't give CPAA an MRA if I was ACCA either, because almost all the CPAA exams are entirely multiple choice based and any CPAAs who came to Britain as ACCAs would have the potential to be an embarrassment to them (although I will caveat that by saying I know some CPAAs who are excellent accountants and to be fair to them it is hard to train in industry as anything else). However, unfortunately, again it means ACCA members have more to do to get recognised (although I would expect them to pass the CPAA exams they need to do rather easily).

I wasn't even sure if the MRA was still in place based on the new merged body's website. However, the UK should take heed of what Canada is doing. One body makes a lot more sense!

I don't think that's entirely correct. The ICAEW have an understanding with AICPA.

Agree 100%. However, these don't tend to be the most popular destinations for British expats to go. It will certainly work for some, but not all and people should choose the qualification that gives them the portability they want. ACCA does try and claim itself as the international body and this is false marketing that seemed to be working on the OP.

It's not an attack on standards. There are a lot of bright people in these countries who can pass the exams. The issue is not that third world students are disadvantaged, I think ACCA is a great opportunity for them. It's actually that ACCA's international reputation should be based on its operations in third world and developing countries and the benefit of the local populations there but instead they claim that their qualification is the most portable for UK students. It's incredibly misleading.

Oh, I can't disagree there. Part of having separate bodies is the stupid marketing. But ACCA being more international is a very old myth, the oldest I'm aware of. An ICAEW qualified accountant who also had his CFA was so taken in by it that he nearly sat their professional papers before his boss pointed out the fallacy in what he was trying to do.

I agree that they do that but I don't agree that there are false barriers in the whole of the UK anymore, only England and Wales.... take a look at ICAI and ICAS' professional entry routes. It would though still make far more sense for one body, with a separate audit qualification for those who wish to work in practice. Maybe people who pass that could wear a bronze pin. Then the smarmy ACAs can wear that on their lapel to satisfy their needs.

PS: I am a member of no accounting body in the UK and have no need or intention to change that.

Right, let's get rid of some myths here. For a start, the idea that ACCA is essential for working internationally is dead wrong. First of all, CIMA and the ICAEW have just as many international alliances as ACCA do. Second, and much more devastating for ACCA, large parts of the English speaking world require that they do further study to call themselves accountants:

1) In Australia, if you're CIMA you can join the CPAA. If you're ACA, you can join ICAA. ACCAs have to do further study to be a member of an Australian body.

2) In New Zealand, ACAs can join NZICA. Again, nothing for ACCA.

3) In Canada, CIMA and ACAs can join CICA. ACCAs have to do further study.

4) In the United States, only ACAs can join AICPA without further study.

ACCA got its international reputation by hawking its qualification to the third world to make money. If you have a lifelong dream to life in Sierra Leone then yes, I would probably say ACCA is better than the ACA to achieve your dreams.

However, only the ICAEW is recognised across the English speaking world and is also taken by students in several significant economies such as China and Russia. ACCA might have been more popular in China, were it not for the fact that it makes far more sense for Chinese students to study Australian qualifications (CPAA is very popular there).

I've been quite harsh on ACCA here but only because I have a particular loathing for false marketing. I am not a member of any accounting body myself (I am a member of ICSA) and I generally subscribe to the view that ACCA and the ACA offer much the same qualification and should merge. However, for the time being, they're separate bodies and ACCA's claims of being the international body has far more to do with making money by selling exams to students in the third world than the portability of its UK students.

Hi guys,

I understand that ACCA is the internationally recognized chartered accountancy body, but is it absolutely necessary to train through them to allow for the possibility to work abroad?

Short term I'd have certainly thought it was necessary, but long term would practical experience make the actual qualification and its specific details a redundant factor to an overseas employer?

Or do you at all know if it's easy enough to simply 'transfer' to the ACCA body? I'd have thought there's be a lot of exam exceptions if I had the ICAEW ACA qualification. I ask this as most on the job training vacancies offer ACA (correct me if I'm wrong though!)

Thanks for any advice