Accountancy Qualifications

MonkMuffet

Does anyone know what is the difference between a Chartered Accountant and a Chartered Certified Accountant?
Ive been told there is no real difference apart from the setup of the exams...is this true?
Im joining a firm in the next couple of weeks and they told me it is up to me which to choose so i need to know the advantages each has over the other.
Any help would be much appreciated.;)

MonkMuffet

anyone?

Cyrus

Basically ACA vs ACCA, ive done the ACA, everyone in KPMG at any rate do them and i would guess the other big 3. I may be worng in saying this but generally people in practice do ACA whereas people working in other related areas tend to do ACCA

Apparently ACCA are harder (aca finals are open book and actually pretty easy)

MonkMuffet

Ok thanks for the help.....really not sure which to do, suppose in the end there probably isnt a huge difference.
anyway cheers.

kluivert

ICAI - Irish qualification, big focus on Accounting and Auditing.

ACCA - International qualification, main focus on accountants of financial managers, as well as accounting and auditing.

I recently passed my finals with the ACCA, i done ACCA because i wanted a qualfication that would give me the training and the option to work in Practice, Industry, Commerce and because its internationally recognised i hope to go to Australia for a couple of years.

There is no real difference. Both will lead you to the same place.

Do some research and if you work or live in Dublin go to the Institutes, set up a meeting and speak to guys there. ICAI is across from Jurys Hotel in Balsbridge, cant remember where ACCA office is Dublin, normally deal with the head office in Glasgow.

MonkMuffet

Brilliant thanks a million. thats given me a good idea. the firm i'm going to is mostly made up of people who did ACCA, but they told me it is completely up to me. decisions decisions:eek:

ronbyrne2005

MonkMuffet wrote:

Brilliant thanks a million. thats given me a good idea. the firm i'm going to is mostly made up of people who did ACCA, but they told me it is completely up to me. decisions decisions:eek:

if everyone in the firm is doing aca then do aca yourself

kluivert

ronbyrne2005 wrote:

if everyone in the firm is doing aca then do aca yourself

Maybe just a typo but he said ACCA and not ACA - alot of ppl think that they are the same thing.

ICAI (ACA)
ACCA

bob_z

I'd check it out some more .... But as far as I know if you sign up to do ACA you are effectively signing yourself into a "3 year contract" with the same company because you can't transfer your work experience. Where with ACCA you can move from company to company and bring your experience with you

Cyrus

kluivert wrote:

ICAI - Irish qualification, big focus on Accounting and Auditing.

ACCA - International qualification, main focus on accountants of financial managers, as well as accounting and auditing.

I recently passed my finals with the ACCA, i done ACCA because i wanted a qualfication that would give me the training and the option to work in Practice, Industry, Commerce and because its internationally recognised i hope to go to Australia for a couple of years.

There is no real difference. Both will lead you to the same place.

Do some research and if you work or live in Dublin go to the Institutes, set up a meeting and speak to guys there. ICAI is across from Jurys Hotel in Balsbridge, cant remember where ACCA office is Dublin, normally deal with the head office in Glasgow.

Erm im sure ACA is as internationally recognised as ACCA? correct me if im wrong

MG

It's a bit like University and an IT. You'll get people who tell you that the courses at ITs are much better than at university. It may well be and very successful people might have gone to ITs but the overall calibre of people at uni are better and the prestige for your CV is higher.

Do the ACA.

Kinetic^

Cyrus wrote:

Erm im sure ACA is as internationally recognised as ACCA? correct me if im wrong

It is but mainly to the common wealth. There are a few agreements in place with countrys outside the commonwealth like the USA but you're still going to be a second grade accountant (according to them anyway). I do ACA & am in Prof 3 ATM, find it ok. Contract is a bit of a drag but lets you stay somewhere long enough to work up the ladder.

kluivert

Keyser Soze 5 wrote:

It is but mainly to the common wealth.

"God save the queen right!"

ACA is a royal charter, recognised by the queen herself, whereas ACCA is not.

With an ACA qualification you should be ok almost anywhere.

You will need to ask yourself which industry do you see yourself.

If the answer if in practice then i would recommend ACA route.

If the answer is in commerce or industry (financial controller etc) then i would recommend ACCA.

