Home | FAM | Academic Courses | Faculty Staff | Industrial Training | Student Resources | Research | Facilities | Vacancy | Staff Directory 
 
  News and Activities

Year 2015

 

Concept of Audit Risk and Materiality

 By Vincent Tung ST, Accountancy Dept, FAM, UTAR

 

Materiality

 

Information is misstatement if non disclosure could influence the economic decisions of users taken on the basis of the financial statements.

 

Materiality depends on the size of the item or error judged in the particular circumstances of its omission or misstatement. The concept of materiality is reflected in the wording of the auditor ‘standard audit report through the phrase “the financial statements give true and fair view or present fairly in all material respects. “This is the manner in which auditor communicates the notion of materiality to the users of auditor’s report

 

Materiality is considered a relative concept because an amount such as RM 10K might be considered highly material for a small entity but would be clearly immaterial for a large multinational company with assets in billions. This is why the calculation of the preliminary judgement is based on the relative size (eg total assets, total revenues, average profit) of the entity. There is no specific guidance and it is a matter of professional judgements of the auditor.

 

Qualitative and Quantitative factors that may affect the assessment of materiality must be taken into consideration.

 

Qualitative factors include: fraud and irregularities, small amounts that might violate covenants in the contract, non compliance with laws or regulations, amount that might affect the trend in earning.

 

Quantitative factors:Total Assets, total revenues, Net Income before tax, Gross Profit, average of 3 year income before tax.

 

According to ISA 320 the auditor should consider materiality and its relationship with audit risk when conducting audit (Inverse relationship).

 

This concept is important to the auditors for the following reasons:

  • Determining the nature (compliance/substantive testing),extent (amount of audit evidence)and timing (year end and interim audit)of audit procedures

 

  • Evaluating the effect of misstatement. It accepted that financial statements may give a true and fair view even if they include errors or misstatements so long as the errors or misstatement are not material. The responsibility of the auditor is to detect material errors and misstatement.(the audit will be impossible if the auditor were to responsible for detecting all the errors)

 

 

 

 

 

 In audit planning materiality in taken into consideration at 2 levels:

 

  • Level 1 ─ Financial statement level (overall materiality), because the auditor expresses an opinion on the financial statements taken as a whole.

 

  • Level 2 ─ Account balances and class of transactions level (account balances level), because the auditor verifies account balances in reaching an overall conclusion on the fairness of the financial statements.

 

         The auditor's judgment about materiality for planning purposes may be different from materiality for evaluation purposes because the auditor, when planning an audit, cannot anticipate all of the circumstances that may ultimately influence judgment about materiality in evaluating the audit findings at the completion of the audit.  If significantly lower materiality levels become appropriate in evaluating the audit findings, the auditor should re-evaluate the sufficiency of the audit procedures already performed.

 

 

Audit Risk and Risk of material misstatements

 

 

.

Audit risk is defined as the risk that the auditor may give an inappropriate or wrong opinion when he financial statements are materially misstated .The auditor’s standard report states that the audit provides only reasonable assurance that the financial statements do not contain material misstatements.

 

 The term “reasonable assurance “implies that there is some risk that a material misstatement could be present in the financial statements and the auditor will fail to detect it. For eg Audit Risk of 5% means that the is 5 chances in 100 of giving the wrong opinion..

 

Audit Risk Model:

Audit Risk (AR) = Inherent Risk (IR) X Control Risk (CR) X Detection Risk (DR)

 

Inherent Risk is the susceptibility of an assertion to material misstatement assuming no related internal controls. (Risk or likelihood of material error being present in the financial statement if there were no internal control operating)  This types of risk derives from 3 sources, Management integrity –management‘s moral and ethical stance , Account risk-the level of uncertainty or degree of judgement  involved in an account(eg provision of doubtful debt),Business risk –External and Internal eg the extent to which the client biz is vulnerable to changes in the economy, competition and or technological advancement.

