Forum Replies Created
- Posts
Thank you Mike for your patient 🙂
I understand the treatment but the question said it was made full year depreciation that why I confuse.
I will ignore it, and hope that I will not appear again :p
I agree that the 1st payment is refundable so I recorded as receivable and retranslate at year end. But my concerns are:
1. The question states that “A full year’s charge for depreciation of property, plant and equipment is made in the year of acquisition using the straight line method over six years.” so if we treat as the plant has not been delivered, recorded and depreciated, so we have to adjust the depreciation booked as the question says but the answer doesn’t.
2. If the asset was recorded and depreciated, again my question is why we did not record the payable for 2nd payment?
And because the plant was recorded and depreciated so the obligation to pay the second installment is a must. so my concern is why we don’t record payable (for 2nd installment) while we have own the asset.
Because the question stated that 2nd installment (delivery and install) in 11/12/x7, so I think it has not been delivered yet.
About the plant purchased at 1/9/20X7, the 2nd installment will be made in 11/12/20X7 when it is delivered and installed, I.e the next year of the reporting year. So I think in this reporting year ended 30/11/20X7, the asset is not commenced and should not record as ppe hence no depreciation, and I do these adjustments in ppe line on sofp.
If the asset is recorded as ppe in year ended 30/11/20X7, why the payable amount is not recorded and retranslated at year end?
Pls help me clarify….thank you so much.
ok, I just think that the standard told “the asset can not be revalued to carrying amount that is higher than its value would have been if asset had not been impaired originally”, and we must comply with 😀
Means that we then revaluate the unimpairment asset from $86 to$105? And record entry dr NCA/cr reserve (105 – 86)?
I confuse it because the asset was purchased at $90, and then after 2 years in use it’s revalued at $105? Is it reasonable?
Dear sir, pls help me where is my misunderstanding in reversal of impairment in quest 1 June 2013-Trailer.
I learnt that the asset can not be revalued to carrying amount that is higher than its value would have been if asset had not been impaired originally.
In the part 5, the total impairment recorded is $12, the revaluation gain calculated base on new value is $32.58. I think that the maximum impairment reversed is $12 give the carrying amount of the asset as at YE2013 is $86 rather than the new value of $105.
Tks so much.
