- This topic has 3 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 10 years ago by
.
Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
- Posts
Why shouldn’t they? It’s an asset of the subsidiary – it’s just not been recognised as such. Tell me, if it’s not an asset of the subsidiary, why has the parent paid greater than the fair value of the newly-acquired subsidiary net assets
An dif you accept that it is an asset of the subsidiary, and the nci own(say) 20% of the subsidiary, why should they not be entitled to 20% of this hitherto unrecognised asset?
Clear?
Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.