 

Internal control Risk is the risk that material misstatement that occur will not be prevented or detected by the internal controls. Some internal control risk will always be present because any system of internal control has inherent limitations (eg collusion)

 

Note: IR and CR are not under the direct control of Auditor, but with the auditee to certain extent. IR & CR are the 2 types of risks contribute to the misstatements in the financial statements which could be due to errors or frauds

 

Detection Risk- Detection Risk is the risk that the auditor will not detect a material misstatement that exists in the financial statements. This risk can be influenced by the auditor. Inherent risk and control risk differ from the detection risk in that they exist independently of the audit of financial statements whereas detection risk relates to the auditor ‘s procedures and can be changed at the auditor’s discretion. Detection risk has and inverse relationship to inherent and control risk. Given the desired AR, if IR and CR are assessed to be high, then, the amount of Substantive test will be increased.

 

Note: DR can be decomposed further into analytical Procedures risk (APR) and Substantive test of details risk

 

The use of the model in planning the areas of the audit on which to concentrate (the areas of greatest risk of material misstatement) and in planning the amount of detailed testing should then follow.

 

 

The limitations of Audit Risk Model are as follows:

  • First: the model assumes that its components are independent of one another while they are likely to be dependent in the real world.

 

  • Second: since the auditor assesses IR and CR, such assessments may be higher or lower than the actual IR and CR that exist for the client

 

  • Last, the audit risk model does not consider the possibility of non sampling risk.

 

Identification of the risk of material misstatement because of fraud

 

The auditor is required to consider the risks of material misstatements in the financial statements due to fraud. ISA 240 requires the following:

 

When obtaining an understanding of the entity and its environment, including its internal control, the auditor shall consider whether the information obtained indicates that one or more fraud risk factors are present.

 

In making the assessment of whether fraud risk factors are present, the auditor should understand the three conditions that are generally present when fraud occurs. These are known as the ‘fraud triangle’, which includes the following:

  • incentives/pressures
  • opportunities
  • attitudes/rationalisations.

 

The auditor should be concerned with fraud risk factors that relate to either misstatements resulting from fraudulent financial reporting or from misappropriation of assets

 

References:

 

 Messier, W. F., & Boh, M. (2007). Auditing and assurance services in Malaysia. (3rd ed.). Kuala Lumpur: McGraw-Hill.

 

Rittenberg, L.E.,Schwieger,B.J.,Johnstone,K.M.,Geisler, C. (2012) Auditing and Assurance Services ( An Asia Edition).Singapore: Cengage Learning

 

Arens, A. A., Elder, R. J., Beasley, M. S. (2014). Auditing and    Assurance Services: An Integrated Approach (15th ed).Prentice Hall

 

 

 _________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

 

 

The change of a paradigm: From internal auditing to enterprise risk management

 By Vincent Tung ST, Accountancy Dept, FAM, UTAR

 

Practitioners have long considered risk assessment as an activity to be performed in the audit process with the specific aim to identify areas of weakness or symptoms of potential failure.

 

In the United States, the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations (COSO) has published two key reports (COSO, 1992 and 2004) laying down guidelines on the design of internal control systems.

 

Specifically, since the issuance of the COSO Internal Control Integrated Framework (IC-IF) (COSO, 1992), risk assessment is explicitly regarded as one of the components of internal control systems.

 

The COSO report (1992) views internal control as a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the achievement of three core objectives:

 

1. Effectiveness and efficiency of operations

2. Reliability of financial reporting

3. Compliance with laws and regulations.

 

 

By implication, internal control is classed as being effective if the Board of Directors has reasonable assurance that the above three objectives are being achieved.

