ACCA or CPA

jph100

hi

ive always intended on doing ACCA from having spoken to people who recommended it to me. however, i had an interview for a trainee position last week in a practice in Kildare where the partners are all members of both ACCA and CPA and they strongly recommend their trainees study for the CPA qualification.

ive never met anyone who has done CPA though. A big thing for me about the ACCA was their global presence as i would love to work abroad further down the line especially in the US. At my interview I was informed by the woman doing the interview that CPA actually does have some sort of a link with their American counterparts.

does anyone know if the American CPA recognises the Irish CPA?
would anyone recommend CPA over ACCA?

thanks!

smcgiff

jph100 wrote: »

At my interview I was informed by the woman doing the interview that CPA actually does have some sort of a link with their American counterparts.

There's none - so not a good start with your prospective employers. There's recognition between ACA and American CPA IIRC.

jph100 wrote: »

they strongly recommend their trainees study for the CPA qualification.

Did they give any reasons - other than falsely saying there was a connection to the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants?

Nothing wrong with going with CPA - but it would slightly reduce your employability later - as some employers will not look beyond certain bodies.

You might ask the ACCA members in the practice if they would consider changing to CPA (they can under CPA rules) - if they like is so much!

DTrotter

I was told by someone in a recruitment agency that i would be doing myself a disservice by changing from the ACCA to the CPA. I don't think the CPA in Ireland is affiliated with the US one, in the US the term CPA seems to mean you're at a level of qualification instead of belonging to a professional organisation.

jph100

well the woman who interviewed me was the boss of the place. she was a member of both acca and cpa and recommended cpa so she must be in a good place to judge.

she definitley said cpa in america is linked to the irish one. i really didnt think they were but couldnt exactly tell her she was wrong, the interview wasnt the smoothest ive ever had so pulling her up on that would have been the final nail in the coffin.

so you guys reckon cpa would harm future career prospects?

mr_edge_to_you

I'm a CIMA head but spent four years in Athlone doing accountancy.

I'm a PQ Cima accountant. Any qualified accountant I have worked with since I left college would not hire a CPA ahead of CIMA/ACCA and possibly ACA depending on the candidate.

CPA is much easier attained which leads to its "yellow pack" perception.

The people who will be interviewing you for a job in a few years time will be ACCA/ACA qualified (CIMA if in industry).

They will want the same calibre candidate as themselves!

DTrotter

jph100 wrote: »

well the woman who interviewed me was the boss of the place. she was a member of both acca and cpa and recommended cpa so she must be in a good place to judge.

she definitley said cpa in america is linked to the irish one. i really didnt think they were but couldnt exactly tell her she was wrong, the interview wasnt the smoothest ive ever had so pulling her up on that would have been the final nail in the coffin.

so you guys reckon cpa would harm future career prospects?

Probably an extreme way to look at it, more like ACCA/ACA/CIMA would put you in a better position. When I passed the ACCA it made a massive difference when I changed jobs.

jph100

DTrotter wrote: »

Probably an extreme way to look at it, more like ACCA/ACA/CIMA would put you in a better position. When I passed the ACCA it made a massive difference when I changed jobs.

yeah meant to put harm in commas like this 'harm' to make it less extreme.

now the woman did say that if i got the job and i really wanted to do acca, they would facilitate me but she isnt sound too enthusiastic about it.

as a side issue, the job is 14k a year. that was lower than i thought it would be

DTrotter

jph100 wrote: »

yeah meant to put harm in commas like this 'harm' to make it less extreme.

now the woman did say that if i got the job and i really wanted to do acca, they would facilitate me but she isnt sound too enthusiastic about it.

as a side issue, the job is 14k a year. that was lower than i thought it would be

I'd say at a point in the future your experience might be more beneficial than your qualification. When I was thinking of moving from the ACCA to the CPA I had 10 exams done for the ACCA and had I transferred to the CPA I would have got 10 exemptions. I don't think the ACCA would do a similar exemption.

jph100

thanks very much.

seems like acca is the better choice between the 2

Bren1609

mr_edge_to_you wrote: »

I'm a CIMA head but spent four years in Athlone doing accountancy.I'm a PQ Cima accountant. Any qualified accountant I have worked with since I left college would not hire a CPA ahead of CIMA/ACCA and possibly ACA depending on the candidate. CPA is much easier attained which leads to its "yellow pack" perception. The people who will be interviewing you for a job in a few years time will be ACCA/ACA qualified (CIMA if in industry). They will want the same calibre candidate as themselves!

