Comments

  1. avatar says

    Hi Mike
    Since my last comment Im now reviewing this chapter as part of my revision and with more care since I had skipped this and later questions in the chapter during learning it the first time around. Im having a lot of trouble trying to figure out how (or perhaps more appropriately why) we arrive at the figures for net cost of 2100 and re measurements (and what is a remeasurement) of 53,000 and 153,900. (I guess the confusion is due to the differing answer in the notes compared to the video since the changes). All the rest is very easy to me in this Q but I have wasted too much of the limited time left trying to figure this out and so I once again turn to you for another dose of your kind wisdom and guidance!
    Thanks in advance from your number 1 fan (…and now I sound like a stalker…but im not…really… lol).

  2. avatar says

    Hi Mike,
    Thanks a million for these amazing lectures!!! I have just passed F7 with ease (an exam which I truly hated) thanks to your help and Im now attempting my final ACCA exam P2. One concern…I know these lectures are free and I appreciate anything I can get from you all without any other expectations however I have noticed that there are much less revision and pass papers for P2 and this lecture seems to be a bit out of date. I just want to ask if you think that with the existing videos on the website and the course notes if you think we could be prepared enough to successfully attempt the P2 or do we need more material. If you think more material is needed do you have any suggestions.
    In any case, thanks again to all the team for this fantastic website!!!!

    • Profile photo of MikeLittle says

      Hi Leo

      Thanks for the praise! You’re right of course that this particular video is out of date and needs to be rerecorded – hopefully some time this year, but no promises and almost certainly not in time for the June exam.

      I think it’s the only lecture that is out of date and the course notes are up to date so I don’t see it as a major issue – I simply need to get recording employee benefits.

      Before you come back again, there are no recorded lectures for the last 12 or so chapters either. However, those I can excuse on the basis that, subject only to IFRS9 and financial instruments generally, the topics are relatively straight forward and should be within the capabilities of a dedicated conscientious student.

      Even these chapters will probably be the subject of a recoding at some time in the future but with these I’m not even looking at 2015.

      The notes are all up to date including notes on integrated reporting and on IAS 41 Agriculture

      • avatar says

        Great! Exactly what I wanted to hear! Thanks! If you have any suggestions of how to deal with these less straight forward subjects that you mentioned pls let me know. Thanks again!

      • Profile photo of MikeLittle says

        The best way that I can think of is repeated reading of the questions 2 and 3 from past exams.

        They cover pretty well every IFRS and IAS and give you an indication of the sort of question that this examiner is likely to ask.

        Remember, the P2 exam is only about 35% computational with the rest being written. Remember too that the suggested solutions include everything that could be ncluded within an answer together with references liberally spread throughout.

        You cannot begin to hope to dream about achieving the depth of these answers so do not panic!

        Yes, read the course notes to get a flavour of what’s involved but then get into the printed solutions from a revision kit.

    • avatar says

      Thanks for that VERY useful info…. I didnt really expect a reply to that last comment not to mention such a lighting fast one!
      About the employee benefits…how about a bottle of 20 year old cognac as a thank you? (And Im sure Ill manage without new recordings.) I definitely owe you at least that…we all do!! 😉

      • Profile photo of MikeLittle says

        I don’t know how much you know about me but I have to tell you that I’m a pensioner! There’s no way I can afford a bottle of 20 year old cognac. I could possibly stretch to a pint of beer should we ever meet but I’d have to start saving straight away.

        :-)

      • Profile photo of MikeLittle says

        Leo, I should have said this earlier – this type of query should really have been on the Ask the Tutor forum. Please bear that in mind when you feel the need to write again

        Thanks

  3. Profile photo of lwitiko says

    The video lecture on example 2 chapter 7 Employee Benefits IAS 19 was clear and made the use ugly accounts quite simple but not until i read comments from other students saying that ugly accounts are no longer applicable. sigh!!

    • Profile photo of MikeLittle says

      Hi Iwitiko

      Yes, sorry :-(

      It’s on my list of “things to do”

      That list is growing each week and I’m going to have to schedule a recording session to deal with it all.

