- This topic has 2,358 replies, 134 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 4 months ago by
lolo.
-
CreatorTopic
-
March 18, 2016 at 4:43 am #200895
-
AuthorReplies
-
June 14, 2016 at 3:18 pm #765936
loloMemberGuys should I study the appendix in Ch4 Becker which is about the inventory accounting for retail methods? and one more thing should I care for the appendix in Ch9 the non for profit accounting chapter?
My Nick name is sunshine, but the fact is I have not been in touch with it since I started this CPA exam! IT HURTS
AUD - ✔ Passed Becker self study!
BEC - ✔ Passed Becker self study!
FAR - ✔ Passed Becker self study!
REG - TBDJune 14, 2016 at 5:35 pm #765937
AnonymousInactiveHi,
I am studying on F9 now, for unrestricted contributions, I don't understand below journals, why the cash will be reversed? How to interpret these journals? The purpose? Thank you so much!Unrestricted pledges(with implied time restriction)-temporarily restricted:
DR Pledge receivable- temporarily restricted
CR Allowance for doubtful accounts
CR Contributed revenue-temporarily restrictedLater, when collected-temporarily restricted assets are adjusted:
DR Cash-temporarily restricted
CR Pledge receivable-temporarily restrictedDR Satisfaction of time restriction-temporarily restricted
CR Cash-temporarily restrictedJune 14, 2016 at 10:48 pm #765938
ZyxParticipantmastump317, looks like some info might be missing? I cannot find a reason of $50000 being in AR either.
allisonchang88; for non-profit, it is the way journal entries work.
1) When received cash, it will be out it temp restricted which is on your second entry.
2) Reversed the temp restricted to unrestricted so the fund can be expended.
3) When the fund is used, we debit expense and credit cash. When the time restriction is satisfied, temp restricted is reclassified to unrestricted.I hope this helps.
REG: 77 x2
BEC: 81 x3
FAR: 68 retake 10/1
AUD: 8/27June 14, 2016 at 11:19 pm #765939
AnonymousInactivezyx11, thank you so much for great help!
2) Reversed the temp restricted to unrestricted so the fund can be expended. which journal matches this one?
I am trying to understand.
June 14, 2016 at 11:19 pm #765940
AnonymousInactivezyx11, thank you so much for great help!
2) Reversed the temp restricted to unrestricted so the fund can be expended. which journal matches this one?
I am trying to understand.
June 15, 2016 at 1:00 am #765941
ZyxParticipantallisonchang88;
There should be another entries to record this in unrestricted;
DR Cash-unrestricted
CR Reclassification satisfaction (building, equipment, whatever the fund is spent on)DR Satisfaction
CR CashAt the end, temp restricted account is washed (it is just a temp account). It is like a double work but this is how to account for expenses in non profit. With being said, all expenses are reported in unrestricted. Expenses are not recorded in temp restricted account.
REG: 77 x2
BEC: 81 x3
FAR: 68 retake 10/1
AUD: 8/27June 15, 2016 at 1:04 am #765942
ZyxParticipantCan someone help me interpret this question?
Belle, a nongovernmental not-for-profit entity, received funds during its annual campaign that were specifically promised by the donor to another nongovernmental not-for-profit health entity. How should Belle record these funds?
A.Increase in assets and increase in liabilities
B.Increase in assets and increase in revenue
C.Increase in assets and increase in deferred revenue
D.Decrease in assets and decrease in fund balance
Answer A, Donors often use one not-for-profit as an intermediary to forward donations to the ultimate recipient. If the intermediary has the right to redirect the resources, then it would recognize temporarily restricted support or revenue. In this case, Belle has been given specific instructions to forward the resources to another entity and has been given no discretion. It is acting as an agent.
I thought the question meant “that were specifically promised by the donor to another nongovernmental not-for-profit health entity” another nongovernmental non-for-profit promised to give the funds.
REG: 77 x2
BEC: 81 x3
FAR: 68 retake 10/1
AUD: 8/27June 15, 2016 at 1:28 am #765943
AnonymousInactivezyx11,
Thank you so much for your clear explanation! Good luck on your exam!
