Forum Replies Created
- Posts
Yeah the treatment was right, I just tried not to say too much about it cos it wasn’t a significant issue but just mentioned there was a risk it wasn’t maintained through changes in trends and obsolescence etc!
Think it mentioned internally generated brand name but they didn’t recognise that so I didn’t really talk about that cos it’s right not to recognise internally generated..
For inventory I think I mentioned lots of hardware stores and lots of transactions so risk there, I also said risk that trends change quickly and stuff becomes obsolete so potentially overstated if not impaired for fashion changes etc
I said for the legal claim that I didn’t think that it was enough because the loans/credit terms were for tradesmen doinf long term work and £800 per tradesman was not a lot so said it might not be sufficient etc.
I think I also said that some things should’ve been expended like Labour and redecoration as that could be assumed to be part of normal wear and tear not capex.
Also said that there was an issue with them having a before exception and after exception profit figure as the exception items should be been capitalised and also the before figure is what was used to calculate executive director bonus which was okie 30m increase or something and the after figure increase was 2, so wasn’t a good measurement and risk that it was purposely done. Also said tax implications are that less tax might be paid if profits were massively reduced etc..
Not sure I feel like I made issues out of nothing? Anyone else get these?Also for the afternoon exam did you work out materiality? I used thresholds 0.5-1% of revenue think it was like between 225,000 and 450,000 or something like that?
I had group audit, forensic and final accounts too!
Spent ages on group audit and found it hard to identify the matters! Kind of feel like I waffled on so much!For final accounts I gave adverse opinion too cos material by quantity and by nature too.. weird exam… had a question about terms of engagement too and I just talked about fees timings expectations nature and reporting..
I had group audit, forensic and final accounts too!
Spent ages on group audit and found it hard to identify the matters!For final accounts I gave adverse opinion too cos material by quantity and by nature too.. weird exam but I hope I passed cos I don’t want to do it again ??
For infinite tangibles I said had to be under 10 years per FRS 102 and best guess had to be applied..
I completely broke at the first question, forgot everything groups etc and just had a panic attack! Finally sorted myself out (lost about 10 minutes) and then just wrote anything i could think of ? did not enjoy at all, will prob be doing again in sept!Also stupidly selected the UK variant which had an additional chapter to learn – only do this if you need the UK content to be a practice partner, if not INT paper is easier!
I did afternoon sitting – found it really tough… Annoyed there were no consolidated SPLOCI/SOFP as I spent all of yesterday prepping for that!
Loan note adjustment in section C single entity completely threw me and I couldn’t think!
Some ratios, gPM.NPM, Inventory and Payables, I feel like I tried to wing It a lot.. Not overly happy with it..i found this exam super hard!! The very first q nearly caught me out, it was employment benefit on a property, think the property was bought in 2009, there was an improvement in 2014 and the new market value was 1st aug 2018, i ALMOST deducted improvement from new market value when calculating the additional charge.
i think we had the same exam, was yours 1:30 sitting? Capability Co and the bin people? and the flower company?
