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

For the selling and closure of the properties I spoke about the restructuring of the properties that it applies when there a closure of a line of business or the business is location to a different location. Furthermore if they is a sale or closure they need to generate a contract that states the reasons behind the closure of the business and the objectives of it. Moreover The employees needs to be aware about the closure of the business before this happens and needs to be stated in the contract. Is this correct ?

certain conditions 1. readily available 2. management is determined and has a formal plan 3. buyer is actively located 4. done within 12 months of classifying 5. is closed or disposed

I’m assuming you are talking about the IFRS 5 question on the INT variant? Not too sure, it sounds like you are talking about a discontinued operation. A discontinued operation is an operation that has ceased during the period or a disposal group held for sale and is a separate major line of business or geographical area. I can’t really remember the question now but I don’t remember them giving too much information about that, they focused more on the IFRS 5 within the question but this is what ACCA make us do, doubt ourselves haha

Hmm and for IR I wrote that integrating reporting is used to help build relationship with other investors and stakeholders, it help to ensure that employees are working in a safe environment and the top level management are working with integrity and are independent, it evaluates the financial position of the company and let’s builts confidence in companies to invest in order companies. All these factors are possible if the investor evaluates the integrating report. Is this correct ?

its non current assets held for sale and that was all of their 6 shops in italy thats a geographical line of theirs thats closed my man.

IR basic purpose is to give insights of how a business will create wealth for the owners using capitals and resources while giving info about future as well as past using APM too

But my points are relevant as well ?

yes you aint wrong either hopefully we all make it im not sure about myself tho :(

I really think that with these exams there should be two monitors in order to work efficiently otherwise a lot of time is wasted clicking back and forward on multiple windows in order to refer to the figures and scenarios. These exams were previously paper based exams which eventually changed to computer in order to mimic real world workplace environment. Arguably these cbe exams is still early days so if enough people give feedback on the insufficient time allotted for each exams and the damn issues with the windows, it would help future candidates.

the question said with an increase in the salary of 3% every year so in calculating the pv arent you supposed to increase by 3% every year and then consider the leavers and discount it idk i might be wrong

I got a strange number as well.. calculate based on share price 3.8 for NCI at FV as well

I had a hunch that cash flow might come up, as I thought I recalled Opentuitiion Tutor here warned us in his video. I did two cash flow questions during my revision, one from Kaplan textbook, one from Kaplan revision kit. Hope I gained enough marks on that question. But I still hadn't enough time to even comtemplating this final question. 25 marks. I am crying.

I completely forgot now: there purchase of associate happened in the year? I can't recall.

I think just follow the requirement as it asked whether the brand should be subsumed in within goodwill or be separate accounted for. IAS38 states that if the IA is not separable it should be subsumed in within goodwill. It has to be legally or contractually separated either to sell it or use it. The last part was about indefinite life / definite life of the two new acquisition brand. The directors intended to recognised the brand as indefinite useful life. My opinion was, the first one have long track records, it has good past experience to produce economic benefit for the entity. It should be alright be treated as indefinite useful life. However, assessment would be made each year for the if there is any indication of declining future cash in flow from the continuing use of the asset. Impairment test each year is required by comparing the carrying amount against the recoverable amount. In respect of the 2nd brand i think not acceptable to be treated as indefinite useful life because it is new.

I did the same as yours. T account is the most efficient way as we dont have much time to drag there.

The SBR remotely held CBE exam was a disaster. It took more than an hour to connect to Onvue after which it took more than 20 minutes to check credentials and photos. This added to stress which was multiplied by the exam format with several windows to be opened on a laptop, which couldn't be resized to fit the laptop making it difficult to read without closing and opening them several times and toggling between the windows. Further, to worsen the situation, the tab key did not work in the word processor to input figures at a distance. Had to use the space key multiple times to input the figures in an orderly fashion. All this took considerable amount of time and ultimately resulted in insufficient time to complete the exam. As a result, I didn't have time to answer the 2nd question of the B Section. ACCA should have checked the word processor and should have considered extending the exam time knowing that the students would neither be having a paper based exam nor a sufficiently large screen to fit all windows so as to enable read and write at the same time.

