- This topic has 4 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 12 years ago by
.
- Posts
Hi,
Im looking at chapter 1 in the latest Kaplan book for P2 and confused.
In one example(Pauline) the group structure is that the Parent has 75% of subsidiary and 30% of associate.
In the W2 Net assets, they calculate both the subsidary and the associate.
In a later example(Borough) ,the group structure is that the Parent has 60% of subsidiary and 30% of associate.
In the W2 Net assets, they calculate just the subsidiary
How can this be right? What should I be doing?
This whole book seems to be so long-winded and really hard to get my head around anything. Seriously considering not turning up for exam in June and starting fresh with BPP for December!
I found the same – I tried both BPP and Kaplan. In the end I just listened to Mike’s videos on this site. His workings are a bit different from the Kaplan workings ( I can’t now remember what the BPP workings were like ) but I know I found Mike’s way easier than either of the approved publishers
As for long-winded!! I’m looking at Kaplan’s F6 study text and wondering how I’m going to even start to get through it – it’s over 900 pages long.
In fact, as I write this, I’m pretty much resolved to just listening to the tax tutor on opentuition
Well, I don’t have the book, but can conclude some reasons:
1)No longer associate, either:
#Disposed
#Other shareholders intervened that diluted your holding, or significant influence lost
#Indeed no significant influence, even though held 30%(rare case)2)Different method of calculation, for example, few things to adjust, so working shown directly on the line of the figure in the financial statement, so don’t worry
Actually I don’t know how kaplan presented because I used to the bpp style of presentation. Anyway, I hope I can help you
I think it’s included for completeness in Pauline & Sonia as it’s an example question. In Borough, High, Street, it isn’t required as it gives the retained earnings figures for Street, which is all you need to work out the group share rather than having a net assets calculation.
Something else you’ll find with Kaplan is that there’s a quite a few typos in the text and in the workings to answers, so you’ll come across things in their workings like 20% x $100,000 = $10,000
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.