[jeff]

Welcome to the Q3 2017 CPA Exam Study Group for REG. 🙂

Introduce yourselves and let your fellow NINJAs know when you plan to take your REG exam.

The Five Steps (NINJA Framework): https://www.another71.com/pass-the-cpa-exam/

Jeff Elliott, CPA (KS) | Another71 | NINJA CPA | NINJA CMA | NINJA CPE

[CPA so close, so far away]

@Jsn3004 They updated Ninja a couple days ago. They got rid of the non-tested items and updated some of the questions with 2017 thresholds and phaseouts.

[Jsn3004]

I logged out than back on and it said “Start Studying 2017 Reg” but why would the section 3: Federal Tax Process, Procedures, Accounting, and Planning (128 questions) still be there? I thought that section was taken out? Would that still be the updated version?

[gguzman]

We shouldn't have to do anything special to update it right? because it's all online,

[jtvande]

No it updated automatically.

@gguzman I was trending low 60's in NINJA MCQ at first also. I just kept going at them hard and the more I did them the more I understood the material. Trending 87% avg is 74% now. Test is Monday. Two 69's on Beckers practice tests. I struggle with SIMS so Im not sure if all of that equals a passing score but we will see!

[CPAIN2K17]

@jsn3004 um Federal Tax Process, Procedures, Accounting, and Planning is definitely still on the test. Ninja MCQ is up to date.

[Jsn3004]

@CPAIN2K17 Although I don't use Becker I looked on their website

and it looked like it didn't match up with the categories when I choose MCQs on the Ninja website. In the end of the day I hope I was just wrong and that everything is up to date.

[CPA so close, so far away]

There is definitely a little overlap between Becker and Ninja on that category, but not much. I've been studying it through Ninja and picking it up as I go. I believe that if you follow Becker's outline, you're all set.

[brokeonbecker4]

Got a 78 on Becker's Mock 1, and I will take it! I thought I absolutely tanked it. I have never second guessed myself more than when studying for REG. 10 more days until exam day! We can do this 🙂

[Omar]

Now I got confused, I just checked Becker changes statement and I'm not sure of the following eliminated parts:
1- Agency – Formation and Termination, Contracts – Third Party Assignments, and Uniform Commercial Code from Area II – Business Law.
*** Should I remove the whole parts?!
2- Earnings and Profits from Topic V – Federal Taxation of Entities.
*** All E&P part?
3- Other Federal Laws and Regulations (antitrust, copyright, patents, money laundering, labor, employment and ERISA) from Area II – Business Law. This topic will be replaced by a new topic, Other Federal Laws and Regulations (employment tax, Affordable Care Act and worker classification).
*** I don't have the new topics, is it big that I should try to study it? or I can skip it?

Can any one help me answer the above questions?

FAR: 73, 85
BEC: 79
REG: TBA
AUD: TBA

[BBHYX]

Hey guys, have a partnership question for you guys.

Belson and Forman decided to terminate North partnership. On the date of termination, North's balance sheet was as follows:

Adjusted Basis
Cash $2,000
Equipment (fair market value $4,000) 6,000
Capital – Belson 4,000
Capital – Forman 4,000

