- This topic has 71 replies, 40 voices, and was last updated 2 years ago by
.
- Posts
Had the same question! After reading what others got for their exam believe that it is unfair to complain about our version but still, the whole paper was confusing. Wish everyone GOOD LUCK!!!
Reading your comments makes me feel relief because I am not the only who’s shocked after the exam. I scored 85 in FR and my financial reporting knowledge is firm, however, SBR does really test in a different level. I attempted all, but the main mark I think I will firmly gain is about 40. The rest will depend on how my writing-about-thing-i-dont-understand skill goes 🙂
God bless and good luck to me, this is the second to sit the exam, hope for the miracle!!!
Seems like you are the only person in this whole thread with the same exam as me.
Goodwill –
This was ok just did the translations, I reckon some of the rates I got wrong..
Did u get 24m USD for goodwill?
It was strange the HR was 1:1 for dinar : usd so it basically stayed the same, did u find the same? (For GW) then assets translated at CR.
Btw did u alsonthrow a lot of definitions in there…I put a lot like control definition and IFRS3 etc presentation currency IAS 21 etcTCI for NCI (9 marks)
My worst question I probably got 1-2 mark here from definitions if I’m lucky
But I moved on pretty quick once i got stuck because from experience I knew what would happen if I tried figuring it out any longer beyond the 9×1.8 minsEPS-
What did u say in the eps question? I just defined eps and diluted eps and talked about share based payments could increase the denominator in the eps formula and thus impact diluted eps because of the “potentially outstanding shares”
I also said investors see diluted eps as “worst case” and I said basic eps wouldnt be impactedIFRS13-
Question with Alternate Co, I mentioned like u the fv hierarchy but because question specifically mentioned business model and financial assets I talked about the ifrs9 business model thingy
Like held to collect only is amortised cost and held to collect and sell is fvtoci etc
Did u say similar thing?SBP-
The calculation question was equity settled right? I got caught off guard by the “cash settled” tax liability part…but if the whole calc was cash settled it would’ve been SARs that were issued to employees not share options no?
For the calc I did the usual formula with the expense being the balancing figure but I messed up something with the vesting period elapsedSale of trademark-
Did usay IAS 10 events after the reporting period?
There was a court case that was settled right, did u say adjusting event? I.e they had to adjust financial statementInternet domain name-
I said the obvious IAS38 intangible assets etc
I said also they made the right choice not to capitalise cost because internet domain name is not internally generated intangible asset and even then it would not be r&d and even then only the development phase expenditure can be capitalised IF the PIRATE thingy applies
What were your thoughts?SBP- purchase raw cotton
I think ur right …it was IFRS 2 equity settled…
I think I got this wrong..
I said IFRS9 …I thought it was a futures contract because the entity was a manufacturer and raw cotton is a commodity asset…sigh.
- Topics: 0
- Replies: 19
- ☆
Quote” I feel like it’s not a permanent transfer but more of a « on loan player – temporary transfer » no?
I said it was intangible asset but thinking back about the exam I guess it was a lease because there was already a question testing intangible asset for development costs and promotional costs. They use to test different ifrs in each question in each exam so for me it was a lease. Arrrggghhhh”I don’t think PwC would be wrong lol
I wrote it was IFRS 16 lease also but this is wrong
I’m doubting an aspect of the crypto question now.
Can anyone remember the specifics of the part about $1m from early investors and then 9m more from ICO.
There was some percentage share going on somewhere? Anyone recall the specifics?
ThanksI vaguely remember the 1m. It said something along the lines of the company offered the tokens at 90% value to the investors in order to raise funding. If 9m worth of funding wasn’t raised then the icos were abandoned and so had to be paid back by investors by 30 September X6, They then told us that at 30 September X6 the company managed to raise 10m of funding. One of the questions was how to account for the funding, I genuinely had no idea.
I think you DR cash CR Liability at point of receipt, but then you have to wait until the condition has been met at which point DR liability CR income statement
Reply to abcd1234eg
The forex is not 1:1, it is 1.1~
It is not adjusting event the court case decision dine after the fs being authorized.
Also for the Internet domain, it is an intangible purchased by the entity in the question, it is not internally generated, the way you discuss you completely wrong. Nothing to do with r&d or pirate. It should be accounted at cost, and should use cost model and reval model unlikely due to inexistence of active market. Also the useful life need to be judged
thatnixonkid wrote:I think you DR cash CR Liability at point of receipt, but then you have to wait until the condition has been met at which point DR liability CR income statement
I think at the initial when conditions were not met, it should be treated as a liability since refund was probable.
