- This topic has 2 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 7 years ago by MikeLittle.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Instant Poll - Read and post comments:
Specially for OpenTuition students: 20% off BPP Books for ACCA & CIMA exams – Get your BPP Discount Code >>
Dear Mike, there was a question in May I couldn’t find the asnwere to. I have the same question. Could you pls explain it?: Thank you!
sorry to keep bothering you. Quick question:
In Ex 3 we do 2 goodwill calulation M in D and M in V (parent in subsidiary1 and parent in subsidiary 2)
But in Ex4 we do 3 goodwill cacalculatios, A in K, A in L (and then a 3rd one which seems inconsistent with Ex3 method) K in L. Why do we need this 3rd goodwill calculation and why dont we need it in Ex3? Something to do with dates of purchase?
(I must have overlooked this different treatment part first time around)
reading it again – is it that both a) A in L and b) K in L are both goodwill of A in L (same as the case in Ex 3 with M in V). They are separated in Ex 4 simply account for for direct investment of A in L in a) A in L schedule?
Yes, I think is from memory. It’s because there is that direct holding of Anda in Liene
Anda has two lots of direct goodwill, one in Liene 8% and another in Kristina 70%. But she also has some indirect goodwill in Liene through Kristina