REG Study Group April/May 2013 - Page 53

Viewing 15 replies - 781 through 795 (of 1,005 total)
  • Author
    Replies
  • #415601
    wendywhite
    Member

    tonight i need…

    to review that yeager video again. it gives me nightmares.

    review how to calculate the carryover for a nol – since it changes… ugh.

    review basis and all it's various evil forms. i feel like you cannot go into this exam without a good grasp of basis.

    FAR 11/2012: 80
    AUD 2/19/2013: 90
    REG 5/14/2013: 76
    BEC 11/2013: 85
    Ethics: 100
    Waiting on the packet....

    #415602
    samdiegoCPA
    Member

    I'd rather do Auditing again than REG. Ewwww… the questions are SO long and have so many parts to it.

    AUD: 84
    REG: 84
    BEC: 79
    FAR: 83

    #415603
    Myeble
    Participant

    AnnaNuthaCPA

    Question#1: why is there a difference between concepts in the WILEY CPA REG REVIEW:

    MCQ#61 p570 and MCQ#62 p665.

    Please check and let me know what I am missing.

    Thanks

    #415604
    wendywhite
    Member

    Myeble

    there is not a difference in concepts.

    in #61: there is a net LTCG

    in #62: it is stated as a net LTCL

    you include a net gain you cannot include a net capital loss for a corporation.

    In #61 they have a gain to offset the losses against and in #62 they do not.

    FAR 11/2012: 80
    AUD 2/19/2013: 90
    REG 5/14/2013: 76
    BEC 11/2013: 85
    Ethics: 100
    Waiting on the packet....

    #415605

    Found great explanation of Sect 179 in general and including retroactive treatment for 2012 limits although for the exam I think Jeff said to use old $125K deduction limit.

    https://www.section179.org/index.html

    Happy studying to all!

    Becker Class of Jan - Aug 2013: FARB DONE!!!!
    CPA license pending 🙂

    #415606
    jeff
    Keymaster

    What do your ninja notes say, Seattle? 🙂

    #415607
    Mike1987
    Member

    I thought BEC cost acct and finance parts had longer questions Samdiego, could just be me but those were hell took about 5-10 min each 1st time around.

    #415608

    @ Jeff, I stand corrected, you did NOT say $125K!

    Per NINJA NOTES for SECTION 179 EXPENSES:

     “For New/Used equipment placed into service between January 1, 2012 and December 31, 2012

     Max Deduction: $139,000

     Max Total Equipment Purchases for 2012: $560,000″

    vs.

    Per Becker R3-28, Section 179 Expenses 2012 Rules” The limit is $125,000 of new or used personal property that is acquired from an unrelated party during the year.” With total max for 2012: $500,000

    vs.

    Per IRS Pub 946 (2012):”Dollar Limits: The total amount you can elect to deduct under section 179 for most property placed in service in 2012 generally cannot be more than $500,000. If you acquire and place in service more than one item of qualifying property during the year, you can allocate the section 179 deduction among the items in any way, as long as the total deduction is not more than $500,000. You do not have to claim the full $500,000. Qualified real property (described earlier) that you elected to treat as section 179 real property is limited to $250,000 of the maximum deduction of $500,000 for 2012. ” https://www.irs.gov/publications/p946/ch02.html#en_US_2012_publink1000107410

    OK, i'm confused. I thought that the original $125K was retroactively increased to $500K (sometimes in Jan 2013) and that is the amount that we now find in Pub 946 + web site I've posted earlier, but where the heck from came $139/560?! What amounts are you guys using for Sect 179?

    Becker Class of Jan - Aug 2013: FARB DONE!!!!
    CPA license pending 🙂

    #415609

    I got NINJA Notes for REG (thank you Jeff) but have not been using them thinking that I'll save them for the final review during the last week of May. Now, i'm thinking I better print them out today and compare to Becker just in case there is another discrepancy or misunderstanding on my part. Better figure out this now before its too late!

    People, please let me know what limits are you using for Sect 179.

    Becker Class of Jan - Aug 2013: FARB DONE!!!!
    CPA license pending 🙂

    #415610
    jeff
    Keymaster

    The 179 rules I have are the ones in place before the Fiscal Cliff legislation.

    The retroactive 2012 amounts should be testable in July – 6 mo after the legislation passed.

    #415611
    Myeble
    Participant

    Wendywhite,

    Interestingly enough…I don't see a gain in any of the problems listed above. May be am brain dead…i need a break! lol

    WILEY CPA REVIEW 2013 -REGULATION

    #61 …p570 …

    I see: “loss on sale of investments in marketable securities” ($8,000)

    Are you saying that the “gain” on the sale of land offset the loss in the investment securities?

    I thought that both the land and building (in the same question) offset each other as sec1231 items?

    #62..p665

    i see: “NET loss on sale of securities bought for investment in 2010” ($20,000)

    Please let me know

    Thanks

    #415612
    wendywhite
    Member

    the building did not have accelerated depreciation – it was straight line.

    FAR 11/2012: 80
    AUD 2/19/2013: 90
    REG 5/14/2013: 76
    BEC 11/2013: 85
    Ethics: 100
    Waiting on the packet....

    #415613
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    Today's the day! Probably going to head out around 1:30. Good luck Wendy and anyone else taking it

    #415614
    rjcpa
    Participant

    So, Jeff are we to use the $500,000 and $2,000,000 for the test? Is there any chance that they would have the $139,000 and $560,000 old questions on there?

    FAR - 10/3/12 - 86
    BEC - 11/27/12 - 70 1/14/13 - 81
    AUD - 4/4/13 - 87
    REG - 7/8/13 - 80

    #415615
    TAJCPA
    Participant

    @MCKKT – good Luck! You got this!!

    I changed my Reg Exam to May 29th…I am currently on Chapter 6…I have to go back to chapter 4 which I plan to complete Friday and Sat. …

    Love Jeff Notes!

Viewing 15 replies - 781 through 795 (of 1,005 total)
  • The topic ‘REG Study Group April/May 2013 - Page 53’ is closed to new replies.