I wouldnt agree with the assumption that CIMA is held in higher regard than CPA. CIMA accountants are effectively ring fenced to Industry, its very easy for a CPA to make the transition from practice to industry. Also, Irish Taxation Institute awards the same exemptions for ACA,ACCA & CPA and none for CIMA. Finally, if you do a job search on a recruitment website you´ll find you´ll get more hits for CPA than CIMA. Bear in mind that the majority of CPA committee members are chartered accountants and it was the ICAI who originally wanted to merge with CPA about 2/3 years ago.

Past30Now

mr_edge_to_you wrote: »

I'm a CIMA head but spent four years in Athlone doing accountancy.

I'm a PQ Cima accountant. Any qualified accountant I have worked with since I left college would not hire a CPA ahead of CIMA/ACCA and possibly ACA depending on the candidate.

CPA is much easier attained which leads to its "yellow pack" perception.

The people who will be interviewing you for a job in a few years time will be ACCA/ACA qualified (CIMA if in industry).

They will want the same calibre candidate as themselves!

I don't agree with any of that. I'm an associate of the CPA Institute.

From an exam perspective, the papers were of the same standard as ACCA and ACA. The added disadvantage of having to sit 4 papers at one sitting made them harder to pass than their ACCA equivalents.

Qualifying as an accountant whether it be ACA, ACCA, CPA or CIMA takes an awful lot of hard work. The possession of the qualification indicates that the holder is a high "calibre" individual from an academic perspective. The same can be said of persons holding primary degrees.

CPA does not have a "yellow pack" perception. It's members work in all areas of the industry at the highest levels. No qualified accountants that I deal with on a regular basis will rule out a candidate for a job on the basis of the CPA qualification being of a lower standard than the other institutes.

The main differences in perception between the Institutes are that the ACCA qualification has a wider international recognition factor, which given that it is a UK based organisation with a large international community of members is unsurprising. ACA has slightly more prestige probably due to their insistence on training contracts in practice ( and some in large industry) for their student members. The new Elevation programme may have an impact on this.

The people employing current and potential students in Ireland in five to ten years time will be as likely to be CPA qualified as ACCA/ACA qualified in proportion to each institutes membership base in Ireland.

Past30

BERBA

mr_edge_to_you wrote: »

I'm a CIMA head but spent four years in Athlone doing accountancy.

I'm a PQ Cima accountant. Any qualified accountant I have worked with since I left college would not hire a CPA ahead of CIMA/ACCA and possibly ACA depending on the candidate.

CPA is much easier attained which leads to its "yellow pack" perception.

The people who will be interviewing you for a job in a few years time will be ACCA/ACA qualified (CIMA if in industry).

They will want the same calibre candidate as themselves!

What a load of rubbish!.

Shurwhynot

Was there not a review done lately of all accountancy bodies and the consensus was that CPA exams were actually harder than ACCA, despite the perception that ACCA was always the more advanced. Any accountancy qualification is a great thing to have and the poster (mr edge to you) is obviously an idiot with an high degree of self importance

smcgiff

Shurwhynot wrote: »

Was there not a review done lately of all accountancy bodies

Was there?

