- This topic has 1 reply, 2 voices, and was last updated 5 years ago by .
Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Interactive BPP books for June 2026 exams, recommended by OpenTuition.
Get discount code >>
Hello Sir, I would like to ask if the parties are deemed not to be related ,will the RPT still can arise? if no related relationship, why the transaction between them still will need to consider whether it is related party transaction?
for reference the examiner answer in Mar/June 2016 Q3 (c) Emcee :
“IAS 24 deems that parties are not related simply because they have a director or key manager in common. In this case, there are two directors in common and it appears as though the entities are not related. However, the Regulator will need to establish whether the sponsorship deal is a related party transaction (RPT) for the purpose of the financial control provisions. There would need to be demonstrated that the airline may be expected to influence, or be influenced by, the club or a related party of the club.”
In most cases a related party transaction is demonstrated by share ownership or membership of key management.
The examiner is implying that it may exist in certain other circumstances if there is evidence of influence or control. I would not get stressed about this.
