And presumably you worked through the example at the same time and realised where the error was in the lecture?
There is a tiny addition mistake in adding up the year 3 flows in the lecture. I will re-record it when I have time, but it is a minor mistake and pretty obvious.
Why didn’t you mention the relating yearly depreciation of new machine? I think, when we buy new machine, we have to take account yearly depreciation expense into the cash flows of project.
is the depreciation expensive irrelevant to the project’s cash flows? If depreciation expensive is relevant to the cash flows, how do we deals with ? we add or subtract depreciation expensive into cash flows. I were really confused depreciation expenses relating to the project’s cash flows and i didn’t how to treat it well. Could you please explain and make me clear.
moreover, you mentioned in the lecture as follows: “Capital allowance another word is tax allowable depreciation” so, is there any difference between the Capital allowance and the depreciation expense? are they the same.
Depreciation is not a cash flow, and with NPV calculations we are only looking at cash flows.
The tax authorities have their own rules for tax allowable depreciation (which is not the same as the accounting depreciation) and the rules are always given in exam questions. Again, it is not a cash flow, but it does reduce the taxable profit and therefore save tax (and tax itself is obviously a cash flow).
Thank you very much for this lecture. This has been giving issues for long. However, I’m confused as to why you didn’t calculate annual allowance when considering the capital allowance. Please elaborate. Thanks in anticipation.
The capital allowance is annual (at 25% reducing balance) and I did calculate it (and then the tax saving resulting from it). There is no other allowance (apart from the balancing allowance or balancing charge when the asset is sold).
Hello,Sir. Your lectures are extremely comprehensible and I’ve learnt a lot of things that I didn’t know about.I just have a quick question,how would we treat the capital allowances if they were on a straight line basis rather than on a reducing balance basis?
Sir, I have two questions; 1) If the project is acquiring a company, will we still calculate a balancing charge/allowance? 2) My capital allowances on NCAs are (in millions) : 2016 – 拢351.96 2017 – 拢326.40 2018 – 拢316.61 2019- 拢307.11
Both tax payments and capital allowance claims occur one year in arrears. I’m confused as to when will the first tax saving occur?
Thank you for a wonderful lecture Sir. This may sound a bit silly but I am failing to understand why the tax saving only starts in year 2. This is my thinking,we bought the machine in Year 0. at the end of which we will calculate the capital allowance. however the tax is to be paid in arrears so we will make the saving at the end of year 1.
In any case I thought to say the tax is on the net operating cashflows. Tax on the first year flow will be paid in year 2. Therefore we can match the saving to the operating flows. Is it a logical assumption, would it prove true in any other situation?
There is no such thing as year 0. It is time 0, and time 0, time 1 etc are points in time that are 1 year apart (so that we are able to discount in whole years).
Time 0 is the start of the first year. Time 1 is the end of the first year – because it is one year later (we are not bothered about the odd day). Time 1 is also the start of the second year (again, we are not worried about the odd day when is comes to discounting). Time 2 is the end of the second year and the start of the third year. And so on…..
For operating flows (revenue and expenses) we always assume (unless the question says different) that they occur at the ends of years. So the first years revenue is at the end of the first year – which is time 1.
For capital allowances, the initial investment is at the start of the first year (time 0). The first allowance will be calculated at the end of the first year (time 1). If the question says that tax is payable immediately, then the tax effect will therefore also be at time 1.
However, if the question says that there is a 1 year delay in tax, then although the allowance will have been calculated at time 1, the actual tax effect will be one year later at time 2.
JOHN : However, if the question says that there is a 1 year delay in tax, then although the allowance will have been calculated at time 1, the actual tax effect will be one year later at time 2.
ME : Does this mean that because of the 1 year delay in tax payment, there is also a 1 year delay in cashflow(tax payment) so the corresponding allowance would be delayed 1 year also in order to match the cashflow(tax payment) because effectively the allowance is a savings on the cashflow(tax payment)…..
petriep says
Thanks a million John!!! Excellent lecture, now I understand.
John Moffat says
Thank you for your comment 馃檪
John Moffat says
The tax saving is a year in arrears also, as I explain in the lecture.
samanthashepherd says
The NPV in the video and the lecture notes are wrong :/
John Moffat says
And presumably you worked through the example at the same time and realised where the error was in the lecture?
There is a tiny addition mistake in adding up the year 3 flows in the lecture. I will re-record it when I have time, but it is a minor mistake and pretty obvious.
The answer in the lecture notes is correct.
bercia says
NPV in notes is not adding up to 6,695 but to 7,103 or am I doing something wrong?
John Moffat says
Read my reply immediately above your post!!!!
khanhhoangvu says
Dear Sir
Why didn’t you mention the relating yearly depreciation of new machine? I think, when we buy new machine, we have to take account yearly depreciation expense into the cash flows of project.
is the depreciation expensive irrelevant to the project’s cash flows? If depreciation expensive is relevant to the cash flows, how do we deals with ? we add or subtract depreciation expensive into cash flows. I were really confused depreciation expenses relating to the project’s cash flows and i didn’t how to treat it well. Could you please explain and make me clear.
moreover, you mentioned in the lecture as follows: “Capital allowance another word is tax allowable depreciation” so, is there any difference between the Capital allowance and the depreciation expense? are they the same.
Please help me clear.
Thank you Sir in advance
John Moffat says
Depreciation is not a cash flow, and with NPV calculations we are only looking at cash flows.
