[animalwithin]

I briefly skimmed the REG book that I have (Roger) and then jumped into MCQ’s. I’m still largely unfamiliar with the topics although I do have some tax experience and as such, I’m guessing on most questions and trying to learn the material as I go over my questions sets.

As I continue to go through the MCQ’s, I’m getting the feeling that much of REG is memorization rather than understanding concepts. The other sections (BEC, AUD, FAR) had some sort of memorization required but there were definitely broad concepts to be understood that would help in solving and answering many questions.

With REG, there appear to be few concepts and just lots of memorization of facts. For example, how could one know that an improper debt collection under the Debt Collection Act can lead to civil penalties, aside from simply memorizing that fact?

Anyone else feel this? I’m hoping that going through hundreds of questions a week I can come to learn the material as I’m reluctant to spend time going through the book if it’s largely memorization of facts.

[Sam]

I took Reg last and struggled with that too. For BEC, FAR and AUD, it seemed like a lot of it was intuitive when you had a good handle on it, but I didn't feel that way at all with Reg.

[animalwithin]

Sam wrote:

I took Reg last and struggled with that too. For BEC, FAR and AUD, it seemed like a lot of it was intuitive when you had a good handle on it, but I didn't feel that way at all with Reg.

Agreed, good to hear someone had a similar experience. You got great scores, any advice for REG?

[Sam]

I split up my studying between before and after busy season so I studied a bit more than I would have, but biggest advice is time commitment. I spent more hours on REG than FAR; since it was my last one, I didn't want to leave anything to chance.

I honestly think it depends on the exam you get too. My approach for all of them was the same and the scores were over the place. On top of that, I work in Audit and not Tax, so I'd have thought those scores would be backwards, but here we are.

Good luck!

[animalwithin]

Sam wrote:

I split up my studying between before and after busy season so I studied a bit more than I would have, but biggest advice is time commitment. I spent more hours on REG than FAR; since it was my last one, I didn't want to leave anything to chance.

I honestly think it depends on the exam you get too. My approach for all of them was the same and the scores were over the place. On top of that, I work in Audit and not Tax, so I'd have thought those scores would be backwards, but here we are.

Good luck!

Thanks Sam! This is my last section and I have 7 months before I lose BEC so I'm going hardcore on REG but it's not fun at all. Really missing using logic/intuition which was more apparent in the other sections. I think as you said, leave nothing to chance and go as hard as possible.

[CPA_VT]

REG was my last section. I did spend more time studying REG. I was having a hard time remembering all the exceptions, $$ limits and such and was consistently scoring in the low 60s (in contrast to the other sections) on the practice quizzes on GLEIM on nearly every unit. I did go over everything again in the last 2 weeks and GLEIM has only 1 model exam.
I was surprised that the actual exam did not test a lot of the specifics of $$ detail and such but more on the tricky aspects that test your conceptual clarity. I felt as though I got bogged down in the details or it could be just the exam I got. One Simulation was a wash out for me but MCQ sections was not bad.

I did spent substantial time in last two weeks doing nearly 1000 MCQs and I would like to think it helped and gave me a margin of safety . I did the same for FAR too. So if you are able to, going hard is certainly a good idea.
I think SIMs are often under-estimated. I would recommend doing the SIMs too if possible as part of your revision phase.

[monikernc]

There are things you have to remember but there is also a method to the madness of tax. Use the forms as you study because the way they gather information will tell you a lot about how tax works. Don't try to do business law separately – there is too much and you will forget whatever you put aside if you don't. Pull a topic of bus law into each other tax topic you study so you learn it as you go. Know how to calculate basis and understand property transactions for individuals and businesses. Do a lot of sims and focus on how they expect each component to be answered. Often with SIMS the question requires the answer to be given in a certain way. Understand how you will be asked.

I remember taking REG and still can't believe I passed with the grade I received. My sims were all hail mary's but the mcq's were very straightforward. Approach each concept in its entirety and master the topic. You don't have to memorize phaseouts, and limits but you do need to know how to apply them in all cases.

Positive self-talk is always key. You can do this. Tell yourself that everyday. Then go get it done.

@CPA_VT congrats on your license! Way to go!

FAR 7/25/15 76!
AUD 10/30/15 93
BEC 2/27/16 82
REG 5/23/16 88!
Ninja Book and MCQ and the forum - all the way!!!
and a little thing i like to call, time and effort!
if you want things to change, you have to do something different

[animalwithin]

Thank you all for the great advice! I've currently gone through ~500 questions and I'm scoring in the low 50s, seeing as I'm guessing on most everything other than the tax stuff haha.

I am seeing some conceptual patterns in the partnership basis questions but the rest of the subjects seem predominantly fact-based memorization which is frustrating, especially the business law. I'm going to stick with doing as many MCQ's as possible and take down copious notes but as you eluded to @monikernc I do feel as if I'm getting bogged down with too many details and facts.

I usually delay SIMs until I've grasped some concepts but I might start with those now. I want to get to a point where my MCQ's are solid but it just seems like a tremendous amount of work ahead seeing as most every subject in this section is a weakness.

[monikernc]

Don’t dwell on the idea of weaknesses. Tax is interesting and complicated. Approach it like a mystery to be solved. You really can do this. Do the sims. Working through them always makes you construct the answer correctly. Practice doing that and you will be thankful on exam day.

FAR 7/25/15 76!
AUD 10/30/15 93
BEC 2/27/16 82
REG 5/23/16 88!
Ninja Book and MCQ and the forum - all the way!!!
and a little thing i like to call, time and effort!
if you want things to change, you have to do something different

[animalwithin]

Thank you @monikernc! I shall take your advice and approach this as a mystery to be solved. Would you recommend going back to the notes/book or is it feasible to learn the material through MCQs/SIMs as I go along? I know basic tax as well as business structure (corp vs parternship vs llc) but the basis stuff still trips me up.

The last time I went through the concepts through books/notes was for FAR and that took a long time, which I don't have. For BEC and AUD I just jumped right in and learned along the way so I'm hoping it's possible to learn REG in that way also.

[ellabella]

I'm using Roger Review as well, and am struggling with my “inner morals”. I can use memorization as a technique, but I feel like I'm cheating myself if I don't understand the underlying reasoning that the MCQ is asking. The trouble is I struggled in grad classes with some of the concepts behind tax and pension accounting, and my textbook was unhelpful.

[animalwithin]

@ellabella I hear you. I think you can get away with quite a bit of memorization for this section, at least as it pertains to business law since so much of it is fact-based. The questions on basis seem to be more intricate are require a bit more understanding of the underlying concept. This has been my experience with this section thus far. I'm currently chugging away through MCQs and taking copious flashcard notes on most every question. It's slow and agonizing but I'm hoping the dots will connect as I continue forward.

[Author]

Replies