Or was there not a similar review done lately that found accountants more sexy than super models?

seven-iron

Or was there not a similar review done lately that found accountants more sexy than super models?

only those who hold the holy grail of accountancy.... making Partner

DTrotter

Shurwhynot wrote: »

Was there not a review done lately of all accountancy bodies and the consensus was that CPA exams were actually harder than ACCA, despite the perception that ACCA was always the more advanced. Any accountancy qualification is a great thing to have and the poster (mr edge to you) is obviously an idiot with an high degree of self importance

When I was doing my ACCA finals I looked at the CPA papers online for their finals and I can assure you that was not the case with the papers I looked at.

Shurwhynot

I think that a professional review of the papers might know more than you though

DTrotter

If you are doning classes for say Corporate Reporting and you look at papers at the same level in different groups I think you can tell which is more difficult.

smcgiff

Shurwhynot wrote: »

I think that a professional review of the papers might know more than you though

If I saw an independent review that claimed CPA papers were harder than ACCA papers I would give it considerable weight.

Still waiting to see link though.

Bren1609

smcgiff wrote: »

If I saw an independent review that claimed CPA papers were harder than ACCA papers I would give it considerable weight.

Still waiting to see link though.

Have you ever seen a paper that says the opposite?

smcgiff

Bren1609 wrote: »

Have you ever seen a paper that says the opposite?

I'll dignify that with the following comment...

I've never seen a newspaper article that claimed Supermodels were sexier than accountants (even partners!).

boredatwork82

I would definitely pick ACCA over CPA.

Reasons stated below :

1) In my vast experience ( 4 multi-nationals) I have not encountered a single Irish CPA. CIMA qualified employers will rate CIMA as the best. ACA qualified employers will rate ACA as the best. likewise with ACCA & CPA.
For this reason CPA will not be beneficial in your job-hunting as it is the smallest membership of ACA,ACCA & CPA. I do not include CIMA as it a different qualification, in my opinion.

2) Its seen as an easy option. One of the girls that was in my College with me was struggling to pass the ACCA finals. 2 of the College lecturers recommended chanmging to CPA. Although she would have more exams to do, he assured her that they were easier to pass. ( Not my words - 2 respected accounting lecturers). I know people in my class who did ACCA/ACA/CPA/CIMA and the people who did CPA, did so because they were under the illusion that it was easier. I never did CPA so I am only telling you what I have been told by classmates who did CPA. They all seem to pass the exams handily enough. They will say so themselves.

3) In relation to the CPA America and CPA Ireland. They are completely different as someone earlier said CPA america = ACA. I know this for a fact as I worked for an American FC who was CPA and she was told that she was to deal with ACA as thats who they were connected with.

4) I know of people who have been told not to do CPA by employers. You are the very first I have heard of beren told to do CPA.

5) Do a simple job search. There will be alot more jobs looking for ACA/ACCA than CPA. Why limit yourself?

6) CPA use to advertise in the toilets in college!

I was discussing this thread with my boss today, and he agrees with all above comments, even point 6.
Hope this is useful.


I am in no means suggesting that the knowledge base is different between ACA/ACCA/CPA but perception is a major factor in the world of business.



Hope this helps

Past30Now

boredatwork82 wrote: »

I would definitely pick ACCA over CPA.

Reasons stated below :

1) In my vast experience ( 4 multi-nationals) I have not encountered a single Irish CPA. CIMA qualified employers will rate CIMA as the best. ACA qualified employers will rate ACA as the best. likewise with ACCA & CPA.
For this reason CPA will not be beneficial in your job-hunting as it is the smallest membership of ACA,ACCA & CPA. I do not include CIMA as it a different qualification, in my opinion.

I agree completely with this statement. CPA vs ACCA/ACA will continue to be a disadvantage because of the numbers game. However, the pride people feel in their qualification will eventually offset this disadvantage

boredatwork82 wrote: »

2) Its seen as an easy option. One of the girls that was in my College with me was struggling to pass the ACCA finals. 2 of the College lecturers recommended chanmging to CPA. Although she would have more exams to do, he assured her that they were easier to pass. ( Not my words - 2 respected accounting lecturers). I know people in my class who did ACCA/ACA/CPA/CIMA and the people who did CPA, did so because they were under the illusion that it was easier. I never did CPA so I am only telling you what I have been told by classmates who did CPA. They all seem to pass the exams handily enough. They will say so themselves.

