Forum Replies Created
- Posts
Thanks a lot sir for all your help in tax. I have passed it in first attempt at 70%
1) Here do we have to compare total available annual allowance of 136000 with amount of Jack’s income that is currently taxable at higher rate (i,e 47650)?
2) If yes then secondly after comparing what we have to do?
3) Thirdly answer says that restricting amount of personal pension contributions to the amount qualifying for tax relief at higher rate will minimize the cost of pension saving because each $100 saved will effectively only cost $60.
I do not understand meaning of this paragraphBasically here we have to compare IHT saving with immediate CGT.
I know CGT here will be 37324I have problem in calculating IHT saving if Creg dies on 31 dec 2022
PET fig is 250000 which is less than NRB of 325000 thus No IHT will be payable on this PET. I do not know how to proceed further in order to calculate IHT saving
I have understood the answer, but what confusion I have is that:
1) Trading loss of 18/19 can be set off against total income of 18/19 and/or 17/18.
2) Setting the loss against total income of 18/19 first would waste complete personal allowance and save no tax. Remaining loss of 2500 can be set off against total income of 17/18 wasting part of personal allowance and saving no tax.
3) Setting the loss against total income of 17/18 first would waste complete P.A and save no tax. Remaining loss of 3165 can be set off against total income of 18/19 wasting part of personal allowance and saving no tax
After writing first paragraph, do I have to write both para 2 and para 3 also? Or is just writing either para 2 or para 3 is sufficient?
Sir from 13.12 to 13.24 it says that “all of the CRQs are expert marked by real markers. These markers can see if you have used formula in the cell and will follow through when marking the exam”
Thats right but I want to ask that when explaining relief against total income i.e trading loss of 18/19 can be set off against total income of 18/19 and/or 17/18. Now when explaining this, do I have to write both below paragraphs OR is just writing any one para between the two is fine
Setting the loss against total income of 18/19 first would waste complete personal allowance and save no tax. Remaining loss of 2500 can be set off against total income of 17/18 wasting part of personal allowance and saving no tax.
Setting the loss against total income of 17/18 first would waste complete P.A and save no tax. Remaining loss of 3165 can be set off against total income of 18/19 wasting part of personal allowance and saving no tax.
Ivy Ltd provides one of its directors with a company motor car which is used for both business and private mileage. For the quarter ended 31 March 2019 the total cost of petrol was £720, with the director being charged £216 for the private use element. Both figures are inclusive of VAT.
Ivy Ltd will include the following entries on its VAT return for the quarter ended 31 March 2019:
Sir here output vat they have taken 36 and input vat they have taken 120. I do not understand the output and input VAT here
Sir if we do not round off every individual calculation in sec C, and just round off the final answer so will examiner deduct marks for it?
Ok Sir, but as you said above, that if NO scale charge is applied and car is used for business + private purpose (whether by employee or owner) then full input VAT cannot be be claimed on FUEL. So in such situation we will apportion the business use and private use and then input VAT on FUEL will only be claimed on business use?
Also is using the below formula in spread sheet fine?
Deff tax credit =-(6000-(14000*0.3))
If we do not round off to the nearest thousand for each line item, and just round off the final answer (i.e NP), then do they deduct marks for it?
Sir but in Qs it says that 4% loan notes have been classified as a current liability due to their imminent redemption. As such they should not be treated as long term funding.
However, they will be replaced immediately after redemption by 8% loan notes with same nominal value, repayable in 10 year’s time.
Sir these 4% loan notes will be redeemed on 1 Nov 20×6 and then they will be replaced with 8% loan notes with same nominal value, repayable in 10 year’s time. So til 30 september 20×7, instead of 12 months, 11 month interest should be taken as finance cost?
But they have deducted 400 from current assets, how overdraft can be in current assets, because overdraft is supposed to be a current liability
In dec 12 , there was a question “Quartile”, its ROCE was 12.1%, and the sector’s ROCE was 16%, so while writing the commentary examiner has mentioned that Measured as a percentage, this underperformance is 28% ((16·8– 12·1)/16·8).
So suppose the commpany’s ROCE was 15% and the sector’s ROCE was 10%, so while writing the commentary we will write the overperformance is __.
So here we will calculate this as ((10– 15)/10) = 33.33%. Is this calculation correct or wrong?
Sir I have again checked the question, but the question just said that
A Ltd is not expected to return its trading operations to profitability untill y/e 31 March 2021. A ltd does not expected significant gains or other income in near future. A ltd’s total profits for y/e 31 march 2017 were 20000 before deduction of QCD of 5000 and tax was paid at rate of 20% on these profits
Calculate corporation tax payable by each of these companies for y/e 31 march 2018 if elections were made to utilize A ltd’s loss in most beneficial manner
Sir I just want to clear once more my confusion, so summarizing
a) In case of car repairs, whether scale charge is applied or not
1) If car is used only for private purpose (whether by employee or owner) then No input VAT can be claimed on car repairs. Correct?
2) If car is used for business + private purpose (whether by employee or owner) then full input VAT can be claimed on car repairs. Correct?
b) In case of input vat on fuel, if scale charge is applied
1) If car is used only for private purpose (whether by employee or owner) then full input VAT can be claimed on fuel. Correct?
2) If car is used for business + private purpose (whether by employee or owner) then full input VAT can be claimed on fuel. Correct?
c) In case of input vat on fuel, if scale charge is Not applied
1) If car is used only for private purpose (whether by employee or owner) then No input VAT can be claimed on fuel. Correct?
2) If car is used for business + private purpose (whether by employee or owner) then we will apportion it and Only business element will be claimed. Correct?
Sir, in Mileage allowance we calculate it on business miles, correct?
Now in answer they have calculated on 1010 miles, so in the question 880 miles are for business purpose as mentioned in Qs, so why examiner has not calculated on just 880 miles? Why he has also included 130 miles and why he has rejected 160 miles?Ok , Sir if generally if there is a freehold warehouse that is let out unfurnished and the property was let from 6 April 18 to 31 Jan 19 at monthly rent of 580. Only this much question
So now in order to calculate rental income for 18/19 on cash basis, we will consider April as an entire month? Won’t we apportion April (i,e 25/30 )?Ok , but still 1 thing which confuses me in property income is that as we know the basis of assesment for individual is cash basis by default. And the actual fiscal year is from 6 april 18 to 5 april 19, so here as you said that 10 months were due to 31 January, but according to the actual fiscal year , should not the 10 month be due to 6 Feb?
Sir I have 1 confusion here. In the question the consolidated operating expenses are of 3300, right. And only subsidiary’s operating expenses are of 1673 (i.e 2510 x 8/12). So for preparing individual P&L of only parent company we need to deduct 1673 from 3300, correct?
This I have understood , but they have also added 9440 profit on disposal which was supposed to be shown in individual P&L of parent company, so they have done (3300 – 1673 + 9440) , but in question 1 line is mentioned that a gain on disposal of Swanson Co of $9·44m is currently included in operating expenses.in consolidated P&L, so it means that this 9440 is already adjusted in 3300 fig then now why we are adding back 9440?