[thomas]

F5 78

[thomas]

F6 UK variant 90

[thomas]

UK variant 80

[thomas]

<cite>@pbijoybiju said:</cite>
How we can divide the partnership loss?
i wrote equal proportion. (but i read it now as in proportion to their capital)

whether loss in equal proportion is also correct?

Yes you have to proportion the losses as well in proportion to their capital provided they had an agreement to do so (like in this case) else the losses are to be divided equally. Hope it make sense

Good luck.

[thomas]

<cite> @whathaveidone said:</cite>
Thanks… I think this is how I interpreted it… no limitation of liability for any of the partners – so Jo does have to pay an additional £500 to settle the outstanding debts of the partnership (as well as her £1000 capital).

To be honest, I thought about this one for ages and then decided to go this way because the figures worked out easier (didn’t think the examiner would use an example with odd amounts).

dont worry mate , you are absolutely right , i have checked the same question on BPP revision kit. even if its a General partnership, the profit and loss are allocate on the basis of profit sharing agreement if there is one.

the order of paying debts

1) external debts – 9000

assets – 5000

external debts left – 4000

next one is to pay loan by a partner( internal debt) – 1000

no assets left , so it adds on to general debt

total debt left- 4000+ 1000 = 5000

divided according to profit sharing ratio

1) 60%= 3000
2) 30%= 1500
3) 10% = 500

any one with this answer and good explanation is going to score 10 marks. its confirmed

check BPP p& r kit question 72 or 73

hope it make sense

[thomas]

<cite>@andreasmacfarlane said:</cite>
Come on everybody. We’re trainee accountants and aren’t expected just to parrot back the text book – this isn’t A-levels. I’d not heard of causation before either, but it seems pretty obvious that it’s got something to do with the cause – anybody who said something sensible should hope to get at least a point.
‘But-for’ was in my notes and I remember it from a lecture I heard so there’s no excuse for point b), and they pretty much gave the answer for c) being that Novus Actus Intervenians means breaking the chain of causation.
I reckon the examiner wants to see if people are able to think independently and come up with something logical – it’s what we’ll be expected to do in the world of work anyway, plus he’s got to throw in some prizewinner questions to reward those people who read around, and not just one text book. There are no textbooks in the industry.

Thoughts?

well said

Novus actus interveniens mainly 3 points

Natural events
action by claimant itself
third party

[thomas]

<cite> @vinai said:</cite>
you are wrong, refer to case law sidebottom v kershaw. Once a director is competing or being dishonest in the form of the case scenario, the other members could compel him to sell his shares because its for the best interest of the comany. However the situation in the Dafen Tinplate case is unlawful

yes you are right AOA can be altered to force members to sell their shares in exceptional cases where

members are competing against the company
member defrauding

well said

[thomas]

<cite>@yaserrasa said:</cite>
Dear Sangria
I believe your answer is not correct. Since the partnership had been formed under the Partnership Act 1890, it was a mere General Partnership. In a General Partnership the partners are fully liable of the firm’s debts and their liability is joint and several (apart from any provision and agreement between the parties).
As a result the 3 partners are fully liable for the debts.

What is your idea on this?

No you are not right. she has the right answer. you are right in saying members cant limit their liability to a certain amount ( fixed amount) but they can divide profit and losses in proportion to their agreement.

If you have BPP revision kit go to question 72

hope it make sense

[thomas]

<cite> @whathaveidone said:</cite>
I did the same as you Sangria £3000, £1500 and £500 but havent got a clue if it is right

I think that was quite tricky 🙁

I did the same

Bribing

Definition?
bribing offences
Receiving
offering
bribing foreign official
corporate failure to prevent bribing

DEFENCES

special defences available for armed forces
secret services

Causation

Link between the chain of events which caused the damage or loss

but for

Causation by fact- physical link between the breach and loss, But for the defendants actions , damage would not have occured
Barnet vs chelsea

Novus actus interveniens

Act which break this link

Natural event
Third party- knighley vs jones
Claimant- mckew vs holland

lEGAL RELATIONS

presunption
rebuttal

Domestic and social arrangements

Commercial arrangements

scenario questions

8- a)Suffiecint consideration- normal contractual obligations

b) anticipatory breach
market rule- sue for extra cost only

9 director removal- ordinary resolution

court order- misconduct, indictable offence related to company running( cdda 1986), insider dealing could be charged

2) secretary dismissal- summary dismissal possible, gross misconduct.