Cyrus

Keyser Soze 5 wrote:

It is but mainly to the common wealth. There are a few agreements in place with countrys outside the commonwealth like the USA but you're still going to be a second grade accountant (according to them anyway). I do ACA & am in Prof 3 ATM, find it ok. Contract is a bit of a drag but lets you stay somewhere long enough to work up the ladder.

erm commomwealth and usa covers a lot of accountants

Kinetic^

Cyrus wrote:

erm commomwealth and usa covers a lot of accountants

Sure does but if you go to the states you'll not have the the best opputrtunities compared to their own CPA (which is the leading qualification over there) unless of course you get a transfer within the Big 4.

Aviator55

Don't forget CIMA, which is preferred by many in Industry.
Once you pass 30 years old it will be your track record that counts.
Plus, every second bugger now has a master's or two on top.

Carb

MG wrote:

It's a bit like University and an IT. You'll get people who tell you that the courses at ITs are much better than at university. It may well be and very successful people might have gone to ITs but the overall calibre of people at uni are better and the prestige for your CV is higher.

Do the ACA.

`
Should I dare ask what you're implying here:D

kluivert

MG wrote:

It's a bit like University and an IT. You'll get people who tell you that the courses at ITs are much better than at university. It may well be and very successful people might have gone to ITs but the overall calibre of people at uni are better and the prestige for your CV is higher.

Do the ACA.

Snob factor kicking in. Royal-ness has hit you on the head.

You have contradicted yourself

MG

kluivert wrote:

Snob factor kicking in. Royal-ness has hit you on the head.

You have contradicted yourself

Nonsense. What you call snobbish I call realism. If the OP wants advice then he may as well have the full picture. No point in him making a decision based on PC niceties.

MartMax

imho, it's wat you do wt your qualifications much more important. it's like everyone who drive a car has licence, but not everyone drives a merc or a beamer.

p/s : i never went to uni, therefore i should feel very low wt my prof cert.

kluivert

MG wrote:

Nonsense. What you call snobbish I call realism. If the OP wants advice then he may as well have the full picture. No point in him making a decision based on PC niceties.

I went to DKIT & received a degree B.A (hons) Accounting & Finance, passed my all my professional exams including the finals first time round. However according to you someone who goes to Trinity or DCU, UDC etc is a better calibre than me. Each person to their own.

Thats just a sterotypical approach to snoobery my friend.

MG

kluivert wrote:

I went to DKIT & received a degree B.A (hons) Accounting & Finance, passed my all my professional exams including the finals first time round. However according to you someone who goes to Trinity or DCU, UDC etc is a better calibre than me. Each person to their own.

Thats just a sterotypical approach to snoobery my friend.

Would you have gone to DKIT if you had the choice between it and Trinity or UCD etc?

Entry to third level is based on academic achievement. Employers have to make judgments on people and they can only do this based on your past achievements. Moreover, they will compare you to other candidates. An employer will naturally presume those whose academic achievement is superior to be of a higher calibre. Those of lesser achievement must overcome this presumption and are at a comparative disadvantage. Reality, not snobbery.

kluivert

MG wrote:

Would you have gone to DKIT if you had the choice between it and Trinity or UCD etc?

Entry to third level is based on academic achievement. Employers have to make judgments on people and they can only do this based on your past achievements. Moreover, they will compare you to other candidates. An employer will naturally presume those whose academic achievement is superior to be of a higher calibre. Those of lesser achievement must overcome this presumption and are at a comparative disadvantage. Reality, not snobbery.

I understand your point fully, but your wrong. You initally stated that those who go to Uni are considered to be of a higher calibre than those who go to an IT. Although you also said that there are people who go to IT's and are very successful.

My choice to go to DKIT was the fact that no other Uni offer the exemptions that DKIT had received from the ACCA for students graduating in the Accounting degree course.

Secondly i missed alot of time at secondary school due to family circumstances. But i still got 425 points, enough to choose which Uni i wanted to go to in Ireland.

