REG Study Group - Page 8

Viewing 15 replies - 106 through 120 (of 694 total)
  • Author
    Replies
  • #2208220
    kakooakki
    Participant

    @bryguy. Thanks that’s really helpful, Taking mine over the next few days.
    Any BLAW in the sims or all from the first 5 chapters

    #2208289
    Typical
    Participant

    There is no blaw in the sims. usually blaw is only tested through the mc. at least in my experience

    #2208328
    kakooakki
    Participant

    @typical thanks

    #2208415
    BryGuy
    Participant

    @kakooakki I had a sim that asked about the different penalties that apply to certain fraudulent filings.. It was a sim where it said to use the authoritative literature to search the answers. I feel as though the answers were very easy to find using the right key words in the search bar. Nothing to really focus on in your studies but I thought it was a unique sim that I had never seen before. But as far as BLAW in the sims, @typical is right, there likely won't be any sims in regards to BLAW.

    #2208478
    kakooakki
    Participant

    thanks guys

    #2209024
    se7en.14
    Participant

    for self-employment tax calculation, 15.3% is used in becker book example page R1-29. I'm assuming it is made up of 2.9% Medicare tax and 12.4% Social security tax. can someone confirm? Thanks.

    #2209234
    LeoLeo
    Participant

    @BryGuy I had that as well.
    @se7en.14 yes

    #2210197
    reymundo03
    Participant

    Hey guys, I was wondering if any of you could solve this SIM based of the AICPA.

    5. Quest, Inc. is a calendar-year, accrual-basis C corporation engaged in manufacturing. Listed in column A are year 2 transactions from Quest’s financial statements and tax records. In column B, enter the amount to be reflected on Schedule M-1, Reconciliation of Income (Loss) per Books with Income per Return as an adjustment to calculate federal taxable income. Each transaction should be considered independently of the others. Enter increases to net income per books as positive, whole values and decreases to net income per books as negative, whole values. If a response is zero, enter a zero (0).
    Year 2 net income per books: $632,000

    Year 2 Transactions Adjustment to calculate federal taxable income

    2 MACRS depreciation $224,000
    Sec. 179 deduction 16,000
    Book depreciation 200,000

    3 Quest declared and paid a $40,000 cash dividend in June, year 2, and declared a $30,000 cash dividend in December, year 2, payable in January, year 3.

    4 $30,000 of cash contributions were paid in year 2, and $10,000 of charitable contributions (approved by the board of directors) to qualifying organizations were accrued at the end of year 2 and paid on the extended tax return filing date.

    5 Ordinary gain on the sale of fully depreciated office equipment to a 60% shareholder:
    Gain recorded per books $8,000
    Gain calculated for tax purposes 2,000

    6 Gains (losses) on sales of investments in public companies recorded for book and tax purposes:
    May 1 ($4,000)
    June 2 7,000
    Sept 4 (8,000)

    There were no other asset sales during the year.
    7 Ordinary gains (losses) on sales of property to a 25% shareholder recorded for book and tax purposes:
    Jan 15 $6,000
    May 15 (4,000)
    July 16 (8,000)
    Sept 25 2,000

    #2211694
    ahugemistake
    Participant

    Can anyone here confirm how much Becker dives into disproportionate distributions? Wiley has an entire page for it but it's prefaced by: Most CPA Exam questions on this topic (hot assets) will be proportionate distributions.

    FAR - 78*
    AUD - 66, 79
    REG - 73, 76
    BEC - 79

    #2211844
    Determined24
    Participant

    @reymundo03 Working on this question and decided to share for you. The answer figures are posted with the question in the test so I am assuming you need the workout.

    The question starts with Net income per books. You would make the adjustment to it as follows:
    Line 2. ($40,000): Book depreciation 200,000 less MACRS depreciation $224,000 PLUS Sec. 179 deduction 16,000 (both MACRS and SEC 179 can be taken for tax purposes. This is saying to arrive at Tax income you can deduct more depreciation if you had use MACRS plus SEC 179 but of course for book income have to follow GAAP or IFRS (not discussed in REG in FAR) that is why you ended up with this temporary difference.