AOA not enforecable by third party , eley vs positive life company( no longer a director)

change AOA- special resolution
proper purpose

court wont approve unless

member competing
member defrauding

evident member defrauding

10) partenr ship cessation

order- pay external debts first
parner loans second
members capital

profit or loss divided as per agreement
total debt- 9000+ 1000
assets – 5000
debt left- 5000

divided in the ratio
3000: 1500 : 500 as per agreement

fingers crossed

[thomas]

<cite> @mohamedd786 said:</cite>
I wasn’t too sure about this. I went with grossing it up, as I had been so used to it when doing past questions. Is the 50K a year pension limit a net or gross limit? I assumed it must have been a net limit. But thinking of it now, it was probably 40K that we needed to extend the band by.

yes its a gross value

[thomas]

<cite> @helplogon said:</cite>
per annum means yearly, every year. As the product’s lifecycle is 3 years you have to multiply all numbers by 3.

in reaching the decision whether to expand or not ( what the question asks for) its not relevant since u will have to multiply both sides by 3 . So even if you don’t multiply by 3 , you will get the same answer. May be loose 1 mark

Hope it make sense

[thomas]

<cite> @unknown44 said:</cite>
i multiplied the figures by the inflation rate im sure we had to do that regardless of what the notes said? and yes the decision tree figures needed to be multiplied by 3

You dont have to multiply it by 3 since all the numbers are for per annum

[thomas]

<cite> @ttslashok123 said:</cite>
I know it’s too late to ask but For F6 paper I could not attempt 2 questions and it was for 15-15 I am really sad did not realise the time. This is my first time sitting in exam for ACCA. Will I fail? attempt 73 marks only.

Well it depends how well u did on 73 marks, Hope you will pass

Good luck

[thomas]

<cite> @thunderkhan said:</cite>
Plz tell me in q4 finding besis of assessmnt there in the last year period was extented to 14 months and also gvn capital allowance and trading profit so what we were to do……i mean first we find c.allowance and minus from trading pofit or we did not need to calculate c.allowance and ajust it….plz confirm to me

U have to apportion the periods first 12 mnths and next 2 months, divide the profits as such and calculate the CA seperate.

Hope it make sense

[thomas]

<cite>@nobleseven said:</cite>
Yeh, without expansion the number of members would go down to 5,250 and op. costs per member would remain the same at £80 per member. Therefore, if we did “nothing” the total profit = 3 x 5,250 x (720-80) = $10,080,000.

i think you dont have to multiply by 3 since all the figures are for per annum

[thomas]

<cite> @mohamedd786 said:</cite>
Yeh, car and fuel benefit were for part of the year. 5 months I think, cant remember. He also got AMAP from his employer for the first few months for using his private car, so that was a big hint there that you had to apportion the car and fuel benefit.

Thanks for the reply

How much did you extend your band rate by 40k or 50k. if you extend by 50k , we have to tax the extra 10k which is over the annual allowance ( gross)?/

[thomas]

<cite> @kutiez2005 said:</cite>
Re the shares Charlotte is right, you can’t roll over the excess of proceeds less original cost so the fact that the daughter paid £4 was relevant.

Re pension, the BR band is extended by the GROSS personal pension contr so £50k. The HR band was extended by the same but he earned under this so there was no tax at the HR.

You cant extend the band rate by 50000, because 40 k is already a grossed up value.Annual allowances are always grossed up values

Hope it make sense

[thomas]

<cite> @waleedansari said:</cite>
Some people did not OPS from Employment income and DID not take extend band by Personal Pension Scheme.They said that Maximum allowance has already been claimed.

Hi Charlotte,

I think you cant extend the band rate by 50000, as 40,000 is the maximum GROSS annual allowance which means he will be only paying 40000*( 80/100) actually , so you can only extend the band rate by 40000, Otherwise you will have to pay tax for 10000.

