I have already signed up to start in July and joined ACCA as a student, seems too good to be true but i will give it a go anyway see where it takes me. I work as an office manager doing basic bookkeeping/payroll but looking to move onto the next stage so this seems to fit the bill.

Not sure how this will affect kaplan et al but bound to have some sort of impact. I suppose maybe the rationale is to get people on the path and then when they move onto the more advanced papers at that stage they will then pay the training providers.

The wonders of the internet!!

 

 

 

Ive passed this one to my son, who is doing his AAT level 2 on a short course. Just need to find out membership fees for ACCA when I have a minute, given he has just paid for AAT. Just as an aside - he is doing the short course through Kaplan at the moment - not at all impressed with the massive number of typos in their questions and their answers in both course, revision and mock assessments. Fortunately he has picked up on most, but there was even one that caught the tutor out! Pretty poor!

Hi Nigel,

sorry, my bad. I didn't come accross as intended.

There is no difference in quality between CAT and AAT. Both are excellent qualifications.

Where it lags is that AAT can be an end in itself where CAT comes with the same regulation 8 restrictions as the full ACCA professional qualification which gives AAT the edge.

I really didn't mean my comment to come accross that there is anything amiss quality of the CAT qualification or that it is in any way inferior to AAT. Simply that issue over regulation 8 giving AAT the edge.

When going for an interview you rather than putting CAT you would say "the ACCA CAT qualification".

HTH,

Shaun.

This looks interesting! I'm planning on starting an ICB course in the summer with a view to becoming a self employed bookkeeper. Do you think these courses would equate to the first level of ICB, or just be a useful introduction prior to doing the ICB course?

Hi Jenny,

as with all qualifications there will be differences in the syllabuses but overall these two courses are well in advance of the ICB level II and cover a lot of things that ICB do not even venture into at level IV.

Conversely, the ICB level III certificate in Payroll management will cover more detail than ACCA-X payroll coverage and ICB have more emphasis on computerised bookkeeping where ACCA-X will be manual bookkeeping so people may wish tyo pair that with a Sage course.

ICB spends a lot of its time teaching entry level accountancy where the ACCA-X course is pure bookkeeping, costing and basic management accounts. I think that the ICB's reasoning behind that is an attempt to take on the AAT on their own turf where the ACCA qualification comes at things from the perspective of the definition of where bookkeeping stops (trial balance) and certainly doesn't need to be fighting for market share against anyone.

The ACCA exams that the ACCA-X course prepares one for are FA1, FA2, MA1 and MA2.

If you had done those I would be looking at ICB level II and a serious backwards step rather than the next step. If you decide to pursue ICB rather than CAT, AAT or the ACCA profesional qualification (if you enjoy ACCA type questions) it might be worth checking with the ICB what exemptions they give based on the ACCA Introductory Certificate in Finanacial and Management Accounting and the ACCA Intermediate Certificate in Finanacial and Management Accounting which is what ACCA-X lead to at the moment (it will eventually also lead to the ACCA Diploma and Accounting and Business which is only a short hop skip and a jump to CAT status).

If I were looking to become a bookkeeper now I would look seriously at the following combination

 - ACCA-X (covering all bookkeeping needed and all internal reporting requirements of clients).

 - A Sage course (You can buy course in a box sollutions from Amazon or companies such as Training Link and Ideal do courses. It is worth doing a Sage course even if that isn't the software that you use in your practice (I use VT))

 - Study the Alan Melville book "Taxation" cover to cover doing all of the excercises (allow at least a month at first read).

 

Hope that helps,

kind regards,

Shaun.

Nimac wrote:

---

I personally think you would be better proceeding with ICB if you plan to become self-employed, the ICB qualification is more suited to that whereas by undertaking this course means you would ultimately be aiming for ACCA status.

 

---

Hi Nigel,

sorry, been busy so didn't have chance to come back to this immediately.

I don't think that what you say is necessarily true although I would hope that a few do decide to move from bookkeeping into accountancy if thats where they see their future lying.

I'm just seeing ACCA-X as a much cheaper bookkeeping specific route to self employment... But to emphasise it would be bookkeeping, not accountancy as quite rightly it stops at Trial Balance (well, actually extended trial balance)

I've looked up the costs of the exams and student membership and that would be :

Initial registration £79
Subscription £83

4 exams at £50 per exam

At twenty weeks for the whole course thats doable within half a year so total cost of £362 (So not quite a free course although the training itself is free).

