Forum Replies Created
- Posts
Hi,
For Harrington…
I dont understand how we got the depreciation “revaluation” of (800) for buildings? shouldnt it be 80 (excess of depreciation on revaluation)? Is this an error in the text book?
any help would be great!
looks like most people passed which is amazing considering how bad the exam was!
i couldnt beleive it, i got 50% pass – the most beautiful feeling in the world. just to know that I never have to do this exam again and that it was such a terrible exam too, makes me all the more happier.
@superwoman said:
I understand student frustration about the exam however I still dont understand the point about VAT it was 10 marks only, no different to other papers. The examiner always tests VAT for about 10 marks. Why are you taking a punt on VAT? My students are always told they must learn all VAT as it will be tested. The adjustment to profit and capital allowances had nothing to do with VAT.
The VAT element was tax point. A Vat return showing output VAT on slaes and INPUT VAT on purchases and the Flat rate scheme. Why is this a joke, it is standard VAT question.
I really think the previous point by vinx98 is concerning. The paper was a slightly different format but standard syllabus areas. If you have worked hard and a praticised exam questions you should pass. Stop worrying and accept exams are difficult and you have to be prepared that an exam will not be a replica of previous exam papers. You will certainly find this at the Professional level.
As I said put it behind you and dont write off success because you were challenged.we had two questions on VAT, I cant remember marks, but they were definately more than 10 marks. I studied VAT, and I will get some marks in this section, but not as much as corp. tax, individuals, etc mainly because the bulk of previous years exam was on those areas.
i think this is the first exam that I studied so hard for and thanks to the BPP material, I actually think I know a lot about tax now – but even with this, the crazy exam could still fail me. As I mentioned before, after doing a “mock” of last years exam I got a mark over 75%, but this year I could fail. How could there be such a discrepancy??
The fact that the exam is harder does not make it “professional”, it makes it deceptive. In a professional environment, you have all the books at your disposal if you have to look into a tricky situation. And also most professionals are pros because of experience. There are many tax experts out there who do not have and do not need to pass F6 paper, Im not downplaying the importance of F6, but its not right to say that it makes you a pro because you memorised a certain part of the syllabus correctly.
The only thing I can think of is that the examiner wanted to trick (ie fail) students, and it has been done.@superwoman said:
Superwoman thinks the following:
Q1 was fair as standard syllabus areas included
Q2 This was a different format than previuos years that may have confused students to start. It is surprising that Company losses were tested again as they were tested in December 2009 Q5. But by breaking up the requirements students could answer the parts they preferred and just have a go at the other parts
Q3 I personally thought students would be pleased that this was corporate gains and not individual capital gains tax. Standard share calculation, Damaged asset, Holdover relief and part disposals.Student comments surprise me.
Q4 As I have always stressed to my students you must learn ADM. If you had not learnt self assessment for individuals then you would find Q4 very difficult. If you had studied this area the question was ok
Q5 AGAIN ADM but for companies. Same comments as above.Someone made the comment about VAT. There was only 10 marks for VAT no more and the examiner has said a MINIMUM OF 10 marks on VAT will be examined. He could set a 30 mark question if he wanted!
Overall, despite the change in format I thought the exam was a bit tougher than say last year but a well prepared student should have no problem passing the exam.
Just forget the exam and look forward and enjoy the FOOTBALL
(FOR NON FOOTBALL FANS IT IS THE WORLD CUP)yes, and perhaps the examiner could have put a 50% or 70% or even 100% question on VAT right? I think we have a right to feel aggreived and we cannot shrug this off by the examiner saying, yeah but we told you that VAT will be a minimum of 10% so make sure you dont forget that! OK so past exams VAT is 10 or 15%, and that is how it is for MANY past exams, I feel then that it is not unreasonable for those of us who work full time, study part time for 6 months, pay loads of money, taking a week off work (as I did) and practising all the past exam questions – to simply take a punt that the VAT question would be worth 10-15% no??? I did study VAT, I did study admin, but I spent a majority of my time studying items that were consisitently 30 marks in almost every exam paper and perfecting answers for those – ie Corp. Tax (yes its harder than CGT but it was omnipresent) and individuals. Seriously, the partnership question was a joke – not too hard fundamentally, but unclear vague and the link with the VAT question actually made me laugh out loud during the exam as I couldnt beleive how incredibly unlucky I was to chose June 2010 to do my tax exam – because if I had only done it 6 months earlier I would have easily pass – but on this occaision, I have no idea after the cost and effort that I will actually pass. So whilst you think its all a formality, no – as many people here have said – its not and we wouldnt come on here if we didnt feel that we were being treated unfairly.
ive said it before, too many people doing the exam, they want to fail people and make it deliberately hard.
just look at previous years pass rates, last year it was 61% the highest in the F series, and recently pass rates of above 50% are common, much higher than the other F series – so maybe they are lowering the bar so less people pass and less get qualified.
Im sure it was deliberately made harder and to put us off, and by making it quite different to previous years exams, im sure they knew they would catch a lot of people out. For me, I spent a lot of time studying for this, and I am very disappointed they would treat people in this way – but that’s statistics for ya!