[graf]

@f4notes said:
In Q31 I have deducted the whole amount of stolen receivables from the Trade Receivables, was that correct?

How did you calculate depreciation for the proprety under lease ? was it October to March 6/12 + 6/12 post depreciation?

How did you show Loan notes in SPF at 40 000 as per face value?

The Dilluted EPS had to include potential loan notes, the

30000 (PBIT)/ 50 000 (Shares as per q) + 8 000 (from loan notes) ? did you get this?

Thanks for comments!

Diluted EPS

earnings + notional earnings / shares plus notional shares

notional earnings = 2400-480= 1920
(40000*6%) = 2400 this is saved if loan is converted (because no need to pay 6% )
less tax on that saving (2400*20%) = 480

notional shares i also calculated but do not remember the number

[graf]

@f4notes said:
In Q31 I have deducted the whole amount of stolen receivables from the Trade Receivables, was that correct?

How did you calculate depreciation for the proprety under lease ? was it October to March 6/12 + 6/12 post depreciation?

How did you show Loan notes in SPF at 40 000 as per face value?

The Dilluted EPS had to include potential loan notes, the

30000 (PBIT)/ 50 000 (Shares as per q) + 8 000 (from loan notes) ? did you get this?

Thanks for comments!

I showed loan notes as following:
40 000 *6% =2400

Dr Finance cost 2400
Cr Conv Loan note 6% 2400

in SFP
dedicted from Ret ears 2400
NCL
Loan note 6% 42 400

[graf]

I showed loan notes as following:
40 000 *6% =2400

Dr Finance cost 2400
Cr Conv Loan note 6% 2400

in SFP
dedicted from Ret ears 2400
NCL
Loan note 6% 42 400

[graf]

My SFP did not balance. Q 31 and Q 32 were not hard,but requred as you said concepts application. They were doable, but under the time pressure it is difficlut to concentrate 100%.

[graf]

Regarding Q 31. I removed (700-450) of fraud from receivables and debited to LOSS 250. But did nothing about the other $450000 of fraud. I am not sure I am correct. Something must be done about the $450k. I thing no provision was required about the 50% of fraud. as it does not meet the definision of provision. I think the whole 750 fraud should have been written of as loss.

[graf]

I did not use the husband remaining NRD. I think it should be used in computation 3, when we compute the death estate.

[Author]

Posts