    Line 3. No adjustment for this $0. We do not deduct dividends from Net income either for tax nor book-it comes from Retained earnings adjustment for Sch M-2, not M1 or M3.

    Line 4. For tax purposes, the company has enough Net income to suffice the 10% limit on charitable contributions for tax purposes so the #30,000 is fine-no adjustment needed. However, the 10000 needs to be put back into net income because though accrued it was not paid timely to be deducted on that year's return (have to wait until next year). This is how we knew “and paid on the extended tax return filing date” that means it got paid around October and tobe deducted on current year it have to be paid by March 15 if it is a calendar year Corp providing it was properly approved and accrued.

    Line 5. The capital gains for book is different from tax reason being that the depreciation system used to calculate depreciation on the equipment before sale is different from the one used in tax. Book uses straight line while tax uses MACRs so the basis of the asset would be different if we were to recalculate the basis of the asset at the time of sale for tax purposes. This results in the difference in gain.

    Line 6 For tax purposes capital losses are only deducted up to the amount of capital gain. For book purposes the corporation deducted $4000 plus $8000 of capital loss but it only has $7000 of gains; therefore to arrive at tax income then put back the $5000 extra of capital loss that they deducted in book income making it ok now for tax.

    Line 7 This is not a related party because this shareholder does not own more than 50% stock. The shareholder in Line 5 is a related party because he owns more than 50% stock but while gains for related party can be recorded in the books for tax purposes the losses cannot. On the other hand this 25% shareholder, both the gains on losses can be recorded for tax purposes; so no adjustment needed.

    Disclaimer: Please note that the attempt above at answering the question2 from Testlet 5 from the AICPA REG sample test in no way represent any official answers that might have been posted from AICPA nor directly linked to the material of any course providers. They are answer attempts from my personal recollection of knowledge gathered from studying various topics in pursuit of the CPA designation and shared with the intention of assisting fellow candidates in answering said question noted.

    #2211931
    reymundo03
    Participant

    @Determined24 Thank you, really appreciate it

    #2212687
    nicdpowell
    Participant

    So I have a question. Has anyone passed REG in 2019 just using NINJA and the new MCQs? I noticed many people keep posting with errors/edits on questions and was wondering if that has effected their preparation. Didn't know if I should use my Wiley materials more. I passed FAR with NINJA only last year, but that was before the new MCQ system. Thanks!

    #2213047
    jeff
    Keymaster

    @nicdpowell – the TCJA was a monster, literally impacting hundreds of questions, answers, and explanations. Candidly, we missed quite a few early on…one database of questions hit the live MCQ site without going through the editorial process – which caused a lot of late nights of fixing.

    When an error – or a questionable explanation is found – people report it and those aren't happening very often now, thankfully. With thousands of users, the content is vetted.

    That said – if something is missed (an answer had $14k for gift tax instead of $15k just this week)…we try to fix it within 24 hours.

    Relatively speaking, the recent score release wasn't very big. In the dojo study group, Briquell posted on score release that she passed – I believe with an 84. Others have chimed in on their recent exam day experience and nothing crazy…mostly positive experiences.

    I'm not perfect (ask my wife), but when there's an issue – I (we – I have a great team) jump on it asap and make it right – or try to.

    jeff

    #2228352
    CPAnerd
    Participant

    hey everyone! I take reg next week and was wondering what everyone thought of it?? what type of sims did you have?

    #2228355
    Steve
    Participant

    I am taking REG two weeks from today and am through most of the material in Becker except for Biz Law. For anyone that has taken the exam recently, is Biz Law heavily tested? I should be able to get through the Biz Law sections in about a week but want to save the last week for progress multiple choice questions. Let me know!

Viewing 15 replies - 106 through 120 (of 694 total)
  • The topic ‘REG Study Group - Page 8’ is closed to new replies.