Whilst the COSO report acknowledges that the term internal control may mean different things to different people, it also defines internal control as being characterized as comprising five inter-related components. The five elements are as follows:

 

1. Control environment

2. Risk assessment

3. Control activities/procedures

4. Information and communication

5. Monitoring.

 

Nonetheless, the recent scandals and financial crashes that hit several large listed companies laid bare the inadequacy of internal control systems in directing management attention and resources towards risk management. An answer to the increasing demand for a more risk-focused perspective in the design and implementation of internal control systems has been given recently by COSO through the Enterprise Risk Management Integrated Framework (ERM-IF) (COSO, 2004).

  

Under COSO 2004 three new components are added, namely:

  • Objective setting
  • Event identification, and
  • Risk response.

 

This framework is a development of the previous IC-IF report (COSO, 1992).In the 1992 report, the identification and assessment of risk were considered strictly an aid in determining the adequacy of internal control systems. In fact, emphasis was placed on the internal control system, risk assessment being only one element of the control process. In the ERM framework, risk management is a key governance activity and internal control is an element of the ERM system. In order to appreciate its relevance and scope, risk management must be examined in connection with:

 

  • Corporate governance, as top management is responsible for conscious and effective risk management;
  • Performance measurement, as risk assessment is a key ingredient of Risk-adjusted return measures;
  • Internal control, as internal control is considered a component of Enterprise

Risk Management systems

 

Risk management activities are primarily focused on how to ensure that top management runs the company in the interests of its stakeholders and in observance of the rules that regulate the competitive, economic, political and social environment (ICAEW, 1999). In the case of listed companies, the protection of investors’ interests and the efficiency of financial markets are fundamental objectives.

 

 

ERM is defined as ‘a process, effected by an entity’s board of directors, management and other persons, applied in strategy setting and across the enterprise, designed to identify potential events that may affect the entity, and manage risks to be within its risk appetite, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the achievement of entity objectives’ (COSO, 2004),

 

ERM is closely linked to both strategy definition and strategy implementation. Thus, risk management is a process guided by the company’s mission and strategic objectives, which unfolds along three phases:

 

Risk identification.Risks that may influence the achievement of company objectives and the success of company’s strategies are pinpointed. Risks can be two-sided or downside. In the first case, once identified, they are channelled into the process of strategic planning. In the second case, they must be analysed thoroughly so that defence strategies may be devised. Interdependencies among different risk factors should be identified in order to neutralise dangerous concatenations or to properly manage common causal factors

 

Risk assessment. The assessment of the identified risks makes it possible to appraise the impact of different risk factors on performance. The evaluation of these effects must be combined with an estimate of the probability of occurrence associated with these risk factors. Such combined assessment of impact and likelihood allows for a rational allocation of management attention to the different risk factors.

 

 Risk response. Following the identification and the assessment of risks, management must act in order to implement risk management policies aimed at aligning the real risk profile to the one negotiated with shareholders.

 

The process of risk management is shaped by the internal environment, the control activities, the information and communication systems and the continuous monitoring of the system’s adequacy.

 

  • The internal environment reflects the approach of management to risk governance.This environment is the result of a process through which top management recognises the risk implications of strategies, defines its risk appetite and encourages the desired risk tolerance within the enterprise.

 

  • Policies for risk control must be derived from these elements. These policies concern control activities and procedures and organisational solutions aimed at risk containment.

 

  • In the ERM framework, information and communication systems play a dual role. On one side, by channelling information throughout the firm, they support effective decision-making and the efficient execution of strategies. On the other side, they are designed to make stakeholders and management aware of the risks that the enterprise is assuming.

 

  • Continuous monitoring of the effectiveness of risk assessment procedures and the adequacy of control mechanisms is necessary, given the dynamics that affect both the competitive environment and the internal organisation.

 

ERM and Business Model (Refer to appendix)

 

The starting point of the process is the identification of business risks, an activity driven by different elements and factors. On one side, risks emerge from the development of alternative scenarios of the environment (industries and countries) in which the firm operates (environmental risk factors).

