- This topic has 47 replies, 22 voices, and was last updated 10 years ago by
.
- Posts
All in all it was a strange exam.
In Q1, I think I did okay enough but I’m not sure. I got different IT liabilities for the two different types of disposals but the same CGT liability for both which is worrying me because that’s weird. But I structured it well enough so hopefully I’ll get some marks there. In the first disposal scenario the basis period was the cessation period and the year before the cessation period and I relieved the 6000 equipment bought against AIA and I’m not sure whether I should have done that or not.
b) of the question wasn’t too bad. Before 2015, BPR applied, afterwards, it didn’t but taper relief came into play.
Q2. I completely missed out on the SSE exemption even though I knew the rules full well! I did manage to latch on to the consortium bit but then I missed out on the 17% for the 6 months and 5% for the next 6 months. For the newly acquired subsidiary my profit was 31200 or 32100 or something. I think it was acquired on Dec 1.
Since I missed out on the SSE, part b sucked. Didn’t attempt it. Didn’t even spend time on it which was a good thing cause as it turned out I was really short on time.
Part c) was easy enough. Ethics blah blah and some procedure.
Attempted Q3 and Q5.
Q3 a) It qualified for the scheme but the genius that I am I laid down the conditions, stated that the conditions were being satisfied and then said it was not qualifying for the scheme. shoot me.
The rest of the Q3 wasn’t too bad.
Q5. Can anyone tell me if there was some trick to the roll over on the machine or was it straight forward? Cause I have a feeling that there was something to it that I missed.
last part was the beneficial interest thing. It’s a taxable benefit for the employee but what about the company? I deducted it from interest income 😀
Before I went through the posts, I had lost 12.5 marks. but now with the SSE thing that I missed and the 17% and then 5%, I think I may have lost some more.
Just hope I get 50. I’ve already failed this once at 49 :/
The rollover on the Cara machine, the way I saw it was
13k gain rolled over,
Cost was 94k
Proceeds were 80krollover meant base cost was 94 – 13 = 81k
thus a loss of £1,000,
Company was a close company, loan is subject to 25% charge, which is repayable by HMRC once the director repays the loan. BIK is chargable to the company for the loan at 13.8% NI and the individual has to pay tax on the interest free part at the official rate of interest as the loan is not at market value.
Thats what I put.
Totally missed the consortium bit, quite liked the rent a room bit, that was my favourite part as property is my strong point.
8th August will be results release date
- Topics: 0
- Replies: 19
- ☆
mufakir – Good luck brother, i failed at 49 last time too. I think in Q5 it was a depreciating asset for rollover relief. Im not sure where all the 6 marks came from, but maybe that is worth a couple to talk about that. So i think the gain crystallises on purchase and becomes chargeable on disposal.
- Topics: 0
- Replies: 5
- ☆
Hi, anyone here taking p6 MYS variant?
How do u answer for the
Q1
(a) donation of goods and van
– is it both not deductible and should added back?anything else to talk about?(b) tax issue if independent contractor / employee
– talk about withholding tax for independent contractor? wat else?
– Wat to talk about employee? More than 60days? Not exempted? wat else?
(c) argument for single / separate business
– how do you argue(d) impact of single/separate business
– how to you explain the impact?Q2
(a) export
– wat incentive?(b) manufacturer incur cost for automation
– wat incentive?(c) promoted product, RM100million capital expenditure
– investion tax allowance?(d) tourism,promoted activity , RM10million annual profit, profitable after 3 months
– pioneer status?Q4
(a) compute capital allowance and balancing adjustment
– is it control transfer? So no balancing charge?
– Wat else to talk about? 9marks!(b) stamp duty
– explain wat?(c) impact on disposal of asset on tax estimate/revised estimate
– wat impact on tat?Q5
(a) tax payable for both benefit package
– second package can save tax?(b) Cash available
– first package more cash available?(c) Merits
– first package more cash
– second package save tax
– wat else can talk about?(d) Tax treatment for
– scholarship from company (exempted?)
– rental income (settlement? S65(1) below 21 years old, unmarried)
– part time income when vacancy (taxable?)Q1 – Tough to get into. Longer period spreads it over two tax years for IT.
Different types of disposal – first is just the building so no ER, second is whole business so ER available. Equipment covered by capital allowances in both cases and balancing charge in income tax.
b) IHT not too bad if identified when taper relief changes.Q2 – Looks like everyone approached this differently! All companies full rate, can’t relieve one in full by group relief unless defer other loss b/f. So I took the tax planning point to be restrict the WDA to reduce CY loss to just what can be used. As a c/f loss can only be used internally and that co wouldn’t be profitable in the future. One co was only 10 months – noticed someone said only acquired on 31 Dec, missed that bit!
SSE available on the sale of shares if they sell on first date but not on the second. Slight after tax benefit on the second date but not a lot for a possible increase of share price.
Q4 – PPR relief restriction on the tennant.
UK domicile for IHT so that spouse legacy not restricted.
Residue of estate calc straight forward.Q5 – Cara machine was rolled over gain on a depreciating asset. Therefore the gain rolled over crystalizes rather than reduces new asset base cost. New asset is just a balancing charge as pool balance was nil.
Dividend v bonus not too bad.
VAT flat rate scheme – I explained system but said it wasn’t available due to some exempt supplies, think that was wrong!Tough paper overall!
- Topics: 0
- Replies: 4
- ☆
q2 and V i dont think was classed as a consortium as the question said some one else not related to the the holding company already owned 75% share holding. If some one else owns 75% that would effectively mean they have full rights to the passing losses downwards as they would be in a loss group
as for associates, i messed up and missed the fact that they said the overseas businesses mean it was contently a higher rate tax payer.
