题目内容
在Word文档编辑过程中，若要将插入点快速移到文档尾部，按快捷键
查看答案
搜索结果不匹配？点我反馈
更多问题
•For each Question 15-20, mark one letter (A, B, C or D) on your Answer Sheet for the answer you choose.
"Harmonization" is a process of increasing the compatibility of accounting practices by setting limits on how much they vary. Harmonized standards are free of logical conflicts, and should improve the comparability of financial information from different countries.
Efforts to harmonize accounting standards began even before the creation of the International Accounting Standards Committee (IASC) in 1973. International accounting harmonization now is one of the most important issues facing securities regulators, stock exchanges, and those who prepare or use financial statements.
Harmonization and standardization are sometimes used interchangeably. But there is still a difference between them. Standardization normally means the imposition of a rigid and narrow set of rules, and may even apply a single standard or rule to all situations. Besides, standardization does not accommodate national differences and, therefore, is more difficult to implement internationally. Whereas harmonization is much more flexible and open. It does not take a one-size-fits-all approach, but accommodates national differences and has made a great of progress internationally in recent years. However, within accounting, these two words have almost become technical terms, and one cannot rely on the normal difference in their meanings. 'Harmonization' is a word that tends to be associated with the transnational legislation originating from the European Union while 'standardization' is a word that is often associated with the International Accounting Standard Committee.
The reasons that make national accounting standards desirable also apply internationally. Generally speaking, the reasons for harmonization are as follows: (1) It is important and necessary for investors and financial analysts to understand the financial statements of foreign companies whose shares they might wish to buy. They hope to make it quite sure that statements from different countries are reliable and comparable, or at least to be clear about the nature and magnitude of the differences. Besides, they also need confidence in the soundness of the auditing.
(2) The advantages of harmonization are very important for MNEs, because the great effort of financial accountants to prepare and consolidate financial statements would be much simplified if statements from all around the world were prepared according to the same standards. Besides, it would be much easier to prepare comparable internal information for the appraisal of the performance of subsidiaries in different countries. Further, many aspects of investment appraisal, performance evaluation, and other decision making uses of management accounting information would benefit from harmonization. Above all, the cost of capital should be reduced by reducing the risk for investors if accounting can be made more comparable and reliable.
(3) International accountancy firms can benefit from harmonization. They are in favour of harmonization because it is good for their large clients.
(4) Governments in developing countries might find it easier to understand and control the operations of MNEs if financial reporting were harmonized.
The most fundamental of obstacles to harmonization is the size of the present differences between the accounting practices of different countries. In previous Section 8.5 some main differences concerned with international accounting are discussed. Besides, there are several significant differences within the equity class, let alone between that class and the other. These differences go to the root of the reasons for the preparation of accounting information. Further, the dichotomy between shareholder/fair view pr
•Read the Chairman's Statement below.
•For questions (23-28), choose the correct answer.
•Mark one letter (A, B or C) on your Answer Sheet.
Chairman's Statement
Despite the appearance of a new competitor on the market, the company continued to grow and increase its market share throughout 2000. Partly in response to this new threat, but more importantly, as part of a strategy for growth, several key decisions were taken this year. The most significant new developments included a range of vitamin-rich drinks for children and low calorie diet drinks, which both proved very popular.
The company is still best known for its range of refreshing fruit drinks and, not surprisingly, these were our biggest sellers once more. There were two new additions to the range last year, Squish! and Liquid Sunshine, both of which have a distinctive Caribbean flavour. The first sales figures suggest that our expensive TV advertising campaign was very successful and that these products will soon be as popular as the rest of the fruit drink range.
Growth in the keep-fit and health markets meant our energy drinks did well in 2000. Sales of one brand, Booster were second only to fruit drinks in April. The strength of this particular market also explains the success of our new diet drinks.
There were, however, big differences in the performance of our older products. The company's oldest product, mineral water, continued to enjoy a healthy share of a very profitable mass market. It seems our customers are still happy to stay with the brand despite the increasing number of competitors' products. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said of our Ice-T and Chocomania drinks. Sales showed an initial increase in the summer after we re-launched both products but customers soon bought other brands and total annual sales for both product ranges were disappointing.
The company also said goodbye to its own brand of cola, launched in 1998. After two unsuccessful years of trying to break into the huge cola market, 2000 looked like being another poor year. The company finally accepted that it had made a wrong decision and stopped production in September of that year.
What was the main reason the company decided to launch its new product ranges？
•Choose the best word to fill in each gap, from A, B or C.
•For each question (29-40), mark one letter (A, B or C) on your Answer Sheet.
THE BIG NUMBER
The country's demand for telephones, mobile phones, faxes and the Internet is growing at an increasingly fast rate. In fact, it is growing (29) quickly that our telephone numbering system needs re-organizing (30) some major changes will have to (31) made.
These changes, (32) , will make the system simpler and easier to use. It is (33) an important task that all the UK phone companies are working together to make (34) changes. The changes will (35) only make hundreds of millions of new numbers, but they will (36) bring order and flexibility to the system for years to come.
(37) main changes are due to happen (38) now and the year 2006, which will give you (39) of time to prepare. You will find details of the number changes on our website, (40) you can visit any time at www. numberchange, org, or call our free phone helpline on 800—820—7713.
(29)
•For each question (23-28) , choose the correct answer.
•Mark one letter (A, B or C) on your Answer Sheet.
The Bosses Speak
Adam Rogers is an executive recruitment specialist who has turned to writing. The result is this book, based on interviews with twenty Chief' Executives.
Each top manager -- none of them famous names, surprisingly -- is .given a short chapter, and there is some introductory material and a conclusion. This means you can jump from one person to another, in any order, which is good for people who are too busy to read a book from cover to cover. For a management book it isn't expensive, although whether it's good value for money is doubtful.
Some of the twenty interviewees started their own businesses, while others joined a company and worked their way up. Some are fairly new in their position, and others have had years of experience, though, strangely, Rogers doesn't seem interested in these differences. The interviewees work in everything, from retailing to airlines to software, and it is this variety that forms the main theme of Rogers's book.
I have to say that Rogers's approach annoys me. He rarely stays at a distance from his interviewees, who are mostly presented in their own, positive words. If this were always the case, at least you would know where you were. But he seems to dislike certain interviewees. As a result, I don't know whether to accept any of his opinions.
It also means that the book gives no clear lessons. At the very least, I expected to learn what makes a successful Chief Executive. But these people seem to share two types of qualities. Some of them are very common, suggesting that anyone can be equally successful, which is definitely not the ease. And the other qualities are ones which most successful bosses I've seen definitely do not have. So in the end I'm no wiser about what really goes on.
Perhaps I'm being unfair. As long as you don't think about whether you'd like them as friends, and pay no attention to most of the advice they give, the most readable parts are where the bosses describe their route to their present position. Rogers seems to think that his book would be useful for people aiming for the top, and that it might even make a few want to start their own company; but, in fact, what they could learn here is very limited. Seen as light business reading for a doctor or teacher, though, this book would provide some good entertainment.
The reviewer suggests that one advantage of the book is that
微信支付 
支付宝支付