I think those self interest, advocacy is applicable and can bring in for discussion. As i remember, the scenario did mentioned that the customer is approaching the chief accountant and offer him a good employment post. I think from practical view, he actually has two option either to accept the offer, or to consult with someone like his superior/management. Since it is not good to turn down the offer from business point of view, but assessment of the customer credit risk would be needed since the scenario did tell customer are in bad credit rating ie cash flow tight. Another issue is something like block chain technology that the company are promoting. I think technical competence and due care, professional behavior, integrity might be relevent as the chief accountant aware himself do not have the knowledge yet he promise the management that he can handle the project. He should have been be honest, not to discretion the profession. He is recently qualified as ACCA member. But most importantly is what action he could do as the requirement specifically asked for that. So might need conclude with that to gain the professional marks. I guess...

My opinion about that question is IFRS 5 and IAS36 and IAS 37 can be relevant. IFRS 5 apply because the store is already closed during the financial year. Despite the director is unwilling to classify for that nor he is willing to disclose. But the standard still requires the company to reclassify as per IFRS5 and disclose as discontinued operation. Before reclassification, it needs to conduct impairment test and recognise at the lower of CV and FVLCTS (more relevant as no more operation means no future economic benefit, VIU less relevant) because uncertainties surrounding the situation. IAS37 provision should be consider if there's any constructive / legal obligation arising from those closure ie compensation to those affected employees/other cost incurred (but not future cost).

The closure of 6 stores should take into account for impairment because the scenario did states that many other stores similar to the the entity operate were closed. Means there are uncertainties surrounding and should conduct impairment test as there are indication (from externally ie market). The scenario also mention that the stores was closed , essentially it should be classify and non current asset held for sale and discontinued operation. IFRS 5 requires reclassification and disclosure if its happened in the financial year.

Somehow i feel like in the question 4 bi, is related to IAS 19 and IAS 37. Firstly, It says define benefit liability arising due to the current cost expected to be deliver as per the promised term and condition if the employees remain with the company. IAS 37 says there are 3 criteria for recognition, cost, probable outflow and past event and these three criteria have actually met. It was probable 75% of the employees will be remain with the company, 3% increase in remuneration each year from 2013. As such, the cost can be reliably measured. Therefore, 1% should be taken up as a current cost to PL and the other corresponding entry by increase each respective years defined obligations these cost meet the liabilities/provision as per IAS37.

Yep did the 3% increase first and discounted to PV :) Hopefully its right

Yeah I agree just didn't manage to figure it out in the exam :'( Hopefully I still get enough marks for my held for sale and provision explanations

Wow how do you remember all the standards names! Did you not discount the 3% raises to PV then? There were some notes saying gains were to be reclassified to OCI though so I think they were getting at if the closing balance was higher than the actuarial estimate then it should go to OCI instead of asset ceiling? I don't think i wrote that in the exam though

Great exam! tailored to keep the pass rate down as the June 20 exam was cancelled. Pretty shameful!

I answered same as you. Literally the same. So we must be both correct!

For the question how will goodwill and gain on purchase consolidate in financial statement? I wrote according to ias38 intangible will be measured at cost and revaluation model and if the revaluation increases the asset it will be recorded in oci with revalution surplus within oce and if revaluation decreases the asset it needs to be recorded within p&l this is how goodwill will be recorded. Hope this is correct ?

what was the difficulty level of paper?

and what about cash flows question? was it difficult or not?

it was a horrible paper, didn't expect hard questions on cash flows it was just too much information and also 16 marks or so for only calculation. Didn't expect IFRS for SMEs as well.

Give five, the same for me