Hope it make sense

[thomas]

<cite> @mohamedd786 said:</cite>
Here are the answers I put down

1) % for the car was 32%. Apportioned the car and fuel benefit for the part of the year where the car/petrol was provided.
AMAP wouldn’t have been claimable to travel from home to work, but allowed for the other 2. Minus what was given to him, to the AMAP to get a benefit.
Loan benefit- loan outstanding at start of year plus loan outstanding at the end of year, divided by 2, times ORI. Minus the actual interest that he paid, giving the loan benefit.
Occupational pension deducted from Gross Salary.
Personal pension he would be able to invest in- 10,000 for the 3 years b/f and 10,000 for the current year. Thus, Basic Rate Band extended 40,000 times 100/80.

Excellent , could you confirm whether the car wasn’t available for whole period? i don remeber apportioning it?
No Personal Allowance available as ANI was over 116,000
Holiday letting treated as property income.

NIC 1 A on loan, car fuel and AMAP benefit.

10% starting rate for Rhoda, and reduction in her Personal Age Allowance as her Net Income is more than 25400.

2) Balancing charge on the special pool,
One of the car was eligible for FYA.
3 associates (4 including the parent)
Group Loss relief of 64000 was the only one they could claim.
Dividends from the company that they had a 40% stake in, included as FII at * (100/90)
Tax was in the marginal rate

VAT output of 300/6= 500
Impaired debt (wasn’t too sure on this), was recoverable as it was exactly 6 months since payment was due?
Had to subtract UK customer entertainment from input VAT figure.
No adjustment for overseas customer entertainment, repairs, etc?

3 a) 6625 shares

b) No Rollover relief on warehouse 1 as sale proceeds greatly higher than re-investment
Some rollover relief on warehouse 2, and some gain (proceeds that werent reinvested)

c) Enterpreneur relief for one of the persons, so 10% for him, and 28% for the other. 2000 shares valued at 2000 pounds for the first person, and cost of shares for the second person was 2000/3000*acquisition cost
Tax saving was around 3000-4000ish pounds.

4) a) first yr assesment for 11 months till 31st march. this was also overlap profits, other years CYB
Final 14 months period, WDA given for 18%*14/12.
Overlap Profits of 2 months deducted to bring the taxable months to 12.

b) 2 CAPs. The first for 12 months, than for 2 months. WDA and AIA for the 2 months proportionally reduced.

5) Reduce gift of house by Annual exemption of 2 years (6000 pounds) plus marriage exemption of 5000 pounds. This gives the Gross chargeable transfer. Death tax on PET would be GCT less NRB of 325,000. IHT @ 40% and taper relief @ 60 %.
Half of the death estate was exempt, the other half chargeable at 40%.
ii) Tax on house payable by son

c) Income tax on rents (less repairs, less insurance)
CGT on proceeds less legal fees, the value of house when inherited and capital expenditure.

Anyone else got something similar? Any feedback would be appreciates .

Excellent , could you confirm whether the car wasn’t available for whole period? i don remeber apportioning it?

[thomas]

<cite> @vipulv said:</cite>
Question 2 UK TAX : Capital allowance bf figures (TWDV) then had sales and cost…….did people use all the sales value? …..
and question also said the cost has previously been included (does this mean we ignore cost correct?) …..

One of the sell I put into main pool and other into special.

The purchase:

One had FYA 100% the other was just main pool?

I am sorry but one of them should have gone into SPR since it specifies this was added on to SPR when bought

Hope it helps

Good luck

Question 2: I think there was also only two Zeros. Rest were all Disallowed including pens/customer/overseas entertain.

Please confirm someone 🙂

I can sleep better lol.

[thomas]

<cite> @hufckinger said:</cite>
I think that we had to find the liability – this was roughy:

Pension 8000
Interest (received GROSS) 21600
Less PA: (10500)
2710 @ 10%
remainder at 20%

There should not have been a repayment.

u wont have the full personal allowance since his ANI exceeds 25400, u have to make adjustments as such..

[Author]

Posts