 

On the other side, performance measurement systems can act as potential generators of risks, as extremely challenging goals can lead to potentially risky organizational and managerial solutions. Moreover, an excessive rigidity in performance evaluation may induce undesirable behaviour in management (Simons, 1995).

 

This seems to be the more so when incentive systems play a central role in driving management decisions and behaviour. It is one of the responsibilities of top management to check whether excessive pressure for results is prompting management to engage in moral hazard.

 

The process of internal control moves in parallel and in synchrony with strategic objectives setting and resource allocation to strategic programmes and initiatives (strategic planning) (Lorange, 1980). As strategic planning can substantially modify the risk profile of a business, an analysis of the business plan can provide useful indications to internal auditing on the elements worth monitoring (audit universe). The subsequent incorporation of the strategic plan into the budget generates operational programmes (which guide management action); performance objectives (upon which management’s commitment is sought); the allocation of resources to the operational units (for the implementation of approved programmes).

 

Thus, the contents of the budget can drive the formation of the annual auditing plan (Lawrie et al., 2003). The precise definition of budgeted objectives and programmes makes for a more detailed analysis, assessment and quantification of the risks previously identified (risk assessment) and a precise definition of the contents of the annual auditing plan (breakdown plans) (Selim and McNamee, 1999a).

 

In the proposed process, the relationships between internal control and risk management are clearly set in an integrated perspective. On one side, as both the planning process and the process of internal control are based on the identification

of business risks, they must be conducted in an integrated way. This is made possible by the parallel development of the phases of both processes and by the continuous exchange of information regarding the business risk profile: the strategic planning process feeds the audit universe, while the budget process contributes to the definition of a detailed auditing plan. On the other side, continuous supervision by the Audit Committee over the internal control process must ensure that top management and line management share a common language and common frames of reference on risk management.

 

In this way, the Audit Committee assumes a key role in the internal control process, as stated by corporate governance principles.

 

 

 

 

 

In light of the above, an internal control process that effectively supports risk management must:

 

  • be able to identify the risks threatening the business (McCuaig, 1998; De Loach, 2000);
  • be integrated into the processes of strategic objectives setting and of strategic resources allocation (Lorange, 1980);
  • be closely linked to the process of budgeting and assignment of objectives to management (Lawrie et al., 2003);
  • ensure the continuous monitoring of risk management strategies (McNamee and Selim, 1998).

 

 

 

Internal control systems are therefore faced with a radical shift in paradigm, as they turn from compliance verification systems to risk control systems.

Elements of this change of paradigm are presented below.

 

Old paradigm

New paradigm

Focus

On effectiveness of

control mechanisms

and on respect of

procedures

On any type of risk that might compromise

the achievement of company objectives:

effectiveness-efficiency of operation;

reliability of financial reporting;

compliance with laws, rules and

regulations

Approach

– responsive

– fragmented

anticipatory, pro-active

– integrated

Responsibility

Concentrated in staff

units (Internal

Auditing and Finance

Diffused through line managers

(Board of Directors, Internal Auditing,

Managers at all levels)

Frequency

Periodic recurrent

activity + occasional

ad hoc activity

Continuous process

 

Conclusion:

 The role played by the internal auditing and audit committee involving management and generating commitment to spread a culture of conscious control and risk for the success of the ERM initiative. Consistent with the strategic choice made by top management, the approach adopted encouraged management’s maximum participation both in risk and control assessment and in the definition of action plans to be implemented to improve the system of controls.

Thus internal auditing has acted as a facilitator, sometimes sacrificing efficiency for the sake of effectiveness. By doing that, on one side risk assessment and control have started to be accepted as basic components of management decisions and actions. On the other side, management’s appreciation of the input of internal auditing into the value creation process has increased dramatically.

 

References:

 Woods,M.,Linsley. P., Kajuter.P-Internatioanl Risk Management,System,Internal control and Corporate Governance.,CIMA

Committee of Sponsoring Organisations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) (1992).  Internal Control – Integrated Framework, AICPA, New York, NY.