      The course notes are up to date and Ugly Accounts (as well as 10% corridor) have now gone – consigned to history

    • Profile photo of MikeLittle says

      Hi Hixam

      I shall certainly have Admin upload the video – just as soon as I have time to record it.

      It is virtually 100% certain that that will not happen before this December’s exams so hopefully you won’t need it

  4. avatar says

    Hello Mr. Little

    The lecture notes are different to the lecture so I am a bit lost when following example 2. For example, where did 53000 (remeasurement) come from?
    Also is there some information missing from the question in the course notes? eg additional actuarial information.

    many thanks

  5. Profile photo of tejot says

    Sir Mike,

    Hope you are doing fine.

    I am aware that there is no more corridor approach and we are recognizing the losses and gains in there year of happening.

    However just wanted to reconfirm that instead of taking the total opening balance of FO on which we unroll the discount,we are taking the net amount i.e (FO-PO) which we call NIC. Is it right ? If yes why so, I understand that their will be no change as both the re measurement and IC go through PL.

    Regards

  6. avatar says

    The lecture does not match the current lecture notes. My Jolanta question is not the same as the lecture video. Is there anything I should not be doing or doing extra as the question I have is shorter? Thank you, am a little confused.

  7. Profile photo of questforknowledge says

    let me go straight to the point. what i am saying is this, in F7 you gave lectures and during your revision you covered a lot of past exam questions: P2 is diffrent. no revision. i dont know if it is a change of approach
    thank you

    • Profile photo of MikeLittle says

      Ah! Now I understand! Sorry for being so slow. In fact, during the F7 lectures we go through NO past questions (possibly with the exception of questions 2 where there is not much to lecture and questions 3 where, after a brief lecture we apply the principles to some – not many – past questions)

      P2 is heavier with a lot more to cover in lectures and we still have only 5 days. Even that is reduced by a half day mock exam in the final afternoon. 4.5 days is not enough to lecture the syllabus, let alone enjoy the luxury of attempting past exam questions.

      In F7 I have worked through past exam questions and recorded them in my bedroom at home and I have never so far worked up the enthusiasm to do the same with the P2 past questions. Maybe, some time soon, I will find that enthusiasm but, trust me here, it is not likely to be in time for your December sitting

      So, with humble apologies, I must leave it to you to fight your way through those awful consolidation exercises ….

      ….and I apologise for not having understood your previous posts

      Should you come across any particular issues when you are practising, post again and I shall try to answer them as soon as I am able

  8. Profile photo of questforknowledge says

    hi Mike i am just listening to a video on you tube on IAS 19 and the guy was saying that the usage of the 10 percent corridor is no longer acceptable: everything is taken to the statement of Comprehensive income. i dont when this lecture was recorded thus i would like you to clarify me if you can please
    thanks

    • Profile photo of MikeLittle says

      Hi

      10% corridor is gone – I seem to remember that I have recorded an up-to-date version of this lecture. Not only has the corridor gone but so too have the UGLY accounts (now recognised as incomes or expenses in the year in which they occur)

      • Profile photo of questforknowledge says

        thanks Mike for your timely response:
        but mike i would like to make this comment and i hope you will think about it. I must confess that before i started doing ACCA people used to say ACCA is difficult and that people start and leave it along the way. Mike the work you people have been putting up here has gone a long way to make ACCA look easy: You did did not only give us the confidence but you also made things look simple. I have always been telling people i meet who want to do ACCA to use opentuition because the lectures there are amazing. I am going in for my first level three paper this december and i have never failed any before thanks to the lectures and revision we get here. Sometimes we find it difficult to understand the texts but your lectures having been making things easy for us: I must say it has not only been the lectures but the revision as well. I dont think i would have been passsing ACCA exams without going through the past papers: this just tells how important the revision is. Mike your revision in F7 made F7 look simple. As i earlier said I am going in for my first professional courses and without the revision you are now making it look difficult

      • Profile photo of MikeLittle says

        I was smiling all the way through your post …… until I reached the last 7 words!