I have worked very hard to get my qualifications but degree and accounting

Moral is the old phrase - dont judge a book by its cover.

slave1

Getting back to thread topic...I'm ACCA and have interviewed a lot of qualified accounts, in all honesty I have no preference to either ACA or ACCA, I would however discount an earlier comment to consider CIMA, CIMA does not cover audit and no matter when you will work you will be subject to audit so this knowledge is essential

ACA is a royal charter, recognised by the queen herself, whereas ACCA is not

Incorrect, ACCA received it's royal charter, not that this is worthy of any significant difference??

http://www.accaglobal.com/about/history

From my personal experience I'm happy at having chosen the ACCA route, it did not tie me down to a single employer, let me travel with a recognised qualification and now I'm lecturing and the ACCA syllabus is more up to date and challenging than ACA

MartMax

kluivert wrote:

I went to DKIT & received a degree B.A (hons) Accounting & Finance, passed my all my professional exams including the finals first time round. However according to you someone who goes to Trinity or DCU, UDC etc is a better calibre than me. Each person to their own.

Thats just a sterotypical approach to snoobery my friend.

i had similar route to my ACCA qualification, never experienced campus life. it was all high school, college and college.. got my Acc & Fin degree through DBS.. and so on and so on... exemption wise, i only needed to complete one part II paper, 2 options and all three finals.. was not too bad, in few little years will get my general and audit practice cert...

my thought on the exams, ACCA students generally have to keep up with fast changing in exam syllabus every 6 months... at least 3 months of lecture for each sittings... or you could gamble doing it on your own in 3 weeks before exams...

as for practice work environment, does not matter much which one you do, people do the same job.. on and on... but i did find ACCA exams helped me to understand all the GAAP and standards and vice versa... i'm sure ACA students would feel the same...

Carb

I've been working in accountancy for a number of years, small to medium sized practices and multinational plcs and I've yet to see any preference for the ACA qualification. There has always be a lot of slagging amongst the various students as to which was the better qualification, but MG is the first person I've come across who seems to believe it.

To the OP, I'd say go with whatever option suits best. Its probably easier to set up your own practice as an ACA as the ACCA requires more exams and has several different practicing certs. On the other hand, the ACCA doesn't get you tied into a contract (helpful at salary reviews) and they have very flexible study methods. From an employment point of view, there shouldn't be any problems with either qualification.

Cyrus

kluivert wrote:

I understand your point fully, but your wrong. You initally stated that those who go to Uni are considered to be of a higher calibre than those who go to an IT. Although you also said that there are people who go to IT's and are very successful.

My choice to go to DKIT was the fact that no other Uni offer the exemptions that DKIT had received from the ACCA for students graduating in the Accounting degree course.

Secondly i missed alot of time at secondary school due to family circumstances. But i still got 425 points, enough to choose which Uni i wanted to go to in Ireland.

I have worked very hard to get my qualifications but degree and accounting

Moral is the old phrase - dont judge a book by its cover.

Sorry but most employers have a preference to UCD/TCD students, its just the way it is. Im in a big 4 practice you can count the people who went to an IT on one hand out of an intake each year of 150-170 people, whereas from my class in the MACC in smurfit 65 people came here

kluivert

No what matter what route you take...you always find your way to boards.ie Its all accountants here

Cyrus

is that because we have such boring and unfulfilling jobs

MonkMuffet

well thanks people, lots of helpful input.....much obliged...;)

MG

Carb wrote:

I've been working in accountancy for a number of years, small to medium sized practices and multinational plcs and I've yet to see any preference for the ACA qualification. There has always be a lot of slagging amongst the various students as to which was the better qualification, but MG is the first person I've come across who seems to believe it.

I’m not questioning the value of the actual work involved to get an ACCA. It may well be more difficult/relevant than ACA. My point is that it tends to be more highly regarded because as Cyrus says above employers will tend to prefer students from Uni. There is a valid reason for this as it is more difficult to get into uni and therefore makes a statement about the persons ability and character.

As regards a contradiction, there is none. Some excellent people will go to an IT. The point is that generally better people go on to uni but there are always exceptions.

Carb

MG wrote:

I’m not questioning the value of the actual work involved to get an ACCA. It may well be more difficult/relevant than ACA. My point is that it tends to be more highly regarded because as Cyrus says above employers will tend to prefer students from Uni. There is a valid reason for this as it is more difficult to get into uni and therefore makes a statement about the persons ability and character.

As regards a contradiction, there is none. Some excellent people will go to an IT. The point is that generally better people go on to uni but there are always exceptions.

Sorry, I'm completely lost now. What has Uni/IT got to do with the OPs query about ACA V ACCA

kluivert

Totally agree.

In addition I think the OP has got the required opinions that they wanted.

Jivin Turkey

kluivert wrote:

You will need to ask yourself which industry do you see yourself.