 

Committee of Sponsoring Organisations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) (2004). Enterprise Risk Management – Integrated Framework. AICPA, New York, NY.

 

Year 2014

3 March: Talk by Hong Kong Polytechnic University Professor

Supporting the university's effort to produce internationally competitive graduates, UTAR Faculty of Accountancy and Management (FAM) organised a talk by its newly appointed external examiner from Department of Building and Real Estate of Hong Kong Polytechnic University Prof Dr Chiang Yat Hung on 3 March 2014 at Sungai Long Campus

FAM International Business Head of Department Alexander Tay Guan Meng said that the purpose of the talk was to expose students to the global alerts pertinent to their future careers in building and property management. "It was a very good sharing of knowledge on the prospect of building and property management from the global perspective. Therefore, we are looking forward to having more collaborative activities with Hong Kong Polytechnic University," said Tay as he shared their plans to improve the overall structure of the course in the near future.

Prof Chiang who has been with the well-established university for 20 years gave a one-hour talk in front of about 50 Building and Property Management students which consisted of three topics based on the context of the Hong Kong economy. The topics covered were the general economic development, the real estate and construction sectors and the property management as a subsector for the real estate and construction.

In encouraging students to gain practical experience, Prof Chiang's word of advice were, "To build your career as a property manager, you have to start from the bottom and drive towards becoming a strategic planner in this field."

Prof Chiang was on a three-day visit to UTAR following his appointment as the external examiner for the Building and Property Management course with the responsibilities on evaluation and advice  the course structures, curriculum, and examinations. During the visit, he had discussions with the academic staff to verify the academic standard of the program.

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

26 February: Transitioning from University to Work -  The Importance of Soft Skills to Land That Job!

CPA Australia and KPMG Malaysia in collaboration with UTAR's Accounting Society organized a talk entitled "Transitioning from University to Work ? The Importance of Soft Skills to Land That Job!" at UTAR Sg Long Campus on 26 February 2014.

The main purpose of the talk was to create awareness among the students on the importance of soft skills throughout their working life. UTAR's Accounting Society was honored to have Chief Auditor of CPA Australia, Dr. AJ Purcell together with Audit Director of KPMG Malaysia, Mr. Ruban Kandasamy as the main speakers for the day.

The talk started with Dr. AJ Purcell sharing his career pathway since graduating with a degree in Economics. Throughout his sharing, he explained how he had applied soft skills in his life and career. Dr. Purcell even gave examples to the students on how they can maintain good practice of soft skills starting from their life as student.

Dr. Purcell equated the soft skills required in leadership with that of driving a car. "You have to collaborate with your "passengers" (your team members) in getting an optimal solution for every problem or situation encountered. Even if a particular "passenger" doesn't work along, you have to find a way for everyone to move on," he added.

He also encouraged students to be investigative and have a strong foundation in accounting which they are gaining through their tertiary education at UTAR.  The real life example shared by Dr. Purcell showed how his investigative mind along with the networks he had built helped him  in detecting fraud where a worker from a client's company was making fraudulent transactions, tracing it back all the way to the company's cash statements.

The ideas provided by Dr. Purcell and Mr. Ruban inspired the audience. Throughout the interactive session, they received many questions from the audience who were keen to know more about topic discussed. 

 

------------------------------------------------------ 

 

President's Visit to Centre of Social Development and Corporate Social Responsibilities (CSDCSR) in FAM

On 20th February 2014 the President, Ir. Prof. Academician Dato' Dr. Chuah Hean Teik paid a visit to CSDCSR Research Centre in FAM. The slides presented to the President can be found here.

More information on the CSDCSR Research Centre can be found here.