If we were in court, this evidence would be described as hearsay and rightly excluded.

boredatwork82 wrote: »

3) In relation to the CPA America and CPA Ireland. They are completely different as someone earlier said CPA america = ACA. I know this for a fact as I worked for an American FC who was CPA and she was told that she was to deal with ACA as thats who they were connected with.

Agree completely, Any Irish CPA trying to make that tenuous connection is a spoofer.

boredatwork82 wrote: »

4) I know of people who have been told not to do CPA by employers. You are the very first I have heard of beren told to do CPA.

Make me the second so. You can add three colleagues who trained in the same practice as me in the early nineties. The boss was a council member/President of the Institute at the time.

boredatwork82 wrote: »

5) Do a simple job search. There will be alot more jobs looking for ACA/ACCA than CPA. Why limit yourself?

Again this is a reflection of the numbers game. As more CPA's come on stream into more senior positions across the economy, jobs won't specify just ACCA/ACA, CPA will be included.

boredatwork82 wrote: »

6) CPA use to advertise in the toilets in college!

I was discussing this thread with my boss today, and he agrees with all above comments, even point 6.
Hope this is useful.


I am in no means suggesting that the knowledge base is different between ACA/ACCA/CPA but perception is a major factor in the world of business.

Hard to know what to say about advertising in college toilets, what market were they trying to attract?

You're completely right about perception being a major factor, which is why I always try to support my Institute and fellow associates when the quality of the qualification is being discussed.

Regards,


Past30 (CPA)

crazzzzy

At the end of the day, its upto the individual and what suits them. I choose CPA coz I didn't have a permanent job and wanted to get started on exams while i was waiting. I would have had to wait til december to start ACCA or waited for contract for ACA.
I asked my 2 bosses - both are CPA but one has ACA aswell and I asked another guy i work with who qualified with ACCA 2yrs ago. They all confirmed what I'd been thinking - ACA had the reputation but if you do the others, put in the work and get good results and understand what you're doing its about how good an accountant you are.

If you are planning on leaving your job when qualified then ya you are up against ACA qualified people but its about your personality and determination. I just want to be a good accountant coz its what I love doing. All the accountancy bodies teach the same thing and everyone seems to have their own opinion on which is better and which exams are harder.

My advice is if you are able, do the chartered as it is recognised world wide and it has the reputation. The drawbacks are you are more or less stuck with the same employer for 3.5yrs even if you hate working there.

I did a lot of research between ACCA & CPA - I only chose CPA coz it was more convenient.

smcgiff

crazzzzy wrote: »

I did a lot of research between ACCA & CPA - I only chose CPA coz it was more convenient.

That convenience is going to cost you over €600 per year in membership fees alone once you are qualified.

Sand Wedge

In my opinion ACCA is same level as ACA if not greater. I did ACCA But if had to choose again, would do ACA as exams are easier to pass than ACCA. Why not look into ACA. They have that new elevation program.

boredatwork82

Past30Now wrote: »

I agree completely with this statement. CPA vs ACCA/ACA will continue to be a disadvantage because of the numbers game. However, the pride people feel in their qualification will eventually offset this disadvantage



If we were in court, this evidence would be described as hearsay and rightly excluded.

We are not in court so hearsay should be included. It shouldn't be an issue but it is.
I will again confirm that I am not saying CPA is technically lower qualification than ACA/ACCA.
As to ACA V ACCA, from speaking to guys who have done either ACA and ACCA, ACA appears to be easier (open book exams). That is the general consensus even from guys who have done ACA, but as the Big4 love ACA it will never be portrayed as the easy option. Greatest influence/loudest voices - can spin what they want!!