However, after the condition was met, there is no refund plus the company oferred to give them part of the profit of about 10% probably as dividend. At this point, I said it should be treated as equity.?????
That was the hard part the question with the tokens as they cannot be treated as equity. It also relates to last question, which asked why the tokens graned to Directors was not Share Base Payment and were Employee Benefits. It was stated in exibit that tokens are not equity instruments. Also there was not any information that tokens are not refundable….
If tokens were equity, it would be simply share issues(tokens). Then DR 10mln Cash and CR 10mln Share Capital(Or Share Premium). However I wrote that this liability, which has to returned with profit to investors. Company will only retain % of profits.
- Topics: 0
- Replies: 10
- ☆
It was a really tough paper and also a very lenghthy, like 10 mins reading time would be required for each question and might not seem enough. Its quite unfair dat u prepared so much and then gets bumped with time management. Q2, 3,4 carried less marks but looks like the equivalent of question 1.
Q1: Consolidation of foreign subsidiary, goodwill calculation, intragroup interest free loan, deferred tax asset
There were many requirements in respect of foreign currency translation and its accounting treatmentQ2: Ethics and course of action, a finance director which is a qualified accountant, is not presenting all facts about a new product – an internet domain (WCOS) to its board of directors. The domain contains a spyware, resembles that of a competitor and other issues. FD hides all these issues from board. Another part was on competitor suing the company for copying their domain and out of court settlement was made.
Q3: A very lenghthy question iro a transaction with a complex diagram/chart to illustrate same and a lot of info to read. Was about a financing arrangement where A buys on credit from B and B enters into a transaction with the bank to recover its debts. A has to pay the bank the amount due.
Q4: Another lenghthy question about a forestry company, contained materiality judgements, defined obligations, restructiring costs
- Topics: 0
- Replies: 10
- ☆
Me too got same question, i wasted like 5 to mins trying to make sense of the diagram and then theres the additional load of info that you have to read and grasp. Me too i feel lik you, i cant understand why they put such a lengthy question. We hv 3.15mins n not 4hrs!
Its seems to be a factoring arrangement from a general viewpoint, but i dont know hw to account for itHi, I sat the exam remote on 9th Dec – I got the football club question. I lost connection after 2 hours and my only option is to resit on Wednesday the 15th. Has anyone done this before? I am just wondering, would I be wise to focus on the questions other people received as stated in comments above, or will this be a completely unseen exam ? I would be grateful for any info. Tnx
Like many of the posters here, I too came out of the exam with the mindset that I need to prepare to resit.
Seeing the footballer responses has me even more concerned, as I have treated it as an IA. I considered lease, but the fact that FC Grate would not stop him from leaving if he wanted to join another club inferred to me that they didn’t “control” the player. Furthermore they subtly threw in the comments about him “likely being fit” at the end of his contract (inferring no impairment)
Having looked at football club balance sheets, this looks similar to the way in which they account for players (big sign on fee, up front cost to club, later paying deferred consideration, plus wages to player)
Is there any particular reason why people went for lease rather than IA?
I also went for IA.
There are a couple of questions I came across when studying that referred to football players as intangibles.
I’ve also seen an article from the PQ magazine too.
Whichever is correct or not, I think you’d still get some credit for explaining why we thought what we did.I was also considering going for IA as in Kaplan exam kit there was a similar question with football players. However, I treated it as leasing as there was information that first 3 years of the contract it was a loan instead of sale.
After the team decide to buy the player, then it would be treated as intangible asset. Although it may be wrong and correct treatment should be IA from the begining
In that footballer question, there was a line at the end which said something like:
“Interest costs are currently 5%. This may help with your solution”The presence of interest rates, indicated to me that PV discounting was necessary which of course would be a PV liability for a lease I thought.
I thought about the discount rate but believed this to be in relation to the salary, as the salary is a contractual liability, it should be recorded on the SOFP at inception.
Guess we will find out soon! Good luck all.
Fully expecting a fail, just wish I knew the result now to be put out of my misery lol
- The topic ‘*** December 2021 ACCA SBR exam – Instant Poll and comments ***’ is closed to new replies.