- This topic has 1 reply, 2 voices, and was last updated 7 years ago by
MikeLittle.
- AuthorPosts
- November 14, 2017 at 5:12 am #415641
What will be reported as NCI on the consolidated SOFP as at 30 9 2014?
the answer is 9700000
at first, i need to write down some relevant information to get NCI based on the answer sheet. i have no idea why the answer sheet uses the difference of depreciations in transferred PPE to get NCI.
………………..Penfold……………….superted
PPE 345000 141000NCI@DOA 7.2M
iv) Penfold sold an item of plant to Superted on 1 4 2014 for $25 M when its carrying amount was $20M. It had a remaining useful life of 3 years at this date.
My working below
before……………..at the transfer…………….difference
20M…………………..25M
(2M)…………………..(2.5M)
18M……………………22.5M…………………….4.5MDR CRE 4.5M
CR PPE 4.5MSubsidiary post acquisition
……………acq……………….reporting…………….post.
sc…………15000………………15000
sp…………..2000……………….2000
Re……………0……………………12000…………..12000NCI working(20%)
NCI@doa…….7200
post…………….2400
…………………..9600.i think my working is perfect under what i learn from you and text books.
now i start ot write down what the answer sheet explains to me.
>>
In answer sheets,
The sale of the plant from Penfold to Superted requires an adjustment to the depreciation
charge recorded within the accounts of Superted. The increase in value of $5M will result in an additional depreciation charge of $0.5M($5 *1/5*6/12) to be reversed as part of the PURP adjustment. The NCI’s share of this is $0.5M*20%=0.1MTherefore 7.2+2.4+0.1= 9.7
Sir, i don’t understand why they add the difference of depn between them to NCI calculation….
now i’m using the Kaplan text book that is the most recent version, but in the previous version, the answer is 9.6M but in this new version the answer is different
November 14, 2017 at 6:23 am #415645Wow! Unless the rules have recently been reversed, it would seem that the recent Kaplan answer could be wrong
But I’m very hesitant to suggest that that may be so
It USED to be the case that the pup on the sale was adjusted in the seller’s records whilst the depreciation on the pup was adjusted in the buyer’s records
But then it changed about 3 / 4 / 5 years ago (I can’t remember how long ago but it was relatively recent) and the NET pup was adjusted in the seller’s records
It seems, if Kaplan is correct, that matters have changed back but until I have positive news about this I’m going to say that Kaplan is wrong in their answer
OK?
- AuthorPosts
- The topic ‘NCI’ is closed to new replies.