These are not uneducated statements. this are all opinions formed from speaking to members of all the accountting bodies. I come from a 4 year full-time accountancy course (not a commerce or business course) so everyone in my college course went onto become accountants of all the bodies. So I regularly talk to people who have studied ACA/ACCA/CPA/CIMA

MGLman

Any chance of getting employed for the half qualified ACCA student in these days?

Thanks for your advices.

MGLman

boredatwork82 wrote: »

We are not in court so hearsay should be included. It shouldn't be an issue but it is.
I will again confirm that I am not saying CPA is technically lower qualification than ACA/ACCA.
As to ACA V ACCA, from speaking to guys who have done either ACA and ACCA, ACA appears to be easier (open book exams). That is the general consensus even from guys who have done ACA, but as the Big4 love ACA it will never be portrayed as the easy option. Greatest influence/loudest voices - can spin what they want!!

These are not uneducated statements. this are all opinions formed from speaking to members of all the accountting bodies. I come from a 4 year full-time accountancy course (not a commerce or business course) so everyone in my college course went onto become accountants of all the bodies. So I regularly talk to people who have studied ACA/ACCA/CPA/CIMA

In your opinion: which is better 4 year college qualification or ACA/ACCA/CPA/CIMA?

I personally think that ACCA or any other exams are just trying to make everything difficult, because anyway any one need a some years of experience in order to become qualified with ACCA (I do not now what is the story with the rest) and pass rates are joke like ranging from 20-40%.

smcgiff

MGLman wrote: »

which is better 4 year college qualification or ACA/ACCA/CPA/CIMA?

If you think undergrad exams are at the same level at the latter stage professional exams you may be in for a surprise.

MGLman

smcgiff wrote: »

If you think undergrad exams are at the same level at the latter stage professional exams you may be in for a surprise.

Why those exams are almost impossible to pass? Isn't it an indication of them making it so hard or is everyone who is taking those exams are so thick?

smcgiff

MGLman wrote: »

Why those exams are almost impossible to pass? Isn't it an indication of them making it so hard or is everyone who is taking those exams are so thick?

They are marked hard - no room for waffle. For ACCA anyway the markers are given set answers and if your answer is not on the list it's hard to score marks. This is particularly the case with theory questions.

boredatwork82

The 4 yr college course was a stepping stone to professional qualification. It gave me an absolute bucketload of exemptions. I am now an ACCA & CIMA member.
My point about the college course is that I know a wide range of accountants from all teh accounting bodies, and I just wanted to let the the op know how I came to my opinions on each.

Which is better?
You will not get into a accounting role without a degree, unless you have been with the company years or have a few years experience and get placed from inside.
It is probably quicker to do the 3 years in college, get a load of exemptions and then go working. The professional exams are tough in any of the prof qualifications so the exemptions are a massive help.


Why are the exams hard?
If the exams were easy everyone would do them, and then there would be loads of accountants, and we would earn less. Tough exams ensure members of each body are up to task and it regulates the number of accountants (somewhat) and keep our wages slightly( and i mean only slightly) higher than average wages.

Bren1609

This topic has been covered numerous times in the past. All the accountancy bodies will have mergered within the next 5 years anyway, once the term "Accountant" has been protected.

smcgiff

boredatwork82 wrote: »

keep our wages slightly( and i mean only slightly) higher than average wages.

you're doing something wrong!;)

Chipboard

I am considering doing accountancy part time and recently spoke to two accountants (one CIMA and one ACA).

They both advised as follows;

CIMA - exams too difficult and qual no better than others.
CPA - more suited to public sector workers, comptroller and auditor general etc.
ACA - chartered accountants - good for going into practice - look down their noses a bit on the rest.
ACCA - perfectly good qual and don't have to do the 3 years work placement hence the one for me.

I will prob be granted exemptions for some of F1 - F5 but I think I will do them anyway as a refresher and because I think some of the professional subjects expand on knowledged gained in them.