June 15, 2016 at 2:29 am #765944
mastump317ParticipantHere is the entire problem from page 25 of the Ninja FAR book 2016:
Acme's Co's accounts payable balance at Dec 31 was $850,000 before necessary year-end adjustments, if any, related to the following information:
– At December 31, Acme has a $50,000 debit balance in its accounts payable resulting from a payment to a supplier for goods to be manufactured to Acme's specifications.
– Goods were shipped FOB destination on December 20 were received and recorded by Acme on January 2; the invoice cost was $45,000.
In its December 31 balance Sheet, what amount should Acme report as accounts payable?$850,000
$895,000
$900,000
$945,000C – The $50,000 debit balance in accounts payable for goods to be manufactured should be shown in accounts receivable unless right to set off exists. The goods shipped FOB destination should not be included as a liability until received and were not included in the $850,000 balance.
$850,000 + 50,000 = $900,000
This problem has to do with the right of setoff, being able to offset receivables and payables with the same vendor with one another. Still, it gives the debit balance in the payable account as $50,000, and I know the normal balance of that account is the credit side. Still, the $50,000 was an advance payment to a company that makes custom parts for Acme, Inc. At the time, Acme paid this vendor: though Acme didn't owe them money, this was like an advance payment(?). I still don't understand why this amount should be in receivables.
Thanks
June 15, 2016 at 3:39 am #765945
KJParticipantI think the question is saying that $50K is a debit balance in A/P but it should not be a debit balance because right to setoff does not exists and that is why they added 50K back to A/P balance of $850K. So they will have to make adjusting entry for year-end to get to the correct balance of A/P. I don't know could be wrong.
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 15, 2016 at 1:19 pm #765946
ZyxParticipantThe question does not mention about the right to set off exit. I think I'm missing some concept here, never saw questions about the right to set off.
REG: 77 x2
BEC: 81 x3
FAR: 68 retake 10/1
AUD: 8/27June 15, 2016 at 3:31 pm #765947
AnonymousInactivemastump317, I read it differently, hopefully the logic is correct:
“At December 31, Acme has a $50,000 debit balance in its accounts payable resulting from a payment to a supplier for goods to be manufactured to Acme's specifications.”
Dr. AP 50
Cr. Cash 50“payment to a supplier for goods to be manufactured to Acme's specifications”
The issue here is goods “TO BE MANUFACTURED” in the future (not in Dec), therefore it is some kind of prepaid and should NOT be reducing AP. Miss coding – error.
Therefore, the adjustment has to bring this AP balance back
Adj entry:
Dr. Prepaid 50
Cr. AP 50YE: AP balance (850 + 50) = 900
June 15, 2016 at 4:40 pm #765948
mastump317ParticipantThis problem was meant to be an application of the right to setoff. The problem took up the bottom half of page, here is the top half, though I don't think it would add any clarity:
A general principle of accounting is that the offsetting of assets and liabilities in the Balance Sheet is improper except where a right to setoff exists. This means, for example, that a debtor with a payable to an entity may not offset a receivable from that same entity and display only the difference as a net payable or receivable unless specified conditions are met. FASB ASC 210-20-45-1 specifies the following conditions must be met for the right of setoff to exist:
a. Each of the two parties west the other determinable amounts.
b. The reporting party has the right to set off the amount owed with the amount owed by the other party.
c. The reporting party intends to set off.
d. The right of setoff is enforceable at law.kanwal78 & Dlu, You both are addressing different parts of the same problem, and I understand you explanation. I also agree with you.
But what threw me off was the mention that the $50,000 should rightfully have ever been in accounts receivable. I am going to assume it is an error with the question itself. Either way, it is a question I will no doubt miss if it should come up. I don't think one speed bump will slow down my study for FAR.Thank you for your time and trouble. Best of luck to all. kanwal78, good luck on your retake of FAR! I hope to be taking it around the same time, maybe early August.
Marc
June 15, 2016 at 7:29 pm #765949
AnonymousInactiveThanks SUNSHINE!
June 16, 2016 at 2:36 pm #765950
Operation_CPAParticipant -
AuthorReplies
- The topic ‘FAR Study Group Q2 2016 - Page 152’ is closed to new replies.