        As I understand it, the video lecture is still being played despite the fact that the course notes have superseded the video and that point is made on numerous occasions in this thread.

        There will (probably) be no more video recordings – at least, not in the foreseeable future so we all will now have to rely on audio recordings and course notes. If I have not already recorded the “updated” Employee Benefit recording, then I’m sorry and I shall hopefully remember to do so this session. Unfortunately, that’s unlikely to happen in time for you doing the December 2013 exam.

        Ok, so no recording. But the course notes are up to date and the suggested solutions to the course notes examples are also up to date so you’re not entirely in the dark without a candle and facing an unknown vicious predator. Try to work through the “big” example (Jolanta?) and, if you come across another issue which you feel you can’t resolve, come back to me

      • Profile photo of questforknowledge says

        you must have posted the right reply to the wrong post. i was talking the need for revising some past papers here: it increase our confidence before the exam:
        thank you

      • Profile photo of MikeLittle says

        I cannot (having read your post again) see how I could possibly interpret your post as a question about the need for revising some past papers. I can agree that working through past exam questions will give you confidence before walking into that exam room but “As i earlier said I am going in for my first professional courses and without the revision you are now making it look difficult” does not seem to bear any resemblance to a question concerning revision of past exam papers!

        However …. should you still need any help, please do post again! I’m always happy to give you the best of my limited wisdom :-)

  9. avatar says

    Greetings Mike,

    I seemed to be following employee benefits fairly well up until the course notes and the lectures went their own separate ways. I hope you will rescue us from all the confusion by updating the Lecture Video for the ‘not so far’ June 2013 exams.

    PS: You are a life saver and a LEGEND!

    • avatar says

      i worked out this solution based on the layout in BPP. Mike or someone else maybe able to confirm if correct or not?

      PV OF FO
      2009opening 930,000
      interest (7% * 930000) 65,100
      CSC 100,000
      BENEFITS PAID (140,000)
      LOSS ON REMEASUREMENT (BALANCING) 90,900
      ACTUARIAL CLOSING 1,046,000
      2010 PSC 60,000
      CSC 105,000
      BENEFITS PAID (165,000)
      interest (8% * 1046000+60000) 88,480
      LOSS ON REMEASUREMENT (BALANCING) 520
      ACTUARIAL CLOSING 1,135,000

      FV OF PA
      2009 OPENING 900,000
      CONTRIBUTIONS 102,000
      BENEFITS PAID (140,000)
      INTEREST (7% * 900000) 63,000
      LOSS ON REMEASUREMENT (10,000)
      ACTUARIAL CLOSING 915,000
      2010 CONTRIBUTIONS 103,000
      BENEFITS PAID (165,000)
      INTEREST (8% * 915000) 73,200
      GAIN ON REMEASUREMENT 13,800
      ACTUARIAL CLOSING 940,000

      EXPS RECOGNISED IN P& L
      CSC 100,000
      PSC –
      NET INTEREST (65100-63000) 2,100
      2009 TOTAL P&L 102,100

      OCI
      LOSS ON FO (90,900)
      LOSS ON PA (10,000)
      2009 Total (100,900)

      CSC 105,000
      PSC 60,000
      NET INTEREST (88480-73200) 15,280
      2010 TOTAL P&L 180,280

      OCI
      LOSS ON FO (520)
      GAIN ON PA 13,800
      2010 Total 13,280

      BALANCE SHEET 2010 2009

      PV OF FO 1,135,000 1,046,000
      FV OF PA (940,000) (915,000)
      NET ASSET 195,000 131,000

  10. avatar says

    Hi Mike,

    The example 2 illustrated in the video was not the same the as the lecture note for June 2013. Kindly advise whether the new version will be uploaded to reflect the solution for the new example 2 question. Thanks

  11. avatar says

    I refer to the printed solution and noted for year 2, that the additional obligation is not considered in the net interest calculation. Interest is (1046-915)*8% instead of (1046+60-915)*8%. Is this correct and why is the additional obligation not considered for the roll up in 2010? Many thanks for an answer in advance.

