• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
Free ACCA & CIMA online courses from OpenTuition

Free ACCA & CIMA online courses from OpenTuition

Free Notes, Lectures, Tests and Forums for ACCA and CIMA exams

  • ACCA
  • CIMA
  • FIA
  • OBU
  • Books
  • Forums
  • Ask AI
  • Search
  • Register
  • Login
  • ACCA FR:
  • FR Notes
  • FR Lectures
  • FR Practice Questions
  • Flashcards
  • Revision Lectures
  • FR Forums
  • Ask the Tutor
  • Ask AI (New!)

20% off ACCA & CIMA Books

OpenTuition recommends the new interactive BPP books for March and June 2025 exams.
Get your discount code >>

Intangibles – Example 2 – ACCA Financial Reporting (FR)

VIVA

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. Tinybit says

    May 26, 2025 at 7:34 pm

    Will the PPE of $5000′ be either revalued or measured at cost (and depreciated), just as normal PPE measurement requirements? That’s my confusion.

    Log in to Reply
  2. Radko101 says

    May 6, 2022 at 2:45 pm

    Why the 0.5 million is going to SPL directly expensed ? Should we capitalize it as a test cost(development) for example ?

    Log in to Reply
    • VikTim says

      March 4, 2025 at 10:27 am

      According to KPMG, costs incurred **after the final acceptance testing and launch have been successfully completed**, should be *expensed*.
      Since the $0.5M is spent on “the use of the product”, it means that the cost is spent AFTER the product is “ready to be used”, and the development of the product must be completed in order for the product to be “ready to be used”.
      In short, that $0.5M is spent after the development stage of the intangible asset, and thus it’s not capitalised but expensed.

      Log in to Reply
  3. soorajraoa says

    February 15, 2020 at 3:47 pm

    The answer in the textbook quotes as below –

    “The $ 8 million subsequently spent after completion of the research phase is development expenditure and is capitalized as an intangible non-current asset on the statement of financial position.”

    In the video tutorial, Chris splits it to PPE ( $5m ) & Intangible as ( $3m ).

    But my question is if the prototype is considered as a PPE, then why not the $ 3m is also added to PPE. Because, as per PPE definition, “Directly attributable costs in bringing the asset to its location and condition” should be also considered as part of PPE cost for capitalization of the asset.

    Log in to Reply
    • megaziz says

      July 15, 2020 at 5:32 am

      I don’t think IAS 16 applies to a product that has gone through research and development, and viewed as commercially viable, except for the tangible part of the developed asset. To get the asset to its saleable condition is part of the development expenditure, which is capitalised as part of the cost of IA. For IAS 16,the company is not developing the product, the company buys the product developed by another company, so IAS 38 doesn’t apply here.

      Log in to Reply
  4. Anooshaaziz says

    February 6, 2020 at 12:49 pm

    Hi
    Can you please tell why we have taken 3 million in intangibles and 5 million in PPE ?

    Log in to Reply
  5. anzar121 says

    January 6, 2020 at 2:44 pm

    Hi sir,

    Can i just ask where you got the £3million from under the intagibles for NCA? I appreciate the £15mil as it is a patent but I’m unsure in regards to the £3million.

    Thanks

    Log in to Reply
  6. zjanus says

    August 10, 2019 at 10:48 am

    I got kind of confuses that “development expenditure must be capitalised when it meets all the criteria” but here, $5m was spent on the functioning prototype, $3m was on getting the product into a safe and saleable condition. Both expenditure occurred before “TRUMP CV”?

    Log in to Reply
  7. toutibai says

    July 3, 2019 at 11:00 pm

    Hello Sir,
    you are awesome! the way you connect Cashflows and prepare us for the future topic is highly appreciable.

    Log in to Reply
  8. adibrafsan says

    February 3, 2019 at 8:24 am

    Hello Sir,
    I have a question. Why functioning prototype’s cost of $5M classified as PPE and separated from Intangible asset ?

    Log in to Reply
    • P2-D2 says

      May 20, 2019 at 2:28 pm

      It is going to be used as a tangible asset to help generate future profits and so classified as PPE.

      Log in to Reply
      • Sam1022 says

        March 5, 2022 at 3:38 pm

        Hello Sir,
        prototype is the design and something like that of the product, so how do we consider it as PPE? isn’t it correct to consider it as IA?

  9. khan3057 says

    September 18, 2018 at 1:42 pm

    Hi,
    Shouldn’t we be capitalising the initial investigative expenses? Though it seems like a research thing, but it can be measured in cost( $6 m) with probable feasibility which are the only two arguments for not capitalising research generally.

    Log in to Reply
    • P2-D2 says

      December 31, 2018 at 1:25 pm

      Hi,

      No, the costs in the investigative phase are research costs and are expenses. Only once we then have determined that there is future economic benefit can the costs be capitalised.

      Thanks

      Log in to Reply
  10. P2-D2 says

    July 8, 2018 at 7:41 pm

    Hi,

    Which cost are you talking about please? Both the purchase of the patent and development costs can be capitalised per IAS 38.

    Thanks

    Log in to Reply
  11. monikaewaj says

    July 7, 2018 at 10:49 pm

    I thought the criteria as we dont capitalise unless asset it ready to use…but we still put it in a SOFP?

    Log in to Reply
    • danicac says

      May 26, 2019 at 8:18 pm

      I believe term “ready for use” refers to starting date of amortization of the intangible asset. As expenditure that met recognition criteria have been inccured during the year, these should be recongnized in the SOFP per IAS 38.

      Log in to Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Copyright © 2025 · Support · Contact · Advertising · OpenLicense · About · Sitemap · Comments · Log in