For q5, the investment was in a depreciating asset so i calmed hold over relief instead of roll over relief so it meant crystallizing gain if you replaced, obsolete or 10 year after purchase. since it was being “replaced” the 13k crystallized to pay. the other comment i picked up on was that the WDA for all assets was set to nil. not sure if this is correct but i assumed all benefits relating to the asset had been taken before and so the loss was in fact a gain as the there was no cost to be asset. i then took it as lower of cost vs net reliseable value and took that amount as being the gain to calculate on.
- Topics: 0
- Replies: 19
- ☆
Oh well, hey ho. See you lucky ones in 6 months time for the resit.
There goes my golden ‘first time passes’ record….
🙁
- Topics: 0
- Replies: 3
- ☆
My advice is to keep on revising the subject till anyone gets results. I am hoping to move to BPP not because kaplan was that bad but would like to know if someone had gone through both. (Do you think BPP IS BETTER?)So I can get a better insight into theory by BPP. One thing I must tell P7 was much easier when I did last time and got managed to pass, without much effort despite low global pas rates.
- Topics: 0
- Replies: 19
- ☆
microsin – You may well be right on the consortium relief. Did the other company definitely hold 75%? If that is the case then this question is very tough and very confusing – theres a capital gains group, restricted loss, an associate joining mid way through the year with a 10 month accounting period and then what looks to be a consortium but isnt – just an associate which i presume isnt part of any group. Very hard to get your head around in such a pressured situation. Working it all out – or trying to- put serious time pressure on me.
Q1: I Calculated Adjusted Trading profits by deducting Capital allowances
1st option,I think Basis period should be performed as it is a sole properterior ..( Cessation Rules applied)
VAT Cant arise for 2nd option if bussiness is transferring on a going concern.I think this is the info which is needed from ziti.
CGT will be arise for building but not for Equipment because less than 6000 chattle exempt
CGT rollover will be chargeable as the bussiness asset going to sell to other partyQ2:
75% Group loss relief …I think order of loss relieving on oplher then Binni( Profit apportioned according to the period 4/10) then ribe and other one ( dont remmeber the name)
Slabs divided by associated companiesCGT will arise on the sale of Shares in V
Error in Return will be result into interest charge from the error date to the correction date
IF company not disclose the matter then if HMRC after sometimes find the error then action against directors can be made by HMRC depending on the Error Intention.
Q4:
B) CGT will be reduced as Property was a Principle residential property for the Charloit and this resulting into PPR relief..
PPR relief available on the date of presence and Deemed absences
A)Rent a room relief lower of :
Normal computation Rent reliefCan somebody tell me whether i wrote correct or wrong
I didnt write whole answers just summary or a trailer of answer 😀
- Topics: 0
- Replies: 4
- ☆
jackbailey02, i think it was in the notes which stood out for me as it mention V and mentioned 75% subsidiary. i cant remember the wording but it just sounded to much like a key note my lecturer kept on pointing out when we brought up the subject of 75% held by one company.
The notes system didn’t help me that much as i was jumping a lot between number notes and letter requirements. i could be wrong as i was scanning for consortium as an automatic calculation i had to try and find.
one thing i dont like about p6 is that it had sooo many pages to connect. even in classes it was that much but the lecturer broke it down to bite size chunks. think its good but i was not prepared for the exam from a volume perspective. I prob ended up reading the same passage 5 times and still didnt understand the nature of the businesses.
right you are. for consortium the company needs to own less than 75%. not equal to or less than, but less than. so it wasn’t a consortium. and there goes another few marks. this forum is damaging to my health right now :/ i am down to 81/100 right now from all the mistakes i think i’ve definitely made. so that leaves me 30 marks for mistakes i am in the dark about. i think this paper’s going to be a tight squeeze if i pass. just gonna pray now 😀
for consortium, “Companies” not individuals must own more than 5% and less than 75%” each I think i read somewhere that the ownership of one company cannot be more than 50% please don’t quote me on that/
Regarding the question Opus Ltd owned 5% and the other company which name was not given owns 75%
Another part that caught me off guard was the calculate the profit from may 2013 for question 1.
Was it 1st December or 31st??
Overall what are people’s thoughts, tricky exam? Too much knowledge focus OR too little but a lot of focus on technical ability.
- Topics: 0
- Replies: 1
- ☆
Question 1 was difficult due to time pressure it was very difficult to manage on time.
Question 2 was average for time pressure point of view but it take 5 to 7 minutes extra and some part remain un attended, which create difficulty for rest of the paper.
Question 4 and question 5 were reason able and i attempt these two first. I hope I shall pass P6 this time.- Topics: 0
- Replies: 5
- ☆
It was my second attempt and it was very tricky this time. It was more on how you apply the rule in different situations.
I thought this exam was very difficult.
With the question (4, I think) about the rent a room relief etc, for the IHT part, I put that as there was a specific gift of property to the daughter, this gift had to be grossed up as the residue of the estate passed to his spouse (and was therefore exempt from IHT).
Thus, the tax due on the gift of land reduced the amount available for his spouse.
Does that sound right?
Q1 – Not great.
Q2 – Unmitigated disaster.
Q3 – Not great
Q4 – OKBefore I sat this I had two exams left. I think I’ll still have two left in December.
- The topic ‘*** P6 June 2014 Exam was.. Instant Poll and comments ***’ is closed to new replies.