    • Profile photo of MikeLittle says

      @ojss, Ok, ok! I am aware that the answer is now out of date – see my reply to the post from two strings ago. The net interest cost should be calculated on the net figure of “brought forward obligation + 60,000 – brought forward plan assets.

      There’s now no Expected Return on Plan Assets, no 10% corridor, no Re-measurements.

      Yes, I know! I have to re-record. But that’s not going to happen in time for the December 2012 exams. Sorry

      • avatar says

        @MikeLittle, sorry that I bothered you. I understood that the recording is outdated. But I thought that you said that the course notes are up to date and reflect the changes. Thats why I asked, refering only to the notes.

        Many thanks for the quick answer.

      • Profile photo of MikeLittle says

        @ojss, Hi

        I think the course notes ARE up to date – though I may have missed in the course notes the increase of 60,000 at the start of the year. Certainly the course notes have eliminated the 10% corridor and show the NET interest cost.

      • avatar says

        I dont understand how is that 60 split? How do you know that 20 relates to PSCFE and 40 to PSCCE. what indications are there given what calculation did you use

  12. Profile photo of 1686844 says

    The old method (with 10% corridor and deferring past service cost) is still valid for 2012. But in fact many companies chose to apply the changes in IAS 19 earlier (especially when this application lead to an increase in retained earnings and/or in equity).
    In my country, we have problems with the treatment of deferred taxation on these remeasurements (unrealised actuarial gains and losses). We had accrued in the past deferred tax on them, but now it is not clear, whether and how, they could be deducted for tax purpose because their amount is restated and transferred as an equity component. Does someone have the same problem?

    • avatar says

      @najihnw, Apparently there is an amendment to IAS 19 which no longer allows the usage of the “corridor” method, however the actuarial gains and losses are to be recognised in the period incurred. So there are no longer any “unrecognised gains/losses”. I guess the lecture doesn’t reflect that!

  13. Profile photo of judi says

    I’m sure that 30 = 930-900 as now we should account net interes cost which is effected by multiplying the NET surplus/deficit in the plan at the beginning of the period by the rate

    • avatar says

      @oandrienko, I dont think so am puzzled too becase the question in the notes has been revised so I have completely disregarded and used the answer at the back of the notes however I havent got a clue how the numbers in the answers we put together for instance interset was on $30000 , where did the number come from??? Hopefully Mike will be able to do an updated lecture fingers crossed

      • Profile photo of judi says

        @sukiyo0824, I’m sure that 30 = 930-900 as now we should account net interes cost which is effected by multiplying the NET surplus/deficit in the plan at the beginning of the period by the rate

      • Profile photo of MikeLittle says

        @judi, The revision to IAS 19 has not been incorporated into recorded lectures. The revisions HAVE been reflected in the course notes and the notes therefore ARE applicable for December 2012 ( as they were also for June 2012 )

  14. avatar says

    Can anyone tell me what the 35 for past service costs for current employees is carried forward as? Whats the double entry:

    Credit PVof FO – 60 (SOFP)
    Debit PSC FE – 20 (I/S)
    Debit PSC CE – 5 (I/S)
    Debit what???

  15. avatar says

    hey bro outsatndng is 35 not 45 :) recalculate it 20plus 5=25
    35+
    25=60 which is total cost and remaining deffered past sevice cost is 35 which will be vested after 7 years hope you got youranswer

  16. Profile photo of olukemisola says

    Hello Mr Little. Thanks for a wonderful lecture.

    I have a question. In recognising the past service costs, what accounting entries were passed. My tots are

    Dr Expense – 20,000 (for retired empees)
    Dr Expense – 5,000 (for the existing empee’s one year portion of remaning pension earning life) – assumed
    Cr Defined benefit obligation(DBO) – 60,000 (total past service cost)

    outstanbding – 45
    Where does the rst of the debit go?

