- This topic has 2,358 replies, 134 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 6 months ago by
lolo.
-
CreatorTopic
-
March 18, 2016 at 4:43 am #200895
-
AuthorReplies
-
June 5, 2016 at 11:59 pm #765831
MaLoTuParticipantTitleist – here is the explanation … forgive the formatting, but this is where I really got confused. Neither are permanent differences.
—————————————12/31/Year 1———-Change———–12/31/Year 2
Temporary Differences—————$30——————(100)—————–(70)
Tax rate———————————-x30%—————————————x 30%
Deferred tax asset———————–9———————-(9)——————–0
Deferred tax liability———————-0——————–(21)——————(21)
Net deferred tax————————–9———————(30)——————(21)
June 6, 2016 at 12:11 am #765832
So FAR So GoodParticipantI think I remember this question from Becker based on the explanation you copied just now. I had trouble understanding the way they explained it with adding up the deferrals, so I did it this way.
Hopefully this grid shows up aligned:
Taxable Temp Diff Book
$300,000 ———— $300,000
(100,000) 100,000
======= ======= ========
$200,000 $100,000 $300,000
x.30 x.30 x.30
————- ———– —————
$60,000 $30,000*** $90,000***Regardless of what the carried over tax asset or liability is, the tax EXPENSE will always equal to the total book taxable amount. The taxable differences for this year were $100,000 which, taxed at the 30% rate, is $30,000 in deferred tax liability. You will book the following:
Dr. Income tax expense – current portion $60,000
Dr. Income tax expense – deferred portion 30,000
Cr. Income Taxes Payable $60,000
Cr. Deferred Tax Liability 30,000The deferred tax asset is a distraction, and so is the cumulative temporary differences, because the “call of the question” is expense, not deferred amount. If you were to look at it that way, however, you will get to your deferral pretty easily. For instance, the temporary difference for this year is 100,000, but the cumulative temporary difference is 70,000. This must mean that there was a temporary difference of 30,000 from the prior year in the opposite direction (book after tax). That 30,000 multiplied by 30% equals the 9,000 deferred tax asset. If you take that 9,000 deferred tax asset and add the current year $30,000 deferred tax liability, you'll get a net $21,000 deferred tax liability (assuming they can be net as current/non-current).
F - 91 (6/5/2016)
A - 7/30/2016
R - 10/8/2016
B - 12/10/2016June 6, 2016 at 12:13 am #765833
Titleistg0lferParticipantOh okay I see now the full question. In year one there was a 9,000 DTA but in year 2 it should have been a 21,000 DTL and the difference between the two to get to the 21,000 was a 30,000 expense.
REG: 84 (10/5/15)
AUD: 83 (11/23/15)
BEC: 77 (2/27/16) - The bubble sucks
FAR: 90 (7/20/16) - AND DONE FOREVER!!!!!June 6, 2016 at 12:15 am #765834June 6, 2016 at 12:48 am #765835
Titleistg0lferParticipantBecause if you think about it like this such as a t account, a deferred asset is a debit balance and a DTL is a credit balance. To get to the credit balance you have to expense the 30k.
REG: 84 (10/5/15)
AUD: 83 (11/23/15)
BEC: 77 (2/27/16) - The bubble sucks
FAR: 90 (7/20/16) - AND DONE FOREVER!!!!!June 6, 2016 at 1:02 am #765836
MaLoTuParticipantIt still seems like they should net to (12), unless there was an additional 30k expense which would bring us back to 100k difference … So, I guess I was reading it wrong and now I think I understand what So FAR said when he said the asset was a distractor. In year 2 they did have a 100k difference and if you times it by the tax rate you get 30k deferred.
Sorry guys! Thanks for all the help.
June 6, 2016 at 1:09 am #765837
MaLoTuParticipantSo FAR, I just read you FAR experience … I think you are going to make it, but it will be marginal … I did like a little random calculation and even if you missed all 25 (as in they were not pretest), I think you should still get about 39-40 points, so lets hope some of those are pretest and that you did as well as you think on your sims. I am rooting for you! I am not sure what to expect for myself!