 

 ----------------------------------------------------

 

Industrial Advisor gives Building and Property Management Talk

 

UTAR students of Property and Building Management attended a talk by its Industrial Advisor Richard Chan on 19 February 2014 at Sungai Long Campus. Organised by Faculty of Accountancy and Management., the professional (director) consultant on shopping centre and high-rise retail complex management were there to enlighten the students on the current industrial reality and demand while sharing his in-depth experience with the students.

International Business Head of Department Alexander Tay Guan Meng said that the talk is held to highlight practical aspects in building management despite the theories learnt in class. "Graduates of this course are in high demand. Therefore, we want the students to be equipped with as much practical knowledge, skills, and real-life experience provided by the industrial expert."

Chan who is also the director of RCMC Sdn Bhd, a Retail Consultancy Firm providing broad range of services and advisory role to developers and shopping centre owners lauded UTAR for having a comprehensive and specifically designed syllabus course syllabus.

In his talk, he advised the students to relate what they have learnt to the reality in order to go further in their career. He also alarmed the students of the huge responsibility the building managers carry on their shoulders involving public safety and convenience. "In order to be a good building manager, you must be a 'troubleshooter' to anticipate a problem before it comes.

"A successful building manager also must be able to enhance two core values which are instant income and the value of the building over time." said Chan who has spent 33 years of ups and downs in the industry. He further touched on the mistakes commonly done which caused severe impacts on to the end users/building manager and value engineering in property management.

Earlier on, Chan attended the industrial advisor's meeting and interaction session with the academic staff where they discussed matters pertaining to the course including the suggestion to extend the internship period to four months

______________________________________________________________________

 

FAM lecturer receives Gold Medal Award

It was an unforgettable moment for Faculty of Accountancy and Management (FAM) lecturer Dr Falahat Nejadmahani Mohammad when he was announced the top Doctorate student during the 48th Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM) Convocation ceremony. He was then awarded the USM Gold Medal Award for Doctor of Business Administration during the Graduate School of Business Annual Dinner held at Cititel Penang on 20 September 2013.


Dr Falahat, who is currently based in the FAM's Department of International Business and also the Chairperson of the Centre for Sustainable Development and Corporate Social Responsibility in Business, received the prestigious award from Motorcycle & Scooter Assemblers And Distributors Association of Malaysia (MASAAM) President YBhg Dato Syed Mohamad Aidid.


Upon receiving the award, a humbled Dr Falahat thanked all academic staff and family members who have contributed to his success. The elated lecturer said, "Unwavering focus on your goal, constant perseverance and motivation is imperative to accomplishing anything. Many life trials may come along the way and sacrifices need to be made in order to achieve your goal." He also quoted Gordon Hinckley's wise saying, "You will come to know that what appears today to be a sacrifice will prove instead to be the greatest investment that you will ever make."


Dr Falahat received a gold medal, trophy, certificate and cheque.

 

 

 

 

Visit by staff of CTIM to FAM

On 13 July 2012, the students of the Faculty of Accountancy and Management (FAM) were paid a visit by Ms Nancy Kaur, the Education Manager of the Chartered Tax Institute of Malaysia (CTIM).

For more info: please click here 

 

September 2010

Exemption for Bachelor of Accounting (Hons) from Chartered Institute of Management Accountants (CIMA)

 

CIMA has given exemptions for their exams to UTAR's Bachelor of Accounting (Hons) (BAT) graduates of up to 11 papers (out of 14).


 

Students are to take note of the units that must be taken to be eligible for maximum exemption of 11 papers. The list of the exempted papers can be downloaded from this following link:

 

CIMA Exemption for UTAR's Bachelor of Accounting (Hons)

 

 

UTAR Professor Cheng Ming Yu honoured as Young Global Leader 2011 by World Economic Forum

 

 

Professor Dr Cheng Ming Yu, Chair of Mr and Mrs Chua Chai Leng Professor of Economics, Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman (UTAR), was honoured as a young global leader by the World Economic Forum on 9 March 2011.

