Comments

  1. avatar says

    on example 2 calculation for Giedrius why is it written deposit Jan 2004 $1152? I thought it is Jan 2009 as the question said that the deposit was 1 Jan 2009 $1152. why are we using the actuarial method in this example?

    • Profile photo of MikeLittle says

      Hi Sharly

      Where exactly does it say “deposit paid Jan 2004″?. The notes say 2009. The lecture may say 2004 but that’s because it was a recorded lecture from a previous (original) version.

      You need, mentally, to move the years in the lecture forward by 5.

      We are using the actuarial method because the rate of interest is given in the question

      OK?

  2. avatar says

    Hi all..does anyone know how the net figures came out of reconciliation of obligations under finance leases ..the gross is understood ..how was 2790,8793,1712 calculated…thank you for your help..Mike! Can you help?

    • Profile photo of MikeLittle says

      Yes, but I wish that you had posted this on the Ask the Tutor page!

      These figures represent the present day discounted value of the future instalments

      So, $3,000 discounted at the rate of 10% for 1 year is $2,790 (it’s actually $2,727)

      $3,000 discounted for 5 years at the rate of 10% gives us $1,712 (actually it’s $1,863 – that could also be incorrect – I’ve just arrived at the figure through mental arithmetic – I don’t have a calculator to hand)

      I trust that that would have been helpful back in June!

      • avatar says

        Excuse me Mike, does it mean, that figures 2790 and 1712 in course notes are incorrect? Because if we simply calculate 3000 by dividing on 1.1 or (1.1)^6 – the figures are different

      • Profile photo of MikeLittle says

        Hi Pavel – yes – if my most recent post calculations are correct, then the figures in the course notes are rounded badly. The figures in my recent post were done to a degree of accuracy not necessary in the exams – normally the examiner will expect you only to work to 2 decimal places – and that’s also in the rare event that there is a lease calculation question in the exam – that, itself, is highly unlikely

  3. avatar says

    Guys, the way I understand it, is that the question is asking us for figures that will appear in financial statements at the y/e 31/12/2009. In other words they are asking us what will be treated as CL (payable within next 12 months time) and what will be treated as NCL (paid after 12 months from the y/e 31/12/2009). Therefore we need figures at y/e 31/12/2010 to figure out what will be payable within next 12 months from y/e 31/12/2009 (CL) and what will be paid afterwards (NCL).
    Please correct me if I am wrong.

  4. avatar says

    Hi Mike,
    I have got a question in reference to Reconciliation of Obligations under Finance Leases with the present value of the minimum lease payments

    We know that from questions that the lease is for 7 years term. I cant get my head around why is it only 5 years is taken in to account. This is an extract from answers from lecture notes.

    Why aren’t we saying that over 5 years are 2 x 3000, hence 6000. Why is it only 1 lease payment shown in payable more than 5 years.

    Payable within 1 year 3,000
    Payable more than 1 year, less than 5 years 12,000
    Payable more than 5 years 3,000

    I understand you are busy man but i will really appreciate Mike if you can please help.

    • avatar says

      Sir, please ignore above. I was under the impression that this was from the reconciliation was from beginning of the time (start of lease) which is not the case. This will be dependent on the how many payment period has been lapsed.

      Thanks.

Leave a Reply