Wiley Incorrect Again?!?! Answer contradicts NINJA (who is never wrong!)

  • Creator
    Topic
  • #172762
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    I’m going through the Business Structure MCQs in Wiley 2012 testbank and found a conflicting answer to what is in the NINJA notes.

    Question ID: BSTR-0034

    R has agreed to purchase stock of J corp. Which of the following types of consideration or value is (are) sufficient to purchase this stock?

    I. Services already performed by R.

    II. Services promised by R to be performed at a later date

    III. Negotiable promissory note to pay cash.

    Wiley says I, II and III. However, I answered I only, because the NINJA REG Notes say cash, property and prior services performed are valid consideration. BUT promises to pay or perform services is not valid.

    Anyone else catch this?

Viewing 3 replies - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
  • Author
    Replies
  • #357909
    jeff
    Keymaster

    This bugged me, so I spent a good 45 minutes researching this.

    I believe Wiley is correct. Future services used to not be valid consideration, but now many states (including Delaware Corps) are allowing the flexibility.

    Nice job – you're the first person in 2 years to spot this.

    I will change the ninjas…appreciate the heads-up.

    AUD - 79
    BEC - 80
    FAR - 76
    REG - 92
    Jeff Elliott, CPA (KS)
    NINJA CPA | NINJA CMA | NINJA CPE | Another71
    #357910
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    THANK YOU Jeff for the follow up, I really appreciate it. And now I will definitely remember this for the exam!

    #357911
    posty
    Member

    I just ran into this problem too and wondered the same thing. Good thing I saw this thread. Thanks Chup and Jeff!

    FAR - 78 (10/3/11)
    AUD - 83 (11/28/11)
    REG - 70 (4/7/12), 84 (7/31/12)
    BEC - 75! (5/31/12)
    Ethics - 98

    DONE

Viewing 3 replies - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.