MGLman

Chipboard wrote: »

I am considering doing accountancy part time and recently spoke to two accountants (one CIMA and one ACA).

They both advised as follows;

CIMA - exams too difficult and qual no better than others.
CPA - more suited to public sector workers, comptroller and auditor general etc.
ACA - chartered accountants - good for going into practice - look down their noses a bit on the rest.
ACCA - perfectly good qual and don't have to do the 3 years work placement hence the one for me.

I will prob be granted exemptions for some of F1 - F5 but I think I will do them anyway as a refresher and because I think some of the professional subjects expand on knowledged gained in them.

Why you do not have to have the 3 year work experience? Have you done the work replacement before or the rules have been changed?

Chipboard

I have been working for c14 years. I think it may still be best to do the 3 years but I asked him specifically if the qual was still good if I didn't do it and he said it was that if you had the exams it was. I think you would have to do the 3 years if you wanted to go into practice but I don't think I'll be going that route.

smcgiff

Chipboard wrote: »

I am considering doing accountancy part time and recently spoke to two accountants (one CIMA and one ACA).

They both advised as follows;

CIMA - exams too difficult and qual no better than others.
CPA - more suited to public sector workers, comptroller and auditor general etc.
ACA - chartered accountants - good for going into practice - look down their noses a bit on the rest.
ACCA - perfectly good qual and don't have to do the 3 years work placement hence the one for me.

Re: CIMA that's the perception, but they do get very well paid.
Re: CPA don't see the connection between CPA and Public Sector at all
Re: ACA compete very well in industry too
Re: ACCA you'll need to have three years relevant experience to become a member.

gowayouttadat

Chipboard wrote: »

I have been working for c14 years. I think it may still be best to do the 3 years but I asked him specifically if the qual was still good if I didn't do it and he said it was that if you had the exams it was. I think you would have to do the 3 years if you wanted to go into practice but I don't think I'll be going that route.

I think you're confusing work experience and the training contract that you have to sign up to when doing ACA.
You need three years experience to qualify as an ACCA member. The difference being you don't have to sign up to a three year training contract with a specific firm like you do with ACA. For ACCA, you can get the three years before, during or after you pass your exams but you won't qualify as a member without it.

Chipboard

gowayouttadat wrote: »

I think you're confusing work experience and the training contract that you have to sign up to when doing ACA.
You need three years experience to qualify as an ACCA member. The difference being you don't have to sign up to a three year training contract with a specific firm like you do with ACA. For ACCA, you can get the three years before, during or after you pass your exams but you won't qualify as a member without it.

No, I'm not confusing anything. I know nothing about accountancy qualifications - I'm not pretending to. I'm quoting what two qualified accountants told me, and they don't even know each other.

I'm well aware that I won't qualify as a member without doing the training contract - I already said that I don't want to practice. Neither do I care about having the letters after my name. If you get the exams you can put it on your CV the same as the guy who does the training contract, and thats all I want.

One of the guys I spoke to is a senior lecturer and he never took up his letters because time spent lecturing doesn't count as experience - it hasn't made any difference to him.

smcgiff

Chipboard,

It looks as if you're pretty sure of your stuff. So, other than the following I'm just going to say I disagree with you and leave it at that.

All I will say is that I'm ACCA and have an interest in going down the lecturing route and know a good bit about both.

Salvelinus

Chipboard wrote: »

No, I'm not confusing anything. I know nothing about accountancy qualifications - I'm not pretending to. I'm quoting what two qualified accountants told me, and they don't even know each other.

I'm well aware that I won't qualify as a member without doing the training contract - I already said that I don't want to practice. Neither do I care about having the letters after my name. If you get the exams you can put it on your CV the same as the guy who does the training contract, and thats all I want.

One of the guys I spoke to is a senior lecturer and he never took up his letters because time spent lecturing doesn't count as experience - it hasn't made any difference to him.

When you pass your ACCA exams yuo can't call yourself a member until you verify a certain amount of experience in different areas, think that changed a bit recently. Instead you are called an affiliate, I don't think employers care.

