• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
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 Forums
  • Ask ACCA Tutor
  • FIA Forums
  • CIMA Forums
  • OBU Forums
  • Qualified Members forum
  • Buy/Sell Books
  • All Forums
  • Latest Topics

BPP Black Friday sale!

40% discount on all BPP books specially for OpenTuition students!
Get it here >>

June 2004 Hapsburg (included in the free lectures opentuition)

Forums › ACCA Forums › ACCA FR Financial Reporting Forums › June 2004 Hapsburg (included in the free lectures opentuition)

  • This topic has 4 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 13 years ago by MikeLittle.
Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • May 6, 2012 at 6:26 pm #52510
    nevyana
    Member
    • Topics: 5
    • Replies: 47
    • ☆☆

    Hello,

    I do not understand the adjustment arising from paragraph
    ( iii) In Jan 2004 Aspen sold goods to Hapsburg at a selling price of 4m. These goods had cost Aspen 2.4m. Hapsburg had 2.5m (at cost to Hapsburg) of these goods still in inventory at 31 March 2004.

    In the lecture the solution showed is:
    Cost + Profit = Selling Price
    2.4 + 1.6 = 4 -> Aspen
    1.5 + 1 = 2.5 -> Hapsburg

    How 1.5 and 1 was reached to? since only 2.5 is given in the task!?
    Really would appreciate any explanation.

    May 6, 2012 at 6:37 pm #97166
    nevyana
    Member
    • Topics: 5
    • Replies: 47
    • ☆☆

    I figured that out, it is just a proportion rule (so called simple triple law) :
    2.4/4 = 60%
    The same ratio must be applied for the Parent also so:
    Cost/2.5 = 60% => Cost = 0.6*2.5 = 1.5
    2.5 – 1.5 = 1

    May 6, 2012 at 6:55 pm #97168
    MikeLittle
    Keymaster
    • Topics: 27
    • Replies: 23350
    • ☆☆☆☆☆

    Ok! Hapsburg had sold 1.5 out of the 4 which they bought. So they still had in inventory 2.5 out of the 4. 2.5 out of 4 is 5/8ths

    Profit recorded by Aspen was 1.6. Of this, 5/8ths is unrealised.

    5/8ths of 1.6 is 1 and that then is the extent of the unrealised profit provision

    May 6, 2012 at 7:18 pm #97169
    nevyana
    Member
    • Topics: 5
    • Replies: 47
    • ☆☆

    I understand, I just received the same result, but the logic is not the same.
    Thank you for this clarification. Very helpful.

    May 8, 2012 at 5:47 pm #97170
    MikeLittle
    Keymaster
    • Topics: 27
    • Replies: 23350
    • ☆☆☆☆☆

    you’re welcome

  • Author
    Posts
Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Log In

Primary Sidebar

Donate
If you have benefited from our materials, please donate

ACCA News:

ACCA My Exam Performance for non-variant

Applied Skills exams is available NOW

ACCA Options:  “Read the Mind of the Marker” articles

Subscribe to ACCA’s Student Accountant Direct

ACCA CBE 2025 Exams

How was your exam, and what was the exam result?

BT CBE exam was.. | MA CBE exam was..
FA CBE exam was.. | LW CBE exam was..

Donate

If you have benefited from OpenTuition please donate.

PQ Magazine

Latest Comments

  • tkhue3296 on CIMA BA2 Internal Rate of Return
  • Musumalip on Audit tests: the difference between tests of control and substantive tests
  • Javen on Property, plant and equipment (IAS 16) – Revaluation increase – ACCA (SBR) lectures
  • BlakeR on Group SCF – Introduction – ACCA (SBR) lectures
  • John Moffat on The cost of capital – Cost of debt – ACCA Financial Management (FM)

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