Forums › ACCA Forums › General ACCA Forums › Reduced membership subscription 2017
- This topic has 1 reply, 2 voices, and was last updated 7 years ago by lavinia69.
- AuthorPosts
- December 11, 2016 at 8:47 am #363206
Hello Everyone,
Please comment & help on this issue,ACCA has facilitated its members to pay reduced subscription by only declaring that are earning less than 5000 GBP , but from 2017 it has required that along with this requirement , a member has to to fall under the categories that are indicated by ACCA,
I said to ACCA that I am raising a family full time & earning less than 5000 GBP to apply for reduced subscription , but they said I am not eligible as I am working & cannot raise my family by working.If this is the case then any of the conditions & earning less than 5000 GBP contradict with each other & no one can claim reduced membership subscription who is working.
If any one has same issue please comment on this & suggest me if there is any way to apply for subscription , as I am earning less that 5000GBP & sent a proof to ACCA.
Draft of ACCA reduced membership application fee.
To be completed by all applicants:
To be eligible to pay a reduced subscription you must fall into one of the following
categories and, in all cases, your earned income must not exceed 5,000GBP per annum.Please tick one of the categories below and that you currently earn less than 5,000GBP:
those who are raising a family full-time/are full-time carers
those who have left accountancy to pursue a religious vocation
those who have re-entered full-time education
those who are experiencing long-term unemployment
those who are suffering a prolonged illness that has prevented them from seeking employmentand
I currently earn less than 5,000GBP per yearDecember 11, 2016 at 12:55 pm #363250Am I being stupid here? If you work then you can not be raising your family full time….sounds like the ACCA are enforcing the obvious.
But then you would not have any earnings if unemployed. But are they saying that only the long term unemployed would be entitled to the reduced subscription?
Not that I agree with this decision as such (I can see it from both sides). Their logic can’t be faulted (as no one would get the discount) but does seem a little unfair. Tempt you with the knowledge of a discount but then snatch it away at the last second
- AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.