• 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
  • FIA Forums
  • CIMA Forums
  • OBU Forums
  • Qualified Members forum
  • Buy/Sell Books
  • All Forums
  • Latest Topics

20% off ACCA & CIMA Books

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

december 2009 question 1(ASOP)

Forums › Ask ACCA Tutor Forums › Ask the Tutor ACCA FM Exams › december 2009 question 1(ASOP)

  • This topic has 5 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 6 years ago by John Moffat.
Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • August 30, 2019 at 8:08 pm #543891
    kennigara
    Participant
    • Topics: 193
    • Replies: 250
    • ☆☆☆

    Hi My Dear tutor, I have a question.

    In the question 1,I deducted licence fee from operating cost saved then calculated tax and tax benefits.is this correct approac?

    August 31, 2019 at 8:48 am #543938
    John Moffat
    Keymaster
    • Topics: 57
    • Replies: 54805
    • ☆☆☆☆☆

    No. The question says that lease rental includes the licence fee. The licence fee is only an extra cash flow if they buy the machine.

    August 31, 2019 at 10:06 am #543951
    kennigara
    Participant
    • Topics: 193
    • Replies: 250
    • ☆☆☆

    Hi dear Tutor again, I really confused in part a and b, and I will explain where I was stuck.

    Let us first start part B because solved it on the blank and compared it with answer.

    In part b, my cost savings and tax calculation are correct but why tax benefits have not been considered in this example?I included tax benefits

    Years———————-0————–1—————2————–3————-4—————–5

    operating
    cost saved———————– 365400—— 479588——–637851—–563995

    Cash flow before tax—————————————————————————————–

    tax in one year arreas————————(109620)——-(143876)—–(191355)—–(169199)

    tax benefits———————————–75000————–56250———42188——-96563

    the rest I discounted with 11% as it is nominal DR. Why tax benefits have not beenn taken into consideration here?

    In Part A, why tax benefits have been calculated over licence fee?,besides tax benefits over machine-which is understandable

    I am really confused why tax benefits have not been taken into account in part B and why tax benefits have been calculated over licence fee?

    From my own point of view, licence fee could be considered here as goodwill or patient which is not depreciated and direclty calculated tax benefits but if tax benefits calculated why i do not include it INITIAL INVESTMENT figure of 1000mln?

    August 31, 2019 at 12:52 pm #543960
    John Moffat
    Keymaster
    • Topics: 57
    • Replies: 54805
    • ☆☆☆☆☆

    In Part (b) the tax benefits have been taken into account – the present value of financing (974,762) is included in arriving at the NPV. (But as the examiner states in his answer it is also acceptable to show the initial costs and the tax flows separately).

    In part (a), the licence fee is an expense and the expense is tax allowable. It is included in the lease payments and so does not need including again, but it is an extra expense if the machine is bought. It has nothing to do with depreciation – it is an expense each year.

    Have you watched my free lectures on lease v buy???

    August 31, 2019 at 1:36 pm #543963
    kennigara
    Participant
    • Topics: 193
    • Replies: 250
    • ☆☆☆

    Yes I wacthed but it is first time I faced this kind of case.I am almost solving all questions when i watched your lectures.Your lectures helped me too much about understanding questions.

    In my calculation, my answer is 1323052 compared to the examiner’s answer of PV of benefits 1135557.

    this is because in part b calculation, tax benefits have not been taken into consideration as it has already been taken into account in part a calculation therefore the examiner did not include it for the second time but used part a’s present cost of financing which is part a calculation 974762.-this amount includes tax benefits.

    now I understood.

    August 31, 2019 at 6:06 pm #543973
    John Moffat
    Keymaster
    • Topics: 57
    • Replies: 54805
    • ☆☆☆☆☆

    That is great that you now understand 🙂

  • Author
    Posts
Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
  • The topic ‘december 2009 question 1(ASOP)’ is closed to new replies.

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

  • Gracemm on FA Chapter 5 Questions IAS 37 – Provisions, Contingent Liabilities and Contingent Assets
  • John Moffat on The Statement of Financial Position and Income Statement (part c) – ACCA (FA) lectures
  • hadeelalhumaidi on The Statement of Financial Position and Income Statement (part c) – ACCA (FA) lectures
  • hadeelalhumaidi on The Statement of Financial Position and Income Statement (part c) – ACCA (FA) lectures
  • BARROS on Introduction to Financial Accounting – ACCA Financial Accounting (FA) lectures

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