700874 Public Sector Finance, Taxation and Accounting

Coursework Template

Module Title	Public Sector Finance, Taxation and Accounting
Module Code	700874
Coursework Element	Assignment
Module Leader	Dr Richard Andrews
Word Count	5,000
First Sit or Resit?	First sit
Submission Date	12th May 2022

 Assignment Title – Public Sector Finance, Taxation and Accounting

M odule assessment

Requirements Part A:

Using a country of your choice:Public Sector Finance, Taxation and Accounting

1. Critically evaluate the role of the public sector and its performance from a taxation policy perspective. Evaluate critically the extent to which your chosen country meets the criteria laid down by Smith’s Canons of Taxation framework.

(25% of marks)Public Sector Finance, Taxation and Accounting

• Critically evaluate the role that culture plays in the implementation of public sector management practices in your chosen country using the Hofstede cultural dimension’s framework.

Part B:

(25% of marks)

Total words for part A: 2,500

• Explain and critically discuss the dominant theories on welfare. Examine and evaluate whether they would support the argument that a government can improve social equality by means of taxation, spending, and regulatory policy.

(25% of marks)

• Discuss critically the methods which are applied to measure performance in the public sector. Explain and critically discuss how governments ensure that public goods and services are delivered in an accountable manner.

(25% of marks)Public Sector Finance, Taxation and Accounting

Total words for part B: 2,500

Structure

This is an academic assignment and extensive use of academic references should be used to support your discussion. Each section of the work should have an introduction, main body with suitable sub headings structured around the key questions asked and a conclusion. You can also use appendices to support any relevant points. Please see the detailed assessment criteria and the feedback sheet that will be used to assess your Public Sector Finance, Taxation and Accountingassignment.

References:

You should reference your work using Harvard style. You should draw a wide range of quality academic journals and practical examples to illustrate your answer.

Public Sector Finance, Taxation and Accounting YOU SHOULD ALSO NOTE:

The  coursework  assignment  required  word  count  is  5,000  words  in  length.   As stated  in  the  programme  handbook,  the  word  count  should  not  exceed  10%  more than this total.

HAND IN DATE:  12th  May 2022

This assignment assesses the following module learning outcomes:

• Critically discuss the role of the public sector and its performance in delivering the essential services provided in the UK and elsewhere.
• Critically evaluate the reasons for differences in public sector management accounting practices and cultures in different countries, and their outcomes in terms of policy and practice.
• Critically evaluate the performance of Public Private Partnerships, using concepts such as economy, efficiency and effectiveness, value-for-money and risk transfer.
• Critically assess international published academic research

Notes

1. Indicative weighting of marks for this assignment

As a guide, the available marks will be split (approximately): Content 40%

Critique 30%

Academic support 30%

• Academic writing

Your views / arguments should include relevant theoretical issues and be supported / justified by relevant academic references. You are reminded of the assessment criteria identified in the module handbook:

Students are expected to provide a critical assessment of the topic area given, and to support their assessment/critique and/or recommendations with reference to pertinent academic references.

• Originality

Your work must of course be original and must make appropriate reference to all sources upon which it draws.

• Information Technology

Your assignment must be word processed.

5. Grading criteria

For a mark of 70% and above:

• The discussion provides an exceptional critical evaluation of all of the main issues involved and provides a balanced and well-presented discussion incorporating consideration of all the views expressed in the articles and the quotation.

• The evaluation and critical analysis demonstrates both competence and understanding together with creativity and originality. The discussion also arrives at a considered and balanced conclusion.

• There is evidence of solid research using a variety of media, and the debate is topical and considers the issues in depth. Evidence of wider reading is apparent.

• Appropriate referencing and presentation skills are illustrated

For a mark of 60% – 69%:

• The discussion provided a thorough and competent financial evaluation of the issues and provides a balanced and well-presented discussion incorporating consideration of all the views expressed in the articles and the quotation.

• A competent analytical approach is taken within the context of a balanced and well-presented discussion. There is also relevant referencing, with the discussion containing no significant errors and/or omissions.

• Appropriate referencing and presentation skills are illustrated

For a mark of 50% – 59%:

• The discussion lacks any critical insight.

• No attempt is made to provide a critique of the views stated. Only limited consideration of all the views expressed is provided in the report, and analysis is lacking.

• Reading and research whilst balanced appears nonetheless limited.

• Appropriate presentation skills are illustrated

For a mark of 40% – 49%:

• The discussion provides an adequate analysis of the issues. However the overall discussion is mainly descriptive and lacks any depth of analysis.

• In addition the assignment is somewhat unstructured with no critical comment provided.

• There is little evidence of reading/research, and concluding comments are somewhat limited and inconclusive.

• Limited presentation skills are illustrated

For a mark of 0% – 39%:

• The discussion fails to provide any adequate evaluation.

• The assignment is limited and unstructured and the analysis poor.

• There is little evidence of understanding with little or no evidence of reading/research.

• Poor presentation skills are illustrated