[chardynigelon]

First time, failed it. Lost a lot of marks on the sustainability topic.

Hurting right now..

[chardynigelon]

NCC21382 wrote:The third question is to discuss whether the transaction is a business combination; and the last one asked for derecognition criteria under IFRS 9

A business combination involves getting control of another entity. The land purchased did not qualify for control or significant influence.

[chardynigelon]

Encaladeus wrote:There was a question about derecognition. I think that asset shouldn’t be derecognised because risks were not transferred

The question mentioned that 100% ownership was sold. The conceptual framework requires that was you have no entitlement to future cash flows then the asset must be derecognized.

[chardynigelon]

suf23 wrote:

khilen wrote:That land & building question – i said it should be treated under IAS 40 – Investment property?? Because it said they cannot find a use for it but it has appreciated in value.

You cannot treat it as investment property unless it was explicitly stated to be treated as such.

[chardynigelon]

Encaladeus wrote:Allowance emission grant is a very complicated. Anyone knowa the correct answer? I recognised income as in government grant for agricultural products

The standard allows two approachs. Reduce asset value or setup deferred income to reduce associated cost.

[chardynigelon]

alexdn wrote:IAS 38 prohibits revaluation model for intangible assets, unless specific evidence that there is an active market to support revaluation.

Revaluation model can be used for intangibles unless no active market exists.

[chardynigelon]

The standard allows you to deduct the grant from the asset value or to set up the grant as deferred income that would reduce emission related expenses.

I used the second approach.

[Author]

Posts