- This topic has 3 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 7 years ago by
.
- Posts
Hi
I was wondering if I could ask-
in the ZED group question (sept dec 2016) the answer says that there is a ROMM for the 50% shareholding in WTC depending on whether it is treated as a joint venture or not. (ie if there is joint control or not).
If there is not joint control would that mean either-
1 the client has control, so it should be consolidated, or
2 the other party has control, so it should be treated with equity accounting, which is the same treatment as for a joint venture.
So the risk is not that the client doesnt have joint control, because that would mean the same treatment and therefore no ROMM, but that the other party has control, because then it should be consolidated , which would be a ROMM?Your logic seems right to me: if you don’t have control at 50% you presumably have significant influence and are dealing with an associate.
However, Kim is away until Saturday and I’m covering for her. Your question might be above my pay-grade, if you could repost on Saturday, the Oracle will answer you herself!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.