SBRJune 2021 ACCA SBR exam was - Instant Poll and comments

Yes the government grant and also it had IAS 37 contingent asset as well. Can't be recognized in the FS until virtually certain and it said that the government had not confirmed about the increase for them therefore it shouldn't be recognized. Also felt that the purchased rights belonged to intangible assets as it had met the recognition criteria for an intangible

The one about the emission rights, and levy. I think the 3rd Q depending on what paper you got

Is that in the UK variant? I cant remember this question?

barbadoshk wrote:I had this q3 in INT paper, think I also mentioned it was an adj event as the bad weather happened in the year, and if considered material it should be disclosed in the notes.

A contingent asset should only be recognized if it is virtually certain and disclosed if it's probable. But since the government hadn't said anything about it thought we should ignore the contingent asset and therefore should recognize what they had initially recognised as a contingent asset

Q1 share based payment I don't think it was the 10m from old scheme I gnored old scheme and calculated the cost of new scheme they promised but as it vested over one year wasn't sure if full cost is just due on acquisition. Although discounted for 1 year. For the deferred tax liability I added on to net assets as they overvalued the liability but the brought forward losses aren't an asset as company was loss making even though acquirer could utilise. No idea if either is right.

For the share scheme. The difference between new and original scheme should be apportioned over the the time already vested by the higher of (total vesting period or time vested + remaining vesting period) the answer to this is part of the consideration. The answer is taken away from new scheme value and balance is expensed in p&l. I did this except I forgot that the amount to be apportioned was difference of new and old. I apportioned new scheme value instead. While I was doing the question I knew I was missing a step but really just couldn't think. I checked a similar question when I got home.

Sounds like you guys answered all the questions better than me. Respect for that :) I find it so unfair that I (we) study so much and they question on so little, including topics that are not really covered. The 10 mins for a question that's worth 6 marks when you need to read the text and then decide what standard to use and then apply the standard ina correct way feels so little. Makes it so hard to get the 50 marks. So disheartening :(

that replacement share scheme triggered me, for consideration calculation, i used 10m FV ( at acquisition) / 3 ( 2 original scheme+1 yr extended) *2 ( vested at the acquisition date) = 6.7m. was this correct?

I think it should be new FV (can't remember the amount) less the 10m x 2/3. I'm not sure though and I wasn't sure whether to divide by 3 or 4 as 4 was the original vesting period and the higher amount but I went with 3.

the new scheme less the acquisition consideration, is that not supposed to be the balance of the replacement scheme, only a year left so should be expensed to P&L? I think it's very similar like the Q Luploid on exam kit, consideration on Luploid was calculated at FV at acquisition / total years * years vested... I could be wrong... ehh lol should stop think of the exam now, it is too late lol

In the CSPL how did you allocate the profit I got the profit as 2 775 (11*(3/12)) Profit to parent = 2.08 (2.775*0.75) To NCI = 0.69 (2.775*0.25) I wasn't sure if they had already included the depreciation or not so I just mentioned it while explaining

I think it was a sale given the requirement in the second question to demonstrate the accounting treatment for the sale and the fact that the lease period was not almost equal to the asset life and the legal title of the documents was handed to the buyer-lessor.

Oh I think you are right. old scheme x 2/3 = X and then X is taken from new value leaving Y and Y is expensed. Haha I used the incorrect amount to apportion but did expense the balance. Then I checked a question when I came home and I confused myself even more haha.

lol that deferred tax on acquisition totally thew me off... were u also studying in AS with Liam? if u were, such a small world :) lol

Yes I was studying with Liam too! He is very good, just hope I did enough to pass. ATX after this and then I'm done. Are you doing another one with AS?

wow such a small world :) can't believe it, we were classmates! yes i have booked SBL study in AS with Shane for sep exam, Dec will do ATX. fingers crossed for us, hopefully we will pass the SBR,and happy study! :)

So funny. I'll be in the December ATX class, they don't do it in September. I wanted to leave tax till last because it was my best in the F levels and wanted to end on one of my stronger ones. I completed SBL in March with Shane! So many exhibits compared to SBR. It was very much exam technique and time management. Best of luck with SBR results and I'll "see" you in class for ATX haha

Hi, anyone remember what was Q3 on in the UK sbr paper, the paper with share based payment and differed tax liability in question one. Tanks for any replies.