  17. avatarclam1 says

    Hi Mr Little or anyone

    should we use $1046,000 as the b/f amount or $1106,000(1046+60k being the psc) when applying the 10% corridor for 2005?

    In the lecture you used 1106 x10% -115.4= $4800. Recognise over 8 years hence $600

    This is different from the model answer on Page 229 where 1046×10% -115.4= $10800/8, $1350!!

  18. Profile photo of MikeLittle says

    Because 929.5 is not the actual value! It’s the brought forward fair value + the amounts paid in + the expected return on plan assets.

    Of those three amounts, only the amount paid in is certain. the brought forward amount is last year’s actuarialvalue and the expected return is just an expectation.

    The theoretical value which would hope to have is 929 – but along comes our bl**dy actuary and says “The fair value of your plan assets is only 915″

    That’s why we have made a loss.

  19. Profile photo of argillani515 says

    @MikeLittle
    I am OK with everything else but I don’t get one important point.

    $915 is the actuarial valuation of FV of PA’s. And the actual value of PA’s turns out to be $929.5 .
    Which is greater than actuarial value. Then why are you treating $14.5(929.5-915) as an actuarial LOSS?
    Isn’t it supposed to be an actuarial GAIN? Because actual value is greater than expected value!

  20. avatar says

    Mr.Little, my question is that when we are adding the “amounts paid in to the plan” of 102,000 to the FV of Plan Assets, why are we not adding the FV of the 102,000? or why don’t we add it to the present value of the PA?

  21. Profile photo of sherlock says

    the question says that one third of the 60000 psc relates to former employees, so 20000 expensed immediately and 40000 are deferred. At year end 1\8 (average of 8 more years of pension earning eployment) of the 40000 are expensed so another 5000. so total expensed 25000

  22. avatarthanh sang says

    when compare cumulative unrecognised actuarial G/L 0f 115,4 with 10% corridor is (10%*PV of FO=104,6+6,0=110,6) and difference is 4,8. But in the answer in lecture is to compare cumulative unrecognised actuarial G/L 0f 115,4 with 10% corridor is (10%*PV of FO=104,6) and difference is 10,8. Please help me!

    • avatar says

      i have the same queries regarding c/f bal. of Yr2005 for “PV of FO” : should we use $1,046 as given to calculate Int. Cost ($1,046 * 8% = 83,680), or shall we use $1,046 + $60 = $1,106 * 8% = 88,480 ? btw, the website and the lecture is really helpful to me! appreicate it!

  23. avatar says

    nice lecture.many thanks. one question:in the last bit, when calculating the net liability, why the 35000 and 106695 go with 940000. I thought they are should be added to the 1135, because they are the losses

  24. Profile photo of MikeLittle says

    Aquafire – you’re absolutely correct. It’s a matter of adding all the debits ( plan assets, ugly debits, past service deferred costs ) and deducting from the aggregate credit balances ( pv of future obligation and unrecognised ugly credits )

    It really is a summary exercise of adding the debits and deducting that total from the aggregate credits

  25. avatar says

    @ unzablu : I think since we are finding the net position of the pension fund, we are just finding the difference between the credit balances and debit balances. Since it is the plan asset and ugly a/c are debits we are subtracting from credit balance of future obligation.
    That is what i undertood – not 100% sure.Anyone please correct me if I am wrong.

  26. avatarunzablu says

    thanks for the quick response, however still confused on why a loss is not reducing our plan asset.or should i take it that we should always add the ugly a/c to the plan asset. in what cases does the ugly a/c reduce the plan asset?

  27. Profile photo of MikeLittle says

    Because it’s an accumulated unrecognised loss. When this loss is recognised ( either by the 10% corridor approach or under the company’s own accounting policy ) it will be debited to the Statement of Income. The Ugly account is a debit balance and is therefore ADDED to plan assets when calculating the NET position for the pension fund.

    We’re back in the realms of F3, debits and credits!

Leave a Reply