Looking at the above sylabus overview I'm not seeing any gaps in the skills that a bookkeeper needs to have.

I'm certainly glad that the site discussion about starting our own qualification to go up against the bookkeeping one's went nowehere as I feel that it would be in serious trouble now compared against ACCA-X (which in reality is simply a new (free) front end on the ACCA FIA).

I'm actually quite looking forwards to bookkeepers starting to ask management accounting questions on here and I can certainly see the additional services around costing and performance that people will be able to provide should score profitable brownie points with clients.

The more that I read about ACCA-X the more impressed that I am with the ACCA. Well, thats decided my nomination for this years professional body of the year!

All the best,

Shaun.

Hi Jenny,

you were originally looking at IAB. What made you change your mind to ICB?

If you do ACCA-X with the intention of offering bookkeeping services what additional knowledge will ICB give you over the above syllabus?

This isn't at all anti anyone but just want you to really think about what additional knowledge your money is buying before you part with it.

kind regards,

Shaun.

Good evening Trevor,

I would not for one moment suggest people taking that fastest and easiest route to a practice certificate as the bit of paper one holds is pretty insignificant in the greater scheme of things, it's the knowledge that one gained in the process that really matters.

From what you say it sounds very much as if IAB would be a great option for somone who has taken ACCA-X and wants to go the bookkeeping route rather than progress further into accountancy.

Think that we may be well on our way here to defining the optimal, most cost effective bookkeeping qualification route for the next generation of bookkeepers... Although, might take some getting used to advising people to go ACCA (even FIA level) to IAB as it really seems the wrong direction, lol.

That said, I note that the ICB now advertise in PQ so seems clear they've also had a similar epiphany.

Seems that we are very much living in interesting times in the evolution of professional qualifications and certainly for anyone reading this in the future I think that I should state here that any discussion here very much comes with an expiry date as whilst this new combination may be right today I'm sure that it won't take many dropped percentage points in student for the ICB the field a change that will swing matters back in their direction... But as discussed above £362 for the exams with a higher tier organisation plus free live training and resources is going to take quite some response.

What I would hate to see is any lowering of the ICB standards in order to fight this new threat... But how does one fight free when free is also a quality product.

It seems that battle lines for ICB/IAB's traditional customer base are being drawn by a new player with many times more resources at it's disposal than the other players combined.

Quality and specialisation have to be the battleground.

ICB's response I feel needs to somehow differentiate their product by perhaps offering real life training that makes people ready for the market so far more emphasis on tax, credit control, international aspects of bookkeeping, form filling, HMRC interaction, etc.

Hi Jenny,

It's no surprise that you are confused as this line from the ICB site can be misunderstood :

"If you are a bookkeeper running your own business and providing a service to clients, you are legally required to have a supervising body in accordance with the Money Laundering Regulations 2007 (MLR)".

there is no need to be a member of a professional organisation in order to offer bookkeeping services but you must have MLR cover which may be acquired directly from HMRC who for the purposes of MLR may be classed as one's supervising body. The ICB line is a little confusing on that one if you read it not knowing that.

The recent first year hike in MLR fee's has for the first year at least swung things back towards becoming a member of a professional body that is able to offer MLR supervision.

With ICB you must have reached AICB status which after spending whatever your training provider charges to get to AICB level (read the small print carefully as some providers include exam fee's and first year ICB membership where with others these are additional costs) your annual fee's will be.

As a cost comparrison :

ICB

Annual Subscription : £93

Practice Certificate : £88

Total : £181 per year

If you become a student of the ICB you have to get your Practice Certificate through them in order to practice

 

HMRC

First year : £210

Subsequent years : £115

So excluding training costs and including only the HMRC planed change to £115 in April 2016 break even point would come in year 2 (£51 better off using HMRC). And assuming a matched inflationary climb in fee's over of tend year period that would be a £635 saving using HMRC.

If training fee's are taken into account, even factoring in additional Sage training if one takes the ACCA-X option there is no break even point between those two options with ACCA-X being a clear winner on cost.

 

If anyone has the current membership and practice certificate / MLR fee's for IAB I would be happy to throw those into the calculation but unfortunately they currently seem to be hidden on the IAB site. 

 

Now, where things get more confusing is that the ACCA-X is a bookkeeping qualification offered free by an accounting body I assume in the hope that people with the right natural skills will go on to become accountants which would involve moving up to CAT, AAT, ACCA, etc.

