Forums › ACCA Forums › ACCA ATX Advanced Taxation Forums › *** P6 June 2014 Exam was.. Instant Poll and comments ***
- This topic has 47 replies, 22 voices, and was last updated 10 years ago by bogle.
- AuthorPosts
- June 6, 2014 at 9:11 am #174546June 6, 2014 at 5:07 pm #174719
its wasnt one of the best P6 exams was it?
June 6, 2014 at 5:08 pm #174721Started with question 3 and 4 and was feeling confident, got to 2, not so bad but not great, then question 1 a just threw me, that was pretty complicated. Hopefully picked up a few marks in the written part though
June 6, 2014 at 5:11 pm #174723That’s exactly how I felt carl29
June 6, 2014 at 5:12 pm #174724AnonymousInactive- Topics: 0
- Replies: 4
- ☆
did not understand question 1 at all. glad i attempted this last. rest of paper was passable. q1 was an unincorporated company… didnt really get the difference in the two disposal options suggested. both were selling the assets?? or not? 🙂
June 6, 2014 at 5:15 pm #174728I felt compared to the rest of the paper, and past papers I have looked at, question one was asking a lot for 17 marks. I have to say, compared to P4, P6 does feel like one of the lower papers, no wonder there was loads of students in my hall today compared to a handful doing P4 on tuesday
June 6, 2014 at 5:17 pm #174730Question 1 very very difficult, on the whole very hard. Expecting to resit in December 🙁
June 6, 2014 at 5:18 pm #174732for question 3, part a) it asked for implications for the employees regarding the childcare. I wrote about the child care exempt benefits, like it is 55 pounds for basic rate tax payer. Is it correct??
June 6, 2014 at 5:23 pm #174736AnonymousInactive- Topics: 0
- Replies: 2
- ☆
I spent ages working out question 2 based on 5 associates and getting the profits under the marginal rate. Had a great answer then re-read the question to see they were all 23% companies.
Absolute waste of time!
Threw me for the last 2 questions!
Will deff be re-sitting.
June 6, 2014 at 5:29 pm #174743Yeah childcare is up to 55 a week. I got roughly that the staff would be about 26 a week better off on the whole. I can’t remember what the other bits were
June 6, 2014 at 5:30 pm #174745part 1 the biggest problem was getting your head round the scenario. Then there was a timing difference due to the cessation of trade.
1st Jan 2015 OR 30th April 2015. The 30th April taxable in 15/16 and 1st Jan 14/15, there was also additional income due to the 4 months (29k)
Also they asked you to calculate trading profit from 1st May 2013 which was slightly odd as you could work in the margin and just calculate the difference in closing tax cost.
Disposing of assets, entrepreneur relief was claimable. You needed to add assumptions such as it was a trading company etc etc, I didn’t do this part well.
Again the IHT question requried some thought, BPR was available (you had to state conditions or assumptions) if he died while business was still owned. If business was sold and then father died afterwards then it become a PET with taper relief etc
Question 2 I found tricky, but do-able. The loss relief was tricky.
I used carry forward loss relief of 68k for offsetting 41k leaving 27k carry forward.
Then offsetting the loss against current year income and gains.
The diposal of the sub qualified for SSE as over 10% ownership for more than 12 months in the 2 years before disposal.
on to part B – i think and there was a question about the timing of diposal. Proceeds being 80k for 1st Oct diposal and 100k for April i think disposal date. The key point here is that SSE will still be available within 2 years of the original diposal but not over a year or 2 years, something along those lines.
I chose question 4 and 5 and thought they were tricky but do-able.
June 6, 2014 at 5:31 pm #17474623% companies? What? I did it first at 100% ownership for all.of them, did this great answer with marginal relief implications, brought them all down to below the lower limit etc.. then realised they were not all 100% owned, then made a mess in my answer book
June 6, 2014 at 5:35 pm #174747childcare allowance for lower rate is £55 per week or higher rate £28 per week. There may have also been a child care benefit charge if anyone earned over £50k, i didn’t chose this question but know that the £50k is something new to the sylabus.
I think for me one of the hard things I find about tax is that you have to carry on, even when you know that you have not done the question correctly. The rules can be so tricky and tiny changes in scenario can mean a different situation arises (dates of death/gift being a good example of this)
How did people find question 1 and 2 overall?
June 6, 2014 at 5:37 pm #174749AnonymousInactive- Topics: 0
- Replies: 2
- ☆
Yeah that’s what I meant Carl.
Worked out all taxes to make sure they didn’t pay at marginal rates, to see they all paid CT at 23% anyway.
June 6, 2014 at 5:39 pm #174751where was the SSE in question 2??. As I remember the holding disposed was just 5%.
June 6, 2014 at 5:42 pm #174754Ahhh budddy, read the question. Examiner only asked for explanation and calculation of the use of losses and carry forward loss.
So you should have first worked out which groups existed and then calculated any gains/losses on disposals then any trading adjustments such as Binni being only 10 month accounting period and being acquired 31st December so only 78,000/10*3 = 23,400 profit being able to be group relieved.
I didn’t do so well on this question BUT the good thing is there are a lot of marks just for ploughing through and coming up with an answer.
June 6, 2014 at 5:56 pm #174761AnonymousInactive- Topics: 0
- Replies: 19
- ☆
In Q2 i believe the SSE applied to the initial disposal of the shares when they had 17% (12% was disposed of? If i remember correctly) so there was no gain there.
