• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
Free ACCA & CIMA online courses from OpenTuition

Free ACCA & CIMA online courses from OpenTuition

Free Notes, Lectures, Tests and Forums for ACCA and CIMA exams

  • ACCA
  • CIMA
  • FIA
  • OBU
  • Books
  • Forums
  • Ask AI
  • Search
  • Register
  • Login
  • ACCA Forums
  • Ask ACCA Tutor
  • CIMA Forums
  • Ask CIMA Tutor
  • FIA
  • OBU
  • Buy/Sell Books
  • All Forums
  • Latest Topics

June 2025 ACCA Exam Results

Comments & Instant poll >>

20% off ACCA & CIMA Books

OpenTuition recommends the new interactive BPP books for June 2025 exams.
Get your discount code >>

Allowance for receivables

Forums › Ask ACCA Tutor Forums › Ask the Tutor ACCA FA – FIA FFA › Allowance for receivables

  • This topic has 9 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 10 years ago by John Moffat.
Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 10 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • March 12, 2014 at 2:04 pm #162142
    muradn
    Member
    • Topics: 50
    • Replies: 53
    • ☆☆

    A company has been notified that a customer has been declared bankrupt. The company had previously made an allowance for this debt. what is the correct double entry to account for this new information?

    answer is DR- Irrecoverable debts, CR receivables

    but i dont understant a thing is that, if we made allowance for it previously , we do:

    Cr Allowance and Dr Irrecoverable debts expence
    we charge it as an irrecoverable expence and we deduct that amount in the income statement.
    and later when we are sure that amount will not be paid exactly, we debit it again to irrecoverable debts expence.. why we debit that amount to irrecoverable debt expence?
    when we debit to irrecoverable expence , we charge it twice and we deduct it twice in income statement. is not it?

    March 12, 2014 at 4:53 pm #162155
    John Moffat
    Keymaster
    • Topics: 57
    • Replies: 54705
    • ☆☆☆☆☆

    You can do the double entries in several ways – all that matters is that you end up with the correct expense in the Statement of profit or loss, and the correct balance on the Allowance for receivables account.

    What you suggest is fine (and I agree seems more sensible) but it does end up creating a lot more work.

    The easiest way is to always CR Receivables and DR Irrecoverable debts expense for all irrecoverable debts (whether or not they were previously doubtful). The reason that it does not end up being charged twice in the income statement is that if you do it this way, then at the end of the year you calculate what allowance is needed at the end of the year and change the existing allowance – the double entry for the change being to the irrecoverable debts account.

    Let me give you a very simple example to explain.

    Suppose you have a debt of $1000 and you have created an allowance of $1000 because it is doubtful.
    Next year you decide that it is irrecoverable. CR Receivables and DR Irrecoverable debts expense – the receivable is gone, and at the moment there is an expense of 1000.
    Then you decide what allowance you need this year. Since the debt no longer exists you need the balance on the allowance account to be zero. But there is a balance of 1000 there at the moment. So…..you change it by DR Allowance and CR Irrecoverable debts expense with 1000.

    The allowance is now zero, and the net expense on the Irrecoverable debts expense account is also zero – which is correct.

    Obviously for such a ‘baby’ example it would be just as easy to do what you suggest. However when there are many things happening then what I have just said is much easier.

    I don’t know if you have watched my lecture, but if you do then you may see what I mean.

    (Also, remember that there is very little testing of double entry in the exam because in real life the computer usually does the DR’s and CR’s. Most questions on irrecoverable and doubtful debts will be asking what the expense in the Statement of profit or loss will be. For this you do not need to use t’accounts – it wastes time and is not necessary. The total expense will be the total of any irrecoverable debts plus the change in the allowance (if it is increasing. Minus the change in the allowance if it is reducing).

    I hope that helps 🙂

    March 13, 2014 at 6:11 am #162190
    muradn
    Member
    • Topics: 50
    • Replies: 53
    • ☆☆

    i understood. thanks for detailed explanation.

    March 13, 2014 at 7:19 am #162193
    John Moffat
    Keymaster
    • Topics: 57
    • Replies: 54705
    • ☆☆☆☆☆

    You are welcome 🙂

    August 26, 2014 at 8:48 am #192346
    zemsk
    Participant
    • Topics: 5
    • Replies: 7
    • ☆

    if there are any pitfalls if we make this entry to write-off the doubtful debt :
    DR Allowance
    CR Receivables

    why it is not better than:
    DR Irrecoverable debts
    CR Receivables

    because our amount of irrecoverable debts will be distort in the st. of P or L?

    August 26, 2014 at 10:18 am #192370
    John Moffat
    Keymaster
    • Topics: 57
    • Replies: 54705
    • ☆☆☆☆☆

    You can make the entry that way and you will end up with the same final expense (which is all that matter – it doesn’t matter how we do the double entries).

    However, it takes longer and can end up being very confusing. Certainly for exam questions, the second way (and the way I do it in the lecture) is by far the safest, easiest and the quickest 🙂

    August 31, 2014 at 1:53 pm #193130
    Aina
    Member
    • Topics: 0
    • Replies: 1
    • ☆

    Hello Mr Moffat! I got a question regarding f3 chap 8 test question 3
    Why wont we subtract $2900 from receivables since its the cash which we have received which was previously allowed for?
    Shouldn’t it be solved like this 50000+1800-2900-2500=$46400?

    August 31, 2014 at 3:54 pm #193134
    John Moffat
    Keymaster
    • Topics: 57
    • Replies: 54705
    • ☆☆☆☆☆

    The question says that the four items have been included in the balance of 50,000. This means that the 2900 will have been deducted in arriving at the 50,000 and therefore no adjustment is required for it (since it was correct to deduct it).

    September 1, 2014 at 2:51 pm #193212
    gabriell
    Member
    • Topics: 11
    • Replies: 101
    • ☆☆

    Aina, please say from which book is it?

    September 1, 2014 at 4:55 pm #193227
    John Moffat
    Keymaster
    • Topics: 57
    • Replies: 54705
    • ☆☆☆☆☆

    Gabriell – it is from the OpenTuition Course Notes!!!!!!

  • Author
    Posts
Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 10 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Log In

Primary Sidebar

Donate
If you have benefited from our materials, please donate

ACCA News:

ACCA My Exam Performance for non-variant

Applied Skills exams is available NOW

ACCA Options:  “Read the Mind of the Marker” articles

Subscribe to ACCA’s Student Accountant Direct

ACCA CBE 2025 Exams

How was your exam, and what was the exam result?

BT CBE exam was.. | MA CBE exam was..
FA CBE exam was.. | LW CBE exam was..

Donate

If you have benefited from OpenTuition please donate.

PQ Magazine

Latest Comments

  • AdityaSairam on Overcapitalisation and Overtrading – ACCA Financial Management (FM)
  • verweijlisa on Financial performance – Example 2 – ACCA Financial Reporting (FR)
  • John Moffat on Linear Programming – Spare capacity and Shadow prices – ACCA Performance Management (PM)
  • John Moffat on The Statement of Financial Position and Income Statement (part d)
  • Salexy on Linear Programming – Spare capacity and Shadow prices – ACCA Performance Management (PM)

Copyright © 2025 · Support · Contact · Advertising · OpenLicense · About · Sitemap · Comments · Log in