SBRACCA Paper SBR December 2020 Exam was.. Instant Poll and comments

jefreyabanilla wrote:Q1 • Pension obligation-With curtailment/settlement<br>• Goodwill, it says that Fair Value of Net Asset of the Subsidiary excludes Pension Obligation???. Treatment of Legal Fees (this include issue cost for the shares)<br>• Land and Building Acquisition using shares (Should be treated as IFRS 2 Share based payment?? the asset as Investment Property)<br>• Derecognition of Financial Assets (not sure, it says sale of 100% right but the seller guarantees the loss)

It should be non adjusting because economic downturn occurd in jan. As of december nothing like that was existing

You mean the inventory part?

Encaladeus wrote:Allowance emission grant is a very complicated. Anyone knowa the correct answer? I recognised income as in government grant for agricultural products

The standard allows two approachs. Reduce asset value or setup deferred income to reduce associated cost.

That land & building question - i said it should be treated under IAS 40 - Investment property?? Because it said they cannot find a use for it but it has appreciated in value. Anyone else put the same?

I put the same.

I came out of the exam 20 Hours ago and i still do not know what is going on..........

Is it fair to say the December webinar for Sbr wasnt helpful?

khilen wrote:That land & building question – i said it should be treated under IAS 40 – Investment property?? Because it said they cannot find a use for it but it has appreciated in value.

Yes, I did as well.

ikenna24 wrote:Is it fair to say the December webinar for Sbr wasnt helpful?

The webinar I watched spent two days on group accounts.

The questions were nothing like was practiced. It would be almost impossible to prepare for 50% of the exam. Not enough time. Might as well have not bothered learning a lot of the syllabus as only niche elements were tested. Ethics question felt more like an audit paper, looking for system weaknesses.

As a student who took ages to prepare and practice, I sincerely hope all the bad things in the world happens to those examiners. They have all the rights to change how they approach setting exams, but they have no right not to announce the changes to their approach. If they feel exams need to be harder, they can come out and say it. It's up to me to decide if I can pay the fees, prepare in time, get leaves approved from work and sit the exams. It doesn't feel good to be kept in the dark especially if I have to save for months to afford the fees for a single paper.

This paper completely threw me off. i felt like the information provided were hard to interpret unlike other exams ive taken. as soon as i saw defined benefit question, i knew it was going to be a tough one. i blabbed for most part

jefreyabanilla wrote:You mean the inventory part?

Yes

suf23 wrote:

khilen wrote:That land & building question – i said it should be treated under IAS 40 – Investment property?? Because it said they cannot find a use for it but it has appreciated in value.

You cannot treat it as investment property unless it was explicitly stated to be treated as such.

chardynigelon wrote:

suf23 wrote:

khilen wrote:That land & building question – i said it should be treated under IAS 40 – Investment property?? Because it said they cannot find a use for it but it has appreciated in value.

If you are not using and held for capital appreciation, it must be classifed as IP.

There was a question about derecognition. I think that asset shouldn’t be derecognised because risks were not transferred

The third question is to discuss whether the transaction is a business combination; and the last one asked for derecognition criteria under IFRS 9

same here!

Really? I remember reading it somewhere in the BPP kit answer that asset held for undetermined use can also be classified as investment property, which is explicitly stated in IAS 40...T_T

Well I think it is correct to include the $1m in the consideration? If I remember correctly there was $3m legal costs in which $1 is directly related to share exchange which should have been included in consideration as per IFRS 3, therefore only $2m needs to be expensed.

I think you are totally correct!

I guess that most of us here would agree this December SBR exam's difficulty level was off the chart, in terms of question style, layouts, etc., and I too felt that profoundly especially when I'm a non-native English speaker/user. But considering the fact that the pass rate for previous SBR exams has always been around 50% without significant fluctuation, it is a reasonable estimation that around half of us here will see a "pass" in their exam result emails 1 month later, albeit a surge in difficulty; this is true even if you think you did really bad at the exam. I'm too worrying about this exam result, but just hope to cheer you guys up.

The costs of issuing debt or equity are to be accounted for under the rules of IFRS 9, Financial Instruments and IAS 32 Financial Instruments: Presentation. Based on book it looks like that it mean they should be deducted from equity. Remaining $2m should be immiedetely expensed.

This set of SBR is never similar to what in the past year.... especially the ethics part and the ECL part.... First time ever I doubt that I can pass this paper

The most terrible part in my opinion is a lot more subjective questions compared to previous past year, these kind of questions require more time to answer (hich I don’t have enough time to answer properly)

Yes, I write as IP also (undetermined future use)

Encaladeus wrote:There was a question about derecognition. I think that asset shouldn’t be derecognised because risks were not transferred

The question mentioned that 100% ownership was sold. The conceptual framework requires that was you have no entitlement to future cash flows then the asset must be derecognized.

NCC21382 wrote:The third question is to discuss whether the transaction is a business combination; and the last one asked for derecognition criteria under IFRS 9

A business combination involves getting control of another entity. The land purchased did not qualify for control or significant influence.

On an unrelated note, why does everyone have similar design profile pictures?

NCC21382 wrote:I guess that most of us here would agree this December SBR exam’s difficulty level was off the chart, in terms of question style, layouts, etc., and I too felt that profoundly especially when I’m a non-native English speaker/user. But considering the fact that the pass rate for previous SBR exams has always been around 50% without significant fluctuation, it is a reasonable estimation that around half of us here will see a “pass” in their exam result emails 1 month later, albeit a surge in difficulty; this is true even if you think you did really bad at the exam.

I agree. Thanks for the reminder.