If the answer if in practice then i would recommend ACA route.

If the answer is in commerce or industry (financial controller etc) then i would recommend ACCA.

The majority of people who qualify as ACA's through big four firms leave and walk into industry jobs in all sectors at home and abroad.

nlgbbbblth

I started Chartered Accountancy in Waterford RTC in 1989. Got a firm to sponsor me just after I sat the Leaving which meant I had two years college (to sit Professional 1 and 2) and then four years working with the firm during which I was to pass Professional 3 and the Final exams.

Passed Professional 1 no problem but due to lack of study failed Professional 2 along with 10 other people in the class. Only 1 out of the 11 of us passed the autumn repeats [they were a lot harder than the summer exams] and of the 10 who failed, 9 of them were given a 'third chance' by their firm - i.e. work for the year and sit the next summer repeat. My sponsor was the only one who didn't go along with this idea. 'I've never done it before and I'm not starting now so I'm terminating your contract'.

It was 1991 and the Celtic tiger was unheard of. Jobs were not that easy to come by then.

I often wonder what would have happened if I had passed / qualified.... but seeing as I didn't like it that much I'm probably better off.

Pythia

This may be a little off topic but here goes...
With regards to a career in tax, would it be advisable to get both the ACA and AITI or the AITI on its own?
I should have a job next year in a big four firm and as far as I know I can do both or just the AITI with a training contract in the tax department.
I don't know if it's worth doing the ACA if it's not needed?

Jivin Turkey

Pythia wrote:

I should have a job next year in a big four firm and as far as I know I can do both or just the AITI with a training contract in the tax department.
I don't know if it's worth doing the ACA if it's not needed?

As far as I know it is general practise to do both. It is more common for people in the audit department to consider it being optional to do both. I'm open to correction on that though.

An ACA as well as tax exams will give you real career options.

chump

Pythia wrote:

This may be a little off topic but here goes...
With regards to a career in tax, would it be advisable to get both the ACA and AITI or the AITI on its own?
I should have a job next year in a big four firm and as far as I know I can do both or just the AITI with a training contract in the tax department.
I don't know if it's worth doing the ACA if it's not needed?

It seems getting a masters in Acc and joining a big4 comp., either in tax, or audit, and doing both sets of exams is the done thing...

Rem. with the tax exams anyone can do them in any job at any stage...
And the big4 or in fact any decent firm, would sponsor you no problem to do those exams even if you were working in audit or somewhere else.

kluivert

Pythia wrote:

This may be a little off topic but here goes...
With regards to a career in tax, would it be advisable to get both the ACA and AITI or the AITI on its own?
I should have a job next year in a big four firm and as far as I know I can do both or just the AITI with a training contract in the tax department.
I don't know if it's worth doing the ACA if it's not needed?

Its normal practice to do AITI after doing ACA or ACCA.

However I have never heard anyone that didnt do ACA or ACCA and did AITI.

Cyrus

chump wrote:

It seems getting a masters in Acc and joining a big4 comp., either in tax, or audit, and doing both sets of exams is the done thing...

Rem. with the tax exams anyone can do them in any job at any stage...
And the big4 or in fact any decent firm, would sponsor you no problem to do those exams even if you were working in audit or somewhere else.

#

not true, they are very reluctant in my firm anyway to sponsor audit staff to do tax exams, extra study leave and expense etc

Carb

Pythia wrote:

This may be a little off topic but here goes...
With regards to a career in tax, would it be advisable to get both the ACA and AITI or the AITI on its own?
I should have a job next year in a big four firm and as far as I know I can do both or just the AITI with a training contract in the tax department.
I don't know if it's worth doing the ACA if it's not needed?

Like most queries like this, it depends what you see yourself doing. If you intend permanently working in tax either with a big 4 or in the tax department of a very large company, then the AITI would be sufficient. IF you intend branching out on your own, then both qualifications would probably be needed as very few companies use one practice for their accountancy/audit needs and another practice for their tax needs.

Most people I know started off doing ACA/ACCA and then done the taxation exams. These were medium sized practices where the line between departments wouldn't have been as clear. Obviously in a Big 4, the tax department is completely separate. I would assume that if you want to do both, it would be easier to do the taxation exams after you've got you're accountancy qualification (easier as in been let do it), but that is just my experience. I'm open to correction on the Big 4 though as I've never worked there.