 

The World Economic Forum is an independent international organisation committed to improving the state of the world by engaging business, political, academic and other leaders of society to shape global, regional and industry agendas. The organisation bestows the honour each year to recognise the most distinguished young leaders below the age of 40 from around the world. The selection committee, chaired by Queen Rania Al Abdullah of Jordan, meticulously screens through profiles of thousands of young leaders from numerous disciplines and sectors from every region of the world.

 

Professor Cheng was selected based on her record of professional accomplishments, commitment to society and potential to contribute to shaping the future of the world through her inspiring leadership. She is the only Malaysian in the list of 190 young global leaders from 65 economies for 2011.

 

"I'm honoured to be chosen as a 2011 YGL [young global leader] and I hope to play an active role to make this world a better place to live in," said Professor Cheng, adding that she had already been invited to attend annual meetings by the World Economic Forum.

 

Before her appointment as the UTAR Chair of Mr and Mrs Chua Chai Leng Professor of Economics, Professor Cheng was a visiting lecturer of Graduate School of Business, University of Newcastle, Australia. She was also a recipient of Japan Society for the Promotion of Science Fellowship with two months in residence at Reitaku University, Japan and a Fulbright Visiting Scholar, Washington State University, USA in 2004-05. She carried out research on competitiveness studies at Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, National University of Singapore in 2007-08. Currently, she researches on projects related to economic development including social capital, globalisation, human capital development and competitiveness studies.

 

 

Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman (UTAR) and the Malaysian Institute of Chartered Secretaries and Administrators (MAICSA) signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) at UTAR Petaling Jaya Campus on 24 May 2011

Prof Chuah and Janet Ang signing the MoU

 

Documents exchanged (from left) : Dr Ong, Prof Chuah, Janet Ang and Dr Cheah

Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman (UTAR) and the Malaysian Institute of Chartered Secretaries and Administrators (MAICSA) signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) at UTAR Petaling Jaya Campus on 24 May 2011.

 

With the signing of the MoU, UTAR, a leading private not-for-profit university in Malaysia, and MAICSA, one of the nine divisions of the internationally reputable Institute of Chartered Secretaries and Administrators (ICSA), formally agreed on working together on areas of common interest including upholding the professionalism of chartered secretaries.

 

Signing on behalf of the parties were UTAR President Ir Professor Dato' Dr Chuah Hean Teik and his counterpart MAICSA President and Fellow of ICSA Janet Ang Siew Cheng. UTAR Dean of the Faculty of Accountancy and Management Dr Ong Seng Fook and MAICSA Deputy President and Fellow of ICSA Dr Cheah Foo Seong signed as witnesses.

 

"MAICSA has accredited nine degree programmes from UTAR for exemptions from the MAICSA Professional Diploma in Corporate Administration (PDCA) and the Professional Part I programme of the ICSA International Qualifying Scheme (IQS)," said Ang, adding that the institute would accredit more UTAR programmes after the signing of MoU.

 

The nine UTAR degree programmes exempted from the two examinations were:

 

  1. Bachelor of Accounting (Hons)
  2. Bachelor of Business Administration (Hons)
  3. Bachelor of Commerce (Hons) Accounting
  4. Bachelor of Communication (Hons) Public Relations
  5. Bachelor of Computer Science (Hons)
  6. Bachelor of Economics (Hons) Global Economics
  7. Bachelor of International Business (Hons)
  8. Bachelor of Marketing (Hons)
  9. Bachelor of Science (Hons) Biotechnology

 

"The synergy between UTAR and MAICSA will open up added avenues for UTAR students to develop their careers and keep abreast with the professional skills and knowledge essential in the business world," said Professor Chuah, adding that the international vision and all-round professionalism approach of MAICSA were synergetic with UTAR's commitment to provide quality education for better graduate employability.

 

Other areas of collaboration would include the two parties involving in international collaborative research in corporate governance, ethics, secretaryship and administration, MAICSA facilitating internship and employment placements for UTAR students and graduates in its member companies, and UTAR becoming a MAICSA approved learning centre.