Then in part 2 or whatever it was, where you could dispose now or in the next accounting year, i put it wanted you to calculate how much you could dispose of now and save some tax and then dispose of the rest next year. Think i calculated like a 4k saving…
June 6, 2014 at 6:13 pm #174770AnonymousInactive- Topics: 0
- Replies: 4
- ☆
Question 1 got me as i couldnt map out the timings and how they affected the question but i think the issue is about cessation of business and continuing the business. The timings also affected the rate which Ziti (I think was the name) was classed as. Higher rate tax or lower rate tax person.
IHT was not my strong point again due to the dates and the fact that his dad Riti was not dead so we had to guess what happens. The date were also soo bad that it was like keep him alive until july when the 7 years are up and you can claim the PET is tax free.
but main thing i did mention was taper relief.
Quick one for Q1, was the 6k expenditure for new equipment fully allowed due to AIA? and also the question said no equipment was greater than 6k in cost or sales, does that mean all equipment was classed as cheap chattels?
Anyways Q2 was a mess, i could describe the different groups and so on but i could not visualize it once i got writing the profit share and distributions. The profits are the profits for the company and not the parents share off which is P2. but i had it in my mind to reduce and how everything based on the parent. This is what caught me for a good 15 minute before i moved on.
Only thing i would say is that the holding in company Viere??? was original 17% before selling 12% during the year. Im not sure how SSE works when you split your trades but the two dates were exactly stretching two periods. one period when in the last 2 years it owned >10% and one when it owned less than 2 years.
Oh my one other contribution was that for Binni i also flexed the tax limits further to refect the fact it had only been trading for 10 months not 12 so upper and lower limits shrank to 250k.
After that i did q4 and q5 which i thought was reasonble but i question how much i write in them as answers as my answers do not look like they justify 5 marks each.
June 6, 2014 at 8:23 pm #174846AnonymousInactive- Topics: 0
- Replies: 19
- ☆
You’re never going to believe this – my watch slowed (finally stopped just before the end) during the exam!! And the exam hall is massive so from the back I couldn’t read the clock!!
I asked the time, he said “25 past”, but I assumed that was 11:25, not 12:25!!! As it didn’t feel like I’d been in the exam that long!!
Argh, I was thinking I’d timed it really well, leaving a 1hr for the last two questions, when really there was only 15mins left!!’
Soooo frustrating, I’m the sort of person that brings two calculators into the exam – I’ve never worried about needing two watches!!!!
I may have scrambled together 10 marks tops for questions 4 & 5 (if I’m lucky). I can only hope that I did well enough for q 1&2 to get a pass.
Sounds like it was a tough exam for all, and from the comments I seem to have faired OK on q 1&2,
I’m expecting to re-sit, but if I pass it’ll be a miracle/ happy bonus.
Ggggrrrrr!!! Soo annoyed!!
June 6, 2014 at 8:35 pm #174849AnonymousInactive- Topics: 0
- Replies: 19
- ☆
In the group CT question, did anyone spot that V was a consortium?
Also, L was only 85% owned by R, and R was 80% owned by Opus). Does that mean that it’s outside of the loss group as the ownership between O and L is 80% x 85% = 68% <75%. ?
Therefore there would be a loss group of O,A,R,B but another loss group of R and L.
OR
I don’t know my loss group rules and it all counted as one big group??????
Please put me out of my misery! I’m away all weekend and don’t have my notes to hand!!!
June 6, 2014 at 8:47 pm #174854AnonymousInactive- Topics: 0
- Replies: 19
- ☆
V was a consortium, 17% for 6 months and 5% for 6 months, does this mean 12% across the year or we can only loss relieve 5%? Ive not seen that before, i went for 12%.
Also yeah i got that R and L was a capital gains group but L was not able to have any losses relieved vs its profit leaving it at 75k profit in the year (its gains could be offset vs the losses carried forward in the capital gains group?).
Also how many associates are in the group? I said 6 but ive seen 5 mentioned earlier on. Ive looked in my notes and i still think 6 but now im not sure.
June 6, 2014 at 8:55 pm #174855AnonymousInactive- Topics: 0
- Replies: 19
- ☆
The question said there were loads of overseas associates which effectively would reduce the limits to virtually nil, so use 23% tax rate throughout.
June 6, 2014 at 9:04 pm #174860AnonymousInactive- Topics: 0
- Replies: 19
- ☆
Im not so sure. Ive seen a past question similar where the term “loads” didnt really matter, we calculated the limits based on the associates given to us. The question asked for “any extra info needed” i think we needed to ask about the extra associates.
June 6, 2014 at 9:09 pm #174862AnonymousInactive- Topics: 0
- Replies: 3
- ☆
Q 1 was difficult and also 2 was bit complicated due to mess up in associates. I feel both theory and revision needs. I failed in the latter therefore didn’t have time. I relied on kaplan but feel this time I should move to BPP. ANY IDEA?
June 6, 2014 at 9:14 pm #174863AnonymousInactive- Topics: 0
- Replies: 19
- ☆
Im not sure Kaplan would be to blame for a fail. I think the examiner was a little harsh this time, the December exam was a nicer paper. Q1 was something out of the ordinary and I feel Q2 was a harder group relief question than we have been used to. Also this was the first exam ive seen in a while where very few marks were attributable to capital gains reliefs.
- AuthorPosts
- The topic ‘*** P6 June 2014 Exam was.. Instant Poll and comments ***’ is closed to new replies.