[debony]

Much better, thanks Mike. There are so many rules I’m trying to wrap my head around.

[debony]

Thanks Mike, I did have a quick look but couldn’t find similar question, I guess I didn’t look hard enough.

[debony]

I see what you mean, I did misunderstand. I thought the £100000 was the FV and not their share of the goodwill. Thanks once again and LOL at the English cricket team joke.

[debony]

Actually, there was only one subsidiary, it was the Sergijus and Indra question. Where S had 55% and 2 years later, acquired a further 25%. The NCI interest in goodwill on original acquisition had been valued at £100000.

In working out the goodwill, you calculated the NCI as:
(45% × 1,280,000) + 100000. The 1280000 was the NA @ DOA.

I just wondered why you had to add both the FV of NCI and proportionate value, when the FV was given or did I misunderstand the question? Thanks.

[debony]

Thanks, I completely overlooked that little detail. I’ve got another question about the change in the composition of a group. In the NCI calculation, why did we have to use the proportionate method when the FV, £100000 was given? I thought if the FV was given, that would be the figure to use.

[debony]

Thanks for making it clear Mike. I’ve got another question, if you don’t mind? In eg 4 of chapter 3 of your course notes, I really don’t know how you got the 7/15 as the group’s share of the NA in the goodwill calculation. I understood the 70%, the 2/15 and I thought that K’s share in L was 10/15 and not 7/15. Thanks.

[debony]

Thank you Mike for your quick response. I guess I’d have to listen to some of the lectures to have a better understanding of the solutions. Much appreciated.

[debony]

Thanks for your help.

[debony]

Thank you Jenny, I’ve decided to take classes but really not sure whether to continue to use BPP or switch to Kaplan

[debony]

Thank you Mike, you have helped more than you think.

[Author]

Posts