Conversely ICB is now an accountancy qualification pretending to be a bookkeeping one so at the higher levels one could offer accounting services (there was just a disturbance in the force as a million accoutants cried out in anguish) where someone who has signed up for ACCA-X will be restricted to bookkeeping to trial balance, VAT, Payroll and internal (only) reporting.

Now, there raises another point on internal reporting in that ACCA-X covers costing and management accounts where ICB is geared completely towards statutory reporting. So advantage ACCA-X on that one.

However, there are advantages and diadvantages to both sides with ACCA-X positioning you to offer restricted services but that includes costing which ICB doesn't ACCA being much cheaper overall.

Conversely with ICB if you include the level IV diploma in financial management which is a tax based paper it is now an entry level accountancy qualification situated completely on the financial accounting side of the fence which is what most micro businesses want.

I assume that the evolution of the ICB qualification is whats sparked this war as I would not imagine that the accounting bodies are happy with the encroachment on their territory. Whats the old saying, if you keep on poking a bear with a stick long enough your going to lose an arm.

At the end of the day it's very much a pick a flag that you believe in completely and stick with it.

With the ICB they are a quality organisation built initially on a sound principle of improving the quality of bookkeepers in the market place which is the same remit shared by this site.

With the ACCA their integrity and quality is beyond question.

The choice facing you is cost effective quality training in bookkeeping with ACCA-X or more expensive entry level accountancy training with ICB (I can't throw the IAB into this equation as they're hiding their practice certificate fee's). 

The really confusing part here is that genarally one's choice is either cost or quality but I don't feel that quality can be the battleground here when one considers who is behind ACCA-X and thats the cheaper option (in branding that would put ACCA-X under a bargain brand categorisisation rather than an Economy brand).

But it's not of course the only variable in the decision.

I cannot definitively say that either of those two is the right option as ever bookkeepers requirements of their professional body and their qualification are different.

All that I can say is that this qualification coming on the maket is a game changer and needs to be considered carefully before a route is chosen.

Hope that helps,

kind regards,

Shaun.

p.s. I've tried to be fair and unbiased in the above but of course if you lop my head off there's ACCA running through me like a stick of blackpool rock.

Hi Simone,

lets for a moment ignore doing ICB or FIA without a training privider and do a straight like for like comparison of someone with no previous experience of bookkeeping who wants to do a course with a tutor (which is really the target market of the ICB, IAB. AAT and ACCA-X).

looking at the sites of the two main ICB training provider contributors on here including all exam fees for levels II and III manual and computerised in order to get to AICB status. Average training cost is a few pounds short of £1200 for both.

For ACCA-X including training (we are not just talking about the cost of exams but an actual full course including costing, management accounting and introductory Payroll) £362.

If you just do the ICB exams without a training provider then the ACCA-X saving comes by way of ICB being £188 per year where after the first year ACCA-X via HMRC would be £115 per year. However, that variance is pretty immaterial so the decision as to the route one goes is a lot closer with matters such as legal advice and networking opportunities with ICB coming into the equation.

For the ACCA-X syllabus see my extensive post above and compare that to the ICB Syllabus.

As for preparing people for a career in bookkeeping also refer to my post above with suggestions as to how ICB could change their syllabus to aim to produce bookkeepers better prepared for what comes after the exams.

The people that I feel really sorry for in this are the training providers who have been thrown into a costly war not of their making. I'm hoping that my advice above that people also need to be taking Sage training in addition to ACCA-X will partially aleviate any hit that they take on the back of this.

Worth noting that every post in this thread needs to be read as a continuation of the previous one rather than in isolation.

HTH,

Shaun.

Hi All,

This is an interesting development but it's a qualification that should not be considered for anyone looking at self-employment as a bookkeeper, in the same way that those that have completed a Level II IAB qualification, as touched upon by Trevor, should not consider self-employment at that level. Quite simply, the coverage is not sufficient. I see this more as a taster of whether you wish to study further to CAT or ACCA. Also, is there not an ACCA regulation that prevents their Members setting out on their own?

There is no real comparison between Associate Level ICB and the new ACCA-X, where the ICB deals with the practicalities of computerised accounts for sole traders, partnerships and not for profits, including the completion of final accounts. These are areas not even touched upon within the ACCA-X structure, based on the brief overview within the links at the start of this post. In my view these are aimed at two completely different markets.