 

 

Series of Talks conducted by Center for Sustainable Development and Corporate Social Responsibility in Business (CSDCSR) - 16th & 17th March 2011

Two talks were conducted by CSDCSR on the 16th and 17th March 2011.

 

16th March 2011 - Talk by Professor Nariai Osamu and Professor Lau Sim Yee, from Faculty of Economics, Reitaku University, Japan on Japanese economy, and Japanese trade & investment relations with ASEAN particularly Post-Earthquake and Tsunami.

 

Professor Nariai Osamu is a professor of economics at the Faculty of Economics, Reitaku University. He graduated from Faculty of Economics, Tokyo University, and served as an economist in Economy Planning Agency 20 years before joining Reitaku University. When he was with Economic Planning Agency, he was seconded to OECD in Paris for 2 years and also to the office of Ministry of Finance, Brunei. His research interests are Japanese economy, Asia economic integration and international financial system.



Professor Lau Sim Yee is a professor of economics at the Faculty of Economics, Reitaku University. He graduated from Tokyo Institute of Technology and Tohoku University. Before joining Reitaku University, he worked for the Sasakawa Peace Foundation. His research interests are development economics, Asia economic integration, and technology transfer. He is a Malaysian and has been residing in Tokyo since 1983.

 

More pictures here

 

17th March 2011 - Talk by Professor Akira Kajiwara, Professor and Dean at the Faculty of Management, Otemon Gakuin University, Osaka, Japan on Corporate Social Responsibility.

 

During the talk, Professor Akira shared about the Professional Engagement and its relevance to Corporate Social Responsibility. He also highlighted the options for future collaboration between the industry and Corporate Social Responsibility.

 

More pictures here

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In the press: New Straits Times, 12 December 2010

UTAR offers industry-relevant MBA courses

 


 

November 2010

MBA Edge Nov 2010 Issue Featuring UTAR MBA (Corporate Governance) students

 

 Click on the image to enlarge it.

 

9 November, 2010

UTAR and Chartered Tax Institute of Malaysia (CTIM) ink pact

Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman (UTAR) and the Chartered Tax Institute of Malaysia (CTIM) signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) at UTAR Petaling Jaya Campus on 9 November 2010.

 

With the signing of the MoU, UTAR, a leading private not-for-profit university in Malaysia, and CTIM, a premier body for tax professionals in Malaysia, formally agreed to collaborate together to promote the profession of tax consultants.

 

Professor Chuah signed the MoU on behalf of UTAR, while Assistant Professor Dr Ong Seng Fook, Dean of Faculty of Accountancy and Management, signed as witness. Signing on behalf of CTIM was its President Mr Khoo Chin Guan and as witness was its immediate-past President Dr Veerinderjeet Singh.

 

MoU signed (from left): Dr Veerinderjeet, Khoo, Prof. Chuah and Dr Ong

 

 


August 2010

Exemption for Bachelor of Accounting (Hons) from Chartered Tax Institute of Malaysia

On August 2010, upon reviewing the programme curricullum for UTAR's Bachelor of Accounting (Hons), the Chartered Tax Institute of Malaysia (CTIM) has granted the university a maximum exemptions (8 out of 10) for the programme.

 

The exemptions are:

 

Foundation Level  - Taxation I, Economic and Business Statistic, and Financial Accounting 1.

Intermediate Level - Taxation II, Taxation III, and Company and Business Law.

Final Level - Financial Accounting II, and BUsiness and Financial Management.

 

 

The remaining two papers i.e. Tax IV (Level III) may be taken while the students are in their final year and Tax V (Level III) can only be taken after the completion of the Bachelor of Accounting (Hons).

 

 

 

Last updated: 16 Jun 2015 by FAM © 2003 - 2015 Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman Email: info@utar.edu.my
Webmasters | Maps | Legal Statement | Terms of Usage