Chipboard

Wha Salvelinus said would tally with what the guy I spoke to told me.

Also, I went back on the notes I took during my conversation with him.

If you have a certain amount of work experience prior to doing the course, the work experience requirement can be reduced by up to 18 mths so you might only have to do 18 mths.

Bren1609

Contact the ACCA and you can get a definitive answer from them.

secman

At the end of the day, any accountancy qualification will most certainly stand to you. I qualified many moons ago as a CPA. I have never looked back. I have what many would deem a successful career. Many of my accountant colleages have also had very sucessful careers, some are ACA, some are ACCA and some are CPA. All have tasted success.
Thankfully we never engaged in "whats best" and and all got along fine,we stiil keep in touch all these moons later.
The three afore mentioned Institutions are all professionally run and generally speaking their members do well in their careers.

Just my tuppense worth !

Secman

gowayouttadat

Chipboard wrote: »

Wha Salvelinus said would tally with what the guy I spoke to told me.

Also, I went back on the notes I took during my conversation with him.

If you have a certain amount of work experience prior to doing the course, the work experience requirement can be reduced by up to 18 mths so you might only have to do 18 mths.

I'm just curious as to why you'd want to put in the effort to study for the exams etc but not become a member?

smcgiff

Salvelinus wrote: »

When you pass your ACCA exams yuo can't call yourself a member until you verify a certain amount of experience in different areas, think that changed a bit recently. Instead you are called an affiliate, I don't think employers care.

You are correct - when you pass your ACCA exams you are qualified and are known as an affiliate.

An affiliate pays a reduced subscription to ACCA for 3 years, but then pays the equivalent membership fee after three years once the grace period is over.

Some employers would not distinguish between qualified and member, but that is because – I suspect – they don’t know the difference between the two. However, you apply for a job that reports to an accountant and he will definitely know the difference, and will have a different attitude.

Personally I wouldn’t even interview someone for a qualified role if they were not also a member. Being a member brings with it standards, rules and CPD requirements. Being able to pass exams is only one aspect of what it takes to be an accountant. However, an employer that will specifically seek membership status are third level educations (see any application form). And with lecturer applications you definitely want to tick as many boxes as possible when applying.

You probably don’t need to be a member for junior roles... and there are room for these people also.

Finally, if the term accountant ever becomes protected, it’s a safe bet that only members will be able to call themselves accountants.

dixi

When you pass the ACCA exams you are an affliate, not a member nor are you qualified. You cannot put the letters after your name, refer to yourself as a member - nor do you have a membership certificate which any employer will look for.

That being said completing the practical experience is not difficult, As ACCA (CIMA & CPA) are comparatively easy going when it comes to meeting these requirements as they do not have a training contract requirment.

If the ACCA found out about you calling yourself a member, you would be in breach of the ACCA bye laws (which as a student you have to sign up to), and subject to disciplinary action.

dixi

FYI - From the acca website


AFFILIATE INFORMATION

ACCA Qualification trainees who have passed their exams but have not yet qualified for membership are referred to as affiliates.

Affiliates have the achievement of passing the exams, however are still trainees working towards completing ACCA's practical experience requirements with the goal of qualifying for membership. If you are an affiliate, it is important that you note the following regulations.

USE OF ACCA LETTERS
As an affiliate, you are not entitled to use the designatory letters ‘ACCA’, which are reserved solely for those who have been admitted to membership, having achieved the required practical experience, in addition to their exam success.

You may refer to yourself as having ACCA affiliate status but may not use the designatory letters after your name or refer to yourself as an ACCA member in any context. Affiliates who do so may be liable to disciplinary action.

This is important to safeguard the reputation of ACCA and its members.

smcgiff

Hello Dixie,

This thread has taken on a life of its own.

When people pass their exams they call themselves qualified, and I thought this was what ACCA considered qualified also, separate of course from membership.