Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    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
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chemhistorian)
    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?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Enoxial)
    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
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chemhistorian)
    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
    I don't see either ICAEW or ACCA being helpful for the US. They have GAAP while we follow the IFRS (we cant follow LIFO while they can) and there are a few changes to theirs and our Auditing Standards (they have to report on Internal Controls while its not compulsory in ISAs)

    For US I'd recommend the AICPA.

    Canada is a bit better imo. They have 3 accounting bodies and if I remember correctly one of them (CGA Canada?) grants ACCA few exemptions.
    (Although I heard the 3 bodies are merging into one)
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chemhistorian)
    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.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AW1983)
    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.

    Well that was rather eye opening. thanks!
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chemhistorian)
    Hi guys,

    I understand that ACCA is the internationally recognized chartered accountancy body
    Minor and rather belated point, but ACCA are not (at least in the UK) a chartered accountancy body and their members cannot describe themselves as such.

    Personally I would second AW1983 - If you want to work abroad ICAEW is still the way to go.
    • Reporter Team
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AW1983)
    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...onalassoc.aspx
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Illusionary)
    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...onalassoc.aspx
    Yes, as a member of the Global Accounting Alliance, the same would be true for ICAS and ICAI members as it is for ICAEW.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AW1983)
    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.
    Oh no, I'm going to have to agree with you again! Better be careful, it's becoming a habit
    • Reporter Team
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AW1983)
    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. :yy: 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.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Illusionary)
    I thought as much - thanks. :yy: 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.
    Yes, fair enough, ICAS members are 'CA' of course!

    If you're in one of the Global Accounting Alliance bodies it would be very unusual for you to have to complete further study to become a member of another. ACCA on the other hand relies on its own name and branding everywhere it goes (for example, I recall it had a local branch in Sydney, primarily for British expats in the region).
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AW1983)
    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.
    Some are correct, some are just downright ignorant and abnoxiously snobbish.

    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.
    With this respect, none of the three qualification is placed in an advanced standing in America. ACCA has more members in the USA since many international students (excluding the UK students) especially the Asian/Carribean ones are studying it and many of them go to USA for further study and seek to migrate there. So you may connect there in careers. ICAEW's membership number in USA is much smaller, but they form a network with other ACA bodies from AU, NZ, CA, IRE, SAICA. CIMA's members there is smaller too, but it has a joint CGMA designation with AICPA, though this CGMA is still a new thing and practically a trophy one for CIMA.
    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? Just because some fat rat ACA accountants in the public pratice place the barrier and create a false short-supply so that they can leech the maximum benefits? I say that is bottom-line evil!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lukayl)
    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.
    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.

    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).
    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).

    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.
    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!

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

    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.
    This is true but do remember in Australia that it is a requirement in Australia for both ICAA and CPAA students to have a degree in accounting OR pass a series of institute papers before they can sit the professional exams. If you think about it, it's like asking you to do a degree instead of F1-F9 for ACCA or the first level papers for the ICAEW. I believe ACCAs are fully exempt from this first stage and just have to do the last few papers.

    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.
    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.

    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.
    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.

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

    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?
    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.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AW1983)
    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 think the International bit is about ACCA operating globally, which we must give it the credit, since not long after its establishment as an LAA, it openned offices in former colonies when UK was still an empire. The globalised culture is well seeped into its root. While ICAEW on the contrary, their globalisation strategy was only a reaction of counter-act long since ACCA did so, and only when ACCA shook up its root in UK did they employed their resources outside UK in the hope that ACCA would hinder its growth globally, at least in some tier-1 commonwealth countries. The 2005 GAA package proved quite a success. The local bodies effectively closed their doors so long as they got the GAA package. Which I think ACCA genuinly made the mistake then. Apparently, it sought statutory recognition in Canada in 2004, quite a blantant move. After all, accountancy is pretty much regulated by local authorities and the bodies there in return enjoy the monopoly. ACCA should only sought MRA there in the first place while operating actively in other emerging markets.


    (Original post by AW1983)
    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).
    It's not only about difficult levels of qualification. It's about strategic cooperation. CIMA and CIPFA are mutually recognised with the CPAA, and we all know how hard CIMA and CIPFA are. ACCA should operate in the interest of its members. And a globally portable qualification is the interest. After all, we worked really hard to get the qualification, we should have had the equivalent benefits. Otherwise, what's point of doing ACCA? Why bother? In these days, the UK job market is pretty much a closed one for non-EU citizens, besides it's really a joke if ACCA thought they can hold off CPAA competition in UK when CIMA and CIPFA recognise it there.


