- This topic has 1 reply, 2 voices, and was last updated 8 years ago by
MikeLittle.
- AuthorPosts
- August 16, 2017 at 11:07 am #402044
Hi my DEAR Tutor, I have a question
————————————————————- Laimonas ——–Kristine
——————————————————————$’000——– $’000
Non-current assets
investment in Kristine————————————– 50
other ————————————————————23——— 16
Current assets————————————————- 36——— 64
Total assets—————————————————–109——— 80
$1 Equity shares———————————————– 60———- 20
Retained earnings———————————————- 40———- 50
Current liabilities————————————————– 9———— 10
Total equity and liabilities ————————————–109———– 80Laimonas has proposed a dividend of $16,000 Kristine has proposed a dividend of $10,000 Both of the above were proposed before the year end, but not adjusted for. Laimonas acquired 90% of Kristine’s share capital 4 years ago when the balance on Kristine’s retained earnings was $30,000.
The value of the nci shareholding at the date of acquisition was $5,500Net assets of Kristine——AD————–DR———–Post acquisition period
SC——————————20000 ———-20000————nil
RE——————————30000———–50000———–20000cost of invesment——–50000
NCI at FV—————————-5500
net identifiable asset————-(50000)
goodwill——————————5500
impairment(5500*80%)———–(4400)
Revised goodwill———————1100GRE–38040
RE of Laimonas-40000
Share of Laimonas(20000*90%)-18000
Impairment(4400*90%)——–3960
Laimonas didivdend pay—-16000Kristines dividend pay is inside of 20000,that is why
NCI at date—7060
NCI at FV—-5500
NCI share(20000*10%)-2000
impairment(4400*10%)-440In your calculation why U have got NCI at DAte 6060 ?need explanation?
Thanks in advanceAugust 16, 2017 at 11:51 am #402049“RE——————————30000———–50000———–20000”
This line in your post is incorrect – it takes no account of the dividend of $10,000 that has been proposed by Kristina so post acquisition RETAINED earnings are only $10,000 and not $20,000 as you have written
“Kristines dividend pay is inside of 20000,that is why” – do you understand by this that the $20,000 HAS been accounted for? Because that would be incorrect – the question specifically states:
“Both of the above were proposed before the year end, but not adjusted for”
OK?
- AuthorPosts
- The topic ‘CSFP’ is closed to new replies.