IAS-38

"my question is. all of the 3 criteria should meet to record asset OR any one of these?" ????? Do you mean 3 or should that be 6? The answer, whatever you meant, is that ALL criteria should be met

sorry . 6. its a typing error.

mike. in Scitech question. one of the competitor is launching his products in market 6 month before our company product. our products are still in research and development stage. whether it affect commercial viabi9lity of our product? please explain how?

I need to see the question - please give me a reference

december 2007 question

Q2a - December 2007 You are the manager responsible for the audit of Sci-Tech Co, a pharmaceutical research company. You are planning the substantive audit procedures to be used in the forthcoming audit of intangible assets and operating expenses. Relevant extracts from the financial statements are as follows: 30 nov 2007 30 nov 2006 (draft) balance sheet $000 $000 intangible assets: development costs cost 2750 2000 accumulated amortisation -1450 -850 ------- ------- 1300 1150 ------- ------- total assets 18500 15000 income statement revenue 4500 3800 operating expenses include: research costs 160 200 amortisation of development costs 600 450 salary expenses 380 400 profit before tax 1800 1530 The following is an extract from the notes to the draft financial statements: ‘Expenditure on product development is capitalised as an intangible asset from the point at which it is probable that future economic benefits will result from the product once completed. Any product development costs which do not meet the above criteria are expensed as incurred as research costs. Two products are currently in the development phase: Medex, an antiseptic cream; and Flortex, a medicine to reduce the symptoms of fever. Amortisation of development costs commences with commercial production, the amortisation period being the estimated life span of the product. Currently two products are being amortised over the following periods: 1. Plummet Cold Cure five years 2. Blingo Cough Cure three years.’ During the initial planning of the audit, the audit senior made the following note on the working papers: ‘Bio-Cert Co is the main competitor of our client. It appears that Bio-Cert Co is developing a rival product to Flortex. This rival product is expected to be launched in June 2008, six months prior to the expected launch of Flortex.’ Sci-Tech Co decided to outsource its payroll function, commencing in June 2007. The service is being provided by ProPay Co, a small local company. All of the accounting records relating to payroll are maintained and kept by ProPay Co. In previous years the audit of salary expenses was performed using a systems based approach with limited substantive procedures. Sci-Tech Co receives funding from governmental health departments, as well as several large charitable donations. This funding represents on average 25% of the company’s research and development annual expenditure. The amount of funding received is dependent on three key performance indicator (KPI) targets being met annually. All three of the targets must be met in order to secure the government funding. Extracts from Sci-Tech Co’s operating and financial review are as follows: kpi target draft kpi 2007 actual kpi 2006 pharmaceutical products donated free of charge to health care charities 1% revenue 0·8% revenue 1·2% revenue donations to, and cost of involvement with, local community charities: 0·5% revenue 0·6% revenue 0·8% revenue accidents in the work place: less than 5 serious accidentsper year 4 serious accidents 2 serious accidents Required: Define ‘outsourcing’ and explain the matters to be considered in planning the audit of salary expense. Note: requirement (a) includes 2 professional marks. (9 marks)

‘Expenditure on product development is capitalised as an intangible asset from the point at which it is probable that future economic benefits will result from the product once completed. Any product development costs which do not meet the above criteria are expensed as incurred as research costs. Two products are currently in the development phase: Medex, an antiseptic cream; and Flortex, a medicine to reduce the symptoms of fever. Amortisation of development costs commences with commercial production, the amortisation period being the estimated life span of the product. Currently two products are being amortised over the following periods: 1. Plummet Cold Cure five years 2. Blingo Cough Cure three years.’ During the initial planning of the audit, the audit senior made the following note on the working papers: ‘Bio-Cert Co is the main competitor of our client. It appears that Bio-Cert Co is developing a rival product to Flortex. This rival product is expected to be launched in June 2008, six months prior to the expected launch of Flortex.’

only this is relevant portion. read this

"mike. in Scitech question. one of the competitor is launching his products in market 6 month before our company product. our products are still in research and development stage. whether it affect commercial viabi9lity of our product? please explain how?" Well, that was a difficult post to read but here's what I think in answer to your question "How may the launch of a competitor's product affect the commercial viability of our own product still in development stage?" A number of possible points spring to mind: 1) instead of finding our own exclusive niche in the market for fever symptom reduction medicine, it looks like we're going to have to share that market with our competitor 2) but we're going to be the ones chasing market share because the competitor's going to be in there first and, with some aggressive marketing, they could well become firmly established before we get launched 3) I could see this as a major reduction in the proposed / anticipated revenues from Flortex to the extent that those revenues may be reduced to a level where profits fail to exceed capitalised development costs 4) the mere existence of a direct rival to our product could cause such a material shift in the projected revenues and profits anticipated from Flortex that commercial viability is now heavily under the microscope 5) if the Sci-Tech directors determine that Flortex is no longer commercially viable (or even simply suspect that it isn't!) then further capitalisation should cease and expenditure on Flortex should be expensed 6) the directors may even decide to abandon the Flortex project in which case all previously deferred expenditure should be immediately written off 7) if the decision is made to continue to develop Flortex, and in so far as the existing balance in Deferred Development Costs relate to Flortex, an assessment should be made as to the likelihood that future revenues will cover that deferred balance and, if not, that too should be impaired down to the level that is projected to be recoverable Does that do it? How many marks was this part worth?

Requirement: part b (i) Explain the matters you should consider to determine whether capitalized development costs are appropriately recognized; (5 marks) (ii) Describe the evidence you would seek to support the assertion that development costs are technically feasible. (3 marks)

thankful to you Mike. but please explain the last point, 7th

The answer I have given relates to part i) only of part b) of the question I assume that you're ok with part ii) If Sci-Tech is going to continue to develop Flortex, the maximum amount available to be capitalised is the estimated revenue from the future sales If the development expenditure so far capitalised exceeds that estimate, we need to impair those capitalised development costs down to the level of assured recovery .... and make sure that n more is capitalised OK?

Mike: Thank you for the flow in your answer.Flow often pose a challenge for me. Could you kindly complete (ii) Describe the evidence you would seek to support the assertion that development costs are technically feasible. (3 marks)

yes mike thankyou so much

"Describe the evidence you would seek to support the assertion that development costs are technically feasible" This is a tricky one and I'm not totally convinced in my own mind that the question makes sense. Surely it's the project, Flortex, that should be technically feasible rather than the "development costs". Sorry to ask this, but are you sure that you have copied the question correctly? However ..... ..... again, from the top of my head, without a lot of thought, you could include: - (you can almost always work in to an answer) board minutes to review the directors' assessment of the current position - market research reports commissioned both before and after the announcement of the competitor product - review of scientific analysis of any tests carried out on Flortex by Sci-Tech's own laboratory (probably unlikely that independent laboratories have been consulted) to confirm that no adverse side-effects have been identified - if any such side-effects have been suspected, determine what action has been taken by Sci-Tech to address that problem and whether the steps taken involve additional costs (this will affect the anticipated profitability of Flortex and could, in an extreme case, result in losses being forecast) - review of the directors' estimated time-scale for the launch of Sci-Tech's Flortex to determent whether it is reasonable and achievable in our view - review the Flortex development budget to confirm that actual expenditure correlates closely with budgeted costs - review previous experience (last and previous years' files) we have seen with reference to management's estimation of time-scales and budgeted expenditure with actual launch dates and costs of previous projects to determine whether management has a history of over-optimism Will that do for you - it's only 3 marks so this is rather more than I could expect to write under time pressure

Thank you..that helps.

You're welcome