Good Afternoon Brian

I didn't say whether you should or shouldn't setup as a self employed bookkeeper - Just that you can - with an IAB Level 2 Bookkeeping course. Interestingly, HLC and IAB have changed their career pathway and recommend a Level 3 course. Interestingly, they only offer the - for business course which is assessed by assignment only (great if you hate going to Pearson Vue Centres etc).

http://www.homelearningcollege.com/docs/default-source/pathways/iab-career-progression-plan.pdf?sfvrsn=2

 

Brian McVean wrote:

---

The ACCA having a re-branding of this makes sense, but it's not in direct competition with ICB, IAB, etc, as, very often, ACCA, CIMA, etc is not the route students want to, or need to take.

---

I think this is actually in competition with certain aspects of the IAB and ICB, cant see how it isnt,  and would anticipate seeing a ramping up of that once ACCA have got this course running.  Interesting how ICB and IAB  dont want their students to take the route of 'Accountants' but want them to do the work of  Accountants.  Personally, the more mess and carnage I see, the more I think Regulation 8 should be extended beyond the ACCA!    

-- Edited by Cheshire on Monday 20th of April 2015 05:43:38 PM

I don't do a disservice to bookkeepers! You are the one who has indicated that ICB 2 and ACCA-X are not suitable enough for people to become bookkeepers, therefore by default anyone not even having these exams must be not capable. This despite the fact that there are many many many good bookkeepers out there who don't have any formal qualifications, although you have clearly contradicted yourself between the first and second post by acknowledging that very fact. It's isn't BOOKKEEPERS I have a problem with, but those who proclaim to be accountants when they are indeed just bookkeepers. The offering of services often well beyond their means and I don't just mean the people who are the rogue ones, there are some very well meaning and hard working people but they just aren't capable.  Have you ever seen the messes that bookkeepers who think they are accountants have made, or had to sort any of it out? You only have to really look at some of the posts on here. I am not averse to people learning and you can't know everything on a course/without getting some life experience, but some of the questions from people who are actually offering these services, after going through 'appropriate' training is frankly frightening. There have been a lot of comments lately off and on this forum, about the transition between the exams and real life and given the  point of regulation 8 is that such restrictions protect both the customer and the person offering the service...extend that out just means that people can offer such services but only after they are suitably supervised until they have the where with all to provide such services on their own. Just passing exams is not a good test of people's knowledge and ability. 

Have you ever sked yourself why ACCA insist on reg 8? Is it for a valid reason? What is that reason? Certainly not to further their own BAnk coffers.

Credit should be given to those who put time and effort into getting properly qualified....I agree with that......but it doesn't and can't stop there. You criticise ACCA-x course saying it's not sufficient without putting any real meat on the bones. Maybe explain that more?

On a personal level Brian, I was pondering this the other day.....I seem to recall you mentioned you had done the ICB course....I think that you could be an invaluable contributor to this site in terms of general advice/helping with day to day questions. I've not seen you answer any, is this something you would consider? Sorry if you have and I've not seen any, but reckon you could help AND get more students along the way?

Sorry for any typos, not got glasses! 

-- Edited by Cheshire on Monday 20th of April 2015 08:37:10 PM

Hi Brian,

I'll just take the ACCA bit of for now in isolation.

my description of regulation 8 is Draconian rather than archaic... I don't recall that latter term being used on here but I could be wrong.

The issue that people have with regulation 8 is that it is unfair that someone with several years signed off experience is allowed to do less than someone with no experience at all.

If everyone had the same rules applied to them then there would be no complaints from anyone as like Jo I feel that regulation 8 is good in principle but poor in application where those with the experience to help the smallest businesses are prevented by their supervisory body from doing the work.

Getting to a practice certificate with ACCA can take up to six years of experience under the supervision of a suitably qualified accountant. Three of which must be after completing all of the exams even if one has already gained (say) ten years signed off experience before completing the exams.

To emphasise though, it's only other bodies not having such stringent rules that makes regulation 8 unfair. In itself I feel that it's a very reasonable expectation to expect people to have gained a great deal of practical experience before being allowed loose on the public without a safety net.

Maybe not three years for all professional bodies regardless of level of the body but at least a year.

I would have thought that would be something that you might fight for Brian as it could prove lucrative to also offer practice certificate supervision to newly qualifieds rather than them simply passing the exams and then being a lost revenue stream.

Just have a look at some of the practices out there that make a good living charging people to be attached (without salary) to a practice for six months in order to gain practical experience.

Kind regards,

Shaun.