    (Original post by AW1983)
    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!
    It's still there since the agreement is essentially a binding contract. But after that, ACCA's hope is dim there.


    (Original post by AW1983)
    I don't think that's entirely correct. The ICAEW have an understanding with AICPA.
    This is a common misunderstanding. There is no MoU or whatsoever between AICPA and ICAEW or ICAS for that matter. Interestingly it has MoU with the Irish Chartered body, along with local bodies in some other commonwealth countries as well as HK in the form of IQEX. Should be because the Irish immigrants reason. This is a very good example that bodies recognise not based on merits but in the spirit of "Zero-sum game". The Englishd and Scottish bodies have huge influence in IFRS standard setting and are recognised or at least by local employers in crucial markets. The AICPA sees them threat when it prepares itself for competition in the wake of global accounting standard convergence.


    (Original post by AW1983)
    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.
    Well, the white people tend to only want to hang on with the white people. ACCA's only hope now is doing well in the emerging markets and root deep in their industry, so that when the likes of China and India are finally on par with the West economically and particularly in earning-wise, the snobbish Whites cannot ignore but face the music. The days are definitely coming.


    (Original post by AW1983)
    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.
    Well, ACCA is portable particularly pre the 2005 GAA era. So may be not misleading but somewhat outdated.


    (Original post by AW1983)
    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 am well aware of ICAEW's influence in the City. CIMA and ACCA enjoy the kudos there somewhat, but not the likes of ICAEW, particularly in mid-office or front-office, such as product control.
    It's the mixing product of historical premium/syllabus content/industry influence.
    Historically, ICAEW is the second oldest, but the City is not in Scotland. As for CFA, it's quite respected, no doubt about that. But after all, it's a new thing compared with the chartered accountant brand in UK. so ICAEW has edge over ICAS and CFA geographically.
    Syllabus content, unlike the American's CPA, which is heavily accounting and audit oriented, all the UK qualifications cover quite a chunk of financial, performance, and strategy knowledge as well as the accounting content. So content-wise, the UK ones can be regarded as a form of mini-MBA. I think that's why the MBA is so popular in America. Many management accounting/FP&A jobs recruit MBA while in UK, these are reserved for the six chartered accountancy members.
    Industry-wise, the Big Four almost entirely train their staff via ICAEW scheme in Audit, after which some of the staff will get chances to transaction business. With these experiences belted, the City is practically courting these Big Four ones.

    (Original post by AW1983)
    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.
    Oh, these audit lot in public practice, particularly in the big ones, is indeed full of themselves, no doubt about that. There was a massive merge attempt in the fifties. Initially, ICAEW tried to merge with ICAS and ICAI, only the English wanted to play the boss. Of course the Scots and the Irish slapped the day-dreamer's face. Then anxiously stimulated by then the Certified Accountants and Cost Accountants talks of merger, and in an attempt to neutralise the adverse impact of the chartered accountants' potential marginalisation, ICAEW offered the bid to absorb ACCA, only they did not see it equal, they wanted the certified accountants to be licentiated designation, which was another attempt to create the two-tier hierarchy to leech the benefit of less competition and silence the certifieds. No self-respect accountant would do that. But ACCA was stupid then. They were the victims of the chartered ones. But when ICAEW extended the olive branch, they were overwhelmed by the self-perceived recognition and turned away from the cost accountants. Only did they see the ICAEW package, had they found out that the chartered ones did not true-heartedly want the proposal. It was only a make-do for the situation. And ACCA lost the shot when it had the chance of partnering with the cost accountants.
    Then the old Empire was crumbling and collapsed. The peers and their influence were diminished somewhat, and British becomes increasingly equalised in class. The blue-blood chartered accountants lost the coveted only chartered bodies position in the UK. The government accountants, the certified accountants, and the cost accountants all got the royal charter chronologically.
    And times change, society evolves, and the six bodies increasingly compete equally in the market. And no one has the subordinate psychic anymore and the chances of merging are lost.

    (Original post by AW1983)
    PS: I am a member of no accounting body in the UK and have no need or intention to change that.
    I see you are a chartered secretary, which is qualification very portal in the industry all across the commonwealth countries. I understand ICSA has a practising certificate for their members. Might I know what can an ACIS do in a public practice in the UK? Thank you!
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Will you be richer or poorer than your parents?
    Useful resources

    Articles:

    Guide to finance and bankingGuide to accountancy

    Featured recruiter profiles:

    Deutsche Bank logo

    Deutsche Bank is recruiting

    "Thrive in an international banking environment"

    ICAEW logo

    ICAEW

    "Choose a career journey with limitless possibilities."

    Quick link:

    Unanswered finance and accountancy threads

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.