- This topic has 631 replies, 115 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 7 months ago by
JMOR.
-
CreatorTopic
-
February 6, 2014 at 9:59 pm #183481
-
AuthorReplies
-
April 29, 2014 at 4:45 am #559315
Kls238MemberShould I be concerned that I'm struggling with practice SIMS? I'm averaging 75-85% on MCQs, but I'm all over the place on SIMs. I'm ok with some, but others I can't seem to do well on even after my send attempt. I feel like I understand some concepts much better in a MCQ format for whatever reason. Should I practice more SIMs or not bother at this point? My test is in a week.
Passed all sections.
April 29, 2014 at 7:10 pm #559316
TopsyaMemberHere is the question from Wiley book:
Edgar, CPA, reviewed the financial statements of Yoke Company (a nonissuer company). In performing the review Edgar failed to discover that a supplier had been overbilling Yoke for purchases for a number of years. Yoke filed a lawsuit against Edgar for negligence in performing the review.
Which of the following would not likely be part of Edgar’s defense in this lawsuit?
a. Contributory negligence.
b. Performance of the engagement in accordance with Statement for Accounting and Review Services.
c. A review cannot be relied upon to detect fraud.
d. Misrepresentations by management.
AUD - 90
FAR - 83
BEC - 81
REG - 80
ETHICS - 100April 30, 2014 at 2:08 am #559317
AnonymousInactiveI have a very basic Partnership Tax question that I keep seeing contradicting answers on between the Wiley text, WTB, and NINJA MCQ: If no provision is made for in the partnership agreement, are income and losses based on an equal share between the number of partners, or is it based on the capital contribution?
April 30, 2014 at 2:26 am #559318
TopsyaMemberProfits and losses in Partnership are shared equally unless agreement specifies otherwise. Even if contributed capital is not equal.
AUD - 90
FAR - 83
BEC - 81
REG - 80
ETHICS - 100April 30, 2014 at 2:35 am #559319
AnonymousInactiveThanks, that's what I was going with for so long and going through WTB problems I missed previously I came head-on with this and it threw me for a loop. Appreciate the feedback!
April 30, 2014 at 8:06 pm #559320
mmp7183ParticipantNot sure how my “exam” mates are (for REG and BEC) but things got so busy for me that I had to reschedule my REG and BEC to May and July, respectively (was supposed to take both in April then May). 🙁 So now I only have one full month to review REG (almost starting from scratch)! Anything on REG that I should be wary of?
Oh-Hey-Yoh Candidate
FAR - 89 Dec 2013 (CPAExcel)
AUD - 89 Feb 2014 (CPAExcel)
BEC - 83 Aug 2014 (Becker)
REG - 85 Oct 2014 (Becker)CMA (Aug 2011), CFSA (Dec 2008), Philippine CPA (Nov 2004)
May 1, 2014 at 12:43 am #559321
MelansMembermmp – I just started back to REG as well. I previously got through part of chapter 4. Lots of tax stuff, and I am told that is what you should focus on.
AUD 7/30/12 73; 12/2/13 85
BEC 7/19/13 81
REG 8/2/14 83
FAR - Jan 2015May 1, 2014 at 3:02 am #559322
lindafineMemberHi guys,
I'm having trouble grasping the difference between void and voidable contracts. I'm using Becker review and read law articles online. Some websites say void contracts are illegal but one of Becker's examples for voidable contracts is misrepresenting material facts. To me, that's illegal. So, what is a good way of telling the two apart besides memorizing which examples are void or voidable?
My second concern is preparing for the authoritative literature section of the REG exam. How did you guys become comfortable with using it? I can never find what I'm looking for…After typing in my search criteria I either get hundreds of results or nothing at all. Any tips would be appreciated. Thanks.
May 1, 2014 at 3:58 am #559323
AnonymousInactiveMay 1, 2014 at 4:05 am #559324
AnonymousInactiveIf you are having trouble memorizing the differences its best to think about it in terms of being illegal. Fraud in Execution, illegal, or duress (extreme) which I always think about as physical threats or putting someone in immediate harm's way. The other Voidable qualifications are sketchy in terms of legality: Fraud in the Inducement, Not competent to contract, undue influence (think relationships between parties), simple duress. I don't have a memory device for these, I think you start by understanding the difference between Fraud in the Execution and Fraud in the Inducement and work a handful of MCQs that deals with these topics to nail it down. Good luck!
May 1, 2014 at 4:41 pm #559325
lindafineMemberThanks for your help! I don't know what fraud in the inducement/execution means but voidable in terms of sketchy will stick with me.
May 1, 2014 at 10:57 pm #559326
MelansMemberMay 2, 2014 at 2:50 am #559327
Kls238MemberPassed all sections.
May 2, 2014 at 3:34 am #559328
TopsyaMemberMay 2, 2014 at 4:53 am #559329
TargetCPAParticipant@ Melans:
Tim and Nicole Wendler were divorced in 2011. Under the terms of their divorce decree, Tim paid alimony to Nicole at the rate of $60,000 in 2011, $25,000 in 2012, and nothing in 2013. What amount of alimony recapture must be included in Tim’s gross income for 2013?
$0
$10,000
$35,000
$47,500
Formula for this ALIMONY RECAP:
R3 = R1 + R2
R2 = P2 – (P3 + 15,000)
R1 = P1 – [ (P2 – R2 + P3)/2 + 15,000]
Shortcut for Year 3 Recapture = P1 + P2 – 2P3 – 37,500
2nd year alimony – (3rd year alimony +15,000) = 3rd year recap
1 yr. alimony – [(2nd yr alimony – 3rd year recap + 3rd yr alimony)/2] – 15,000 = 2nd year recap
3rd year recap + 2nd year recap = total recap as gross income in year 3
2nd year recapture: 25,000″2nd year alimony” – (0″3rd year alimony” + 15,000) = 10,000
1st year recapture: 60,000″1st year alimony” – ([25,000 – 10,000″2nd year recapture” + 0] / 2) + 15,000 = 37,500
Total recapture would be: 10,000″2nd year recapture” + 37,500″1st year recapture” = 47,500
ALIMONY RECAP RULE:
The rule applies when the payments decrease or terminate during the first three calendars years post-divorce and:
1.) The total payments made in the third year decrease by $15,000 or more from the payments made in the second year; (or)
2.) The payments made in the second year and the third year are substantially less than the payments made in the first year.
-
AuthorReplies
- The topic ‘[Q2] REG Study Group 2014 - Page 28’ is closed to new replies.