The tax authorities have their own rules for tax allowable depreciation (which is not the same as the accounting depreciation) and the rules are always given in exam questions. Again, it is not a cash flow, but it does reduce the taxable profit and therefore save tax (and tax itself is obviously a cash flow).
Have you not watched the earlier lectures?
togwe says
I think they is an error calculating the net cashflow for yr 3 (8000+563+1000+6000-2100)=$13463. You have a different figure.
Thanks
John Moffat says
You are correct – thanks – I must re-record the lecture.
However the answer in the lecture notes is correct 馃檪
zaidmdjalil says
capital allowances are similar to depn, but a depn is a non cash expense, so how can we show them in the operating cash flows??
John Moffat says
We don’t, and I don’t in my lectures either!!!
Capital allowances do however reduce the taxable profit and therefore result in a saving of tax. Tax is of course a cash flow!
theodoor says
Dear Sir,
I am not quit sure why we assume to be taxed on the cost of $10’000 in period 1.
Shouldn’t costs not be taxed?
Thank you for your reply.
Regards
John Moffat says
We are not paying tax on the cost. The cost gets tax allowable depreciation (capital allowances) each year, and we save tax was a result.
mikoyems19 says
Thank you very much for this lecture. This has been giving issues for long. However, I’m confused as to why you didn’t calculate annual allowance when considering the capital allowance. Please elaborate. Thanks in anticipation.
John Moffat says
The capital allowance is annual (at 25% reducing balance) and I did calculate it (and then the tax saving resulting from it). There is no other allowance (apart from the balancing allowance or balancing charge when the asset is sold).
mikoyems19 says
Thank you John.
I actually meant initial allowance. Thank you very much. You rock.
John Moffat says
There is rarely an initial allowance in F9, but if there is then the question will specifically tell you.
(And thank you for the comment 馃檪 )
caroline22 says
hello,
example 4 i get a different answer, i get +7103 as the NPV, using -11000+4545+5163+10111-1716, have i missed something or miscalculated something.
thanks
John Moffat says
You are correct – I must re-record the lecture. Thank you for noticing 馃檪
ashishramnani1 says
Hello,Sir.
Your lectures are extremely comprehensible and I’ve learnt a lot of things that I didn’t know about.I just have a quick question,how would we treat the capital allowances if they were on a straight line basis rather than on a reducing balance basis?
John Moffat says
In exactly the same, except that it is easier because the capital allowance is an equal amount each year.
Kiara says
Sir,
I have two questions;
1) If the project is acquiring a company, will we still calculate a balancing charge/allowance?
2) My capital allowances on NCAs are (in millions) :
2016 – 拢351.96
2017 – 拢326.40
2018 – 拢316.61
2019- 拢307.11
Both tax payments and capital allowance claims occur one year in arrears.
I’m confused as to when will the first tax saving occur?
Also,
The project life is 2016-19.
Thank you!
John Moffat says
You must ask this sort of question in the F9 Ask the Tutor Forum, and not as a comment on a lecture.
Kiara says
My apologies, will do so.
Kelly says
Thank you for a wonderful lecture Sir. This may sound a bit silly but I am failing to understand why the tax saving only starts in year 2. This is my thinking,we bought the machine in Year 0. at the end of which we will calculate the capital allowance. however the tax is to be paid in arrears so we will make the saving at the end of year 1.
In any case I thought to say the tax is on the net operating cashflows. Tax on the first year flow will be paid in year 2. Therefore we can match the saving to the operating flows. Is it a logical assumption, would it prove true in any other situation?
John Moffat says
There is no such thing as year 0. It is time 0, and time 0, time 1 etc are points in time that are 1 year apart (so that we are able to discount in whole years).
Time 0 is the start of the first year.
Time 1 is the end of the first year – because it is one year later (we are not bothered about the odd day).
Time 1 is also the start of the second year (again, we are not worried about the odd day when is comes to discounting).
Time 2 is the end of the second year and the start of the third year.
And so on…..
For operating flows (revenue and expenses) we always assume (unless the question says different) that they occur at the ends of years.
So the first years revenue is at the end of the first year – which is time 1.
For capital allowances, the initial investment is at the start of the first year (time 0).
The first allowance will be calculated at the end of the first year (time 1). If the question says that tax is payable immediately, then the tax effect will therefore also be at time 1.
However, if the question says that there is a 1 year delay in tax, then although the allowance will have been calculated at time 1, the actual tax effect will be one year later at time 2.
Kelly says
Crystal. Many thanks Sir.
John Moffat says
You are welcome 馃檪
karlinnee says
Had the same issue and question, now it’s clear, thank you!
John Moffat says
Great 馃檪
SamTallroth says
Same issue for me to, understand perfectly now!
shaneg1989 says
JOHN :
However, if the question says that there is a 1 year delay in tax, then although the allowance will have been calculated at time 1, the actual tax effect will be one year later at time 2.
ME :
Does this mean that because of the 1 year delay in tax payment, there is also a 1 year delay in cashflow(tax payment) so the corresponding allowance would be delayed 1 year also in order to match the cashflow(tax payment) because effectively the allowance is a savings on the cashflow(tax payment)…..
John Moffat says
Yes 馃檪
shaneg1989 says
Thank you Mr. Moffat
This has been so helpful to me
John Moffat says
You are very welcome 馃檪