How did you get so good at the sims?
June 6, 2016 at 1:19 am #765838
MaLoTuParticipantOMG … This question is asking about Year 1 IS and there is a loss carryback from year 2 … how the heck is one suppose to account for a loss in the future that hasn't happened yet? This may be more of a rant than anything.
June 6, 2016 at 2:01 pm #765839
jonm857ParticipantIf anybody is using Becker… I could use some help…
I'm reading Ch 7 pg 10, and the example shown is the cost method for treasury stock.
I'm good on everything except the last journal entry which shows “reissue below cost”:
Cash ($10,000 X $13) – – – – – 1,300
APIC – T/S – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 200
Retained Earnings – – – – – – – – -500
Treasury Stock (100 X $20) – – – – – – – $2,000How do you determine the amount to debit APIC and Retained Earnings??
Thank you in advance.
B - 81
A - 87
R - 73
F - July 5thJune 6, 2016 at 2:25 pm #765840June 6, 2016 at 2:28 pm #765841
KJParticipant@jonm857..can you post the complete question? I think APIC could be loss from original issue of T/S to the point they were reissued.
FAR - August 2016
AUD - September 2016
REG - October 2016
BEC - November 2016Remember: "Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler." - Albert Einstein
June 6, 2016 at 2:41 pm #765842
MaLoTuParticipant@Jon- I know you said nevermind, but APIC can only be debited to the point that the account was credited with APIC. Then everything beyond that goes to RE.
June 6, 2016 at 4:37 pm #765843
jonm857ParticipantOkay hang on a second… I though I had it grasped but it's still not clicking when I look at it again, so I'm just going to write out the whole page basically. I know this is a quick fix, but that $200 debit to APIC is KILLING me right now. Please help.
– – – – – – – – – — – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
T/S Cost Method1) Original issue
10,000 shares $10 par value common stock sold for $15 per share.Cash – – – – 150,000
Common stock (10,000 x $10 par) – – – 100,000
APIC – C/S – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –50,0002) Buy back above issue price
200 shares were repurchased for $20 per shareTreasury stock (200 x $20) – – – – -4,000
Cash – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 4,0003) Reissue below cost
100 shares repurchased for $20 were resold for $13Cash (100 x $13) – – – – – -1,300
APIC – T/S – – – – – – – – – – 200
Retained earnings – – – – – 500
T/S (100 x $20)- – – – – – – – – – – – 2,000B - 81
A - 87
R - 73
F - July 5thJune 6, 2016 at 4:55 pm #765844
MaLoTuParticipantok, so 7 (20-13) is the difference between par and what they got at a loss. 7*100 = 700, that is where the 700 between APIC and RE came from. In the first entry they have APIC for CS of 50000, that means each share would have $5 attributed to it … that is where the 500 from RE comes from, because it is a loss, I believe that is the caveat here (5*100). Then the APIC TS is a squeeze.
Someone correct me if I am wrong.
June 6, 2016 at 5:00 pm #765845
Titleistg0lferParticipantYes, the way I usually do those when they reissue treasury stock is look at the APIC-CS from the very first transaction.
From the first transaction, they issued 10,000 shares of $10 common stock at $15 so APIC should be credited for the $50,000 (10,000 shares x $5 difference).
For the reissue, this is how I calculate the RE:
100 shares reissued / 10,000 shares initially issued = 1%
1% x 50,000 Initial APIC = 500 RE DebitI usually plug the APIC after this, but I think you could also say the reissued shares of 100 x ($15 inital issue – $13 reissue) = 200 APIC Debit
REG: 84 (10/5/15)
AUD: 83 (11/23/15)
BEC: 77 (2/27/16) - The bubble sucks
FAR: 90 (7/20/16) - AND DONE FOREVER!!!!! -
AuthorReplies
- The topic ‘FAR Study Group Q2 2016 - Page 145’ is closed to new replies.