I got the same. But 2,3,4 was manageable. Im loosing 30 marks for sure.

I thought it was sale as it was sold for an amount higher than fair value; control has been transferred

They were operating under a tax jurisdiction which allows group relief of losses. Also, the parent company has sufficient profit to cover the loss; so i believe that deferred tax should be calculated despite the subsidiary not being profit making.

ak2401 wrote:The shared based payment bit was tricky in question 1.

i got this $14.4m too. i then found the difference with the original FV of $10m; i took $4.4m as post acquisition remuneration and the $10m as part of the consideration. Hope we get it right

Emszylou wrote:For the share scheme. The difference between new and original scheme should be apportioned over the the time already vested by the higher of (total vesting period or time vested + remaining vesting period) the answer to this is part of the consideration. The answer is taken away from new scheme value and balance is expensed in p&l.

Could you please direct me to a similar question re the share-based issue?

I didn't even get time to attempt this question. One of the requirements for this question was also around fair value and an active market. Do you remember any other other requirements for Q3?

Hi on the question one, of we did get the purchase consideration and the net assets amount, do we get penalised on the goodwill and the NCI calculation?

@chris777 sorry I made a mistake. Another student showed me it was the old scheme amount to be apportioned. Answer part of consideration and take away from new scheme value , ans is expensed to p&l. The question is called Luploid from sept/Dec 2019 paper

miraji wrote:Hi, anyone remember what was Q3 on in the UK sbr paper, the paper with share based payment and differed tax liability in question one. Tanks for any replies.

For me it was a big chunk on FRS 102. The first part asked about the treatment of a retail unit under FRS 102, which I answered poorly. The second part asked about the impairment of a credit customer under FRS 102. I felt I answered this pretty well, FRS 102 requires objective evidence of impairment. The third part asked about the differences between FRS 102's use of incurred losses vs IFRS ??'s Expected losses. I felt I answered this one reasonably. On a different note, on Q4 I also didn't have a spreadsheet, I managed, but that's a bug, surely?

Q1 - straight forward except for the share based payments (went with $10m consideration and $4.4 million as P&L loss for the year) and the deferred tax asset obligation (I deducted the NCI portion from the net assets). Q2 - Computer parts had to be depreciated separately, which I did at half rates because I skipped and didn't have time to think of anything else when I came back to it. Ethics on crypto, focused on GDPR, reputational risk, chief accountant pressure and self dealing. Q3 - Focused on how intangibles for tech companies are worth way more to investors than what they're allowed to be recognised as, as well as management commentary and metrics to fill in the gaps. Balance sheets especially aren't comparable. For the Deferred revenue I just recognised as performed (domestic in first years and both in final two). Q4 - it was a sale because rights and obligations of ownership were transferred. Did my best with lease accounting. On all - ran out of time, which is unusual for me but this was my first strategic exam.

ExpatDave wrote:Q1 – straight forward except for the share based payments (went with $10m consideration and $4.4 million as P&L loss for the year) and the deferred tax asset obligation (I deducted the NCI portion from the net assets).

Hello David. It seems like I was reading my own answers. I also mentioned about GDPR! Considered it was sale in the q4. And did depreciation in q2. I woke up this morning and only now reimbursed what I did in q2. Thank you for your share! You put a bit of confidence in me.

Hi did anyone get the a streaming website as the Q4 which included research and production costs and also the platform was on a lease or something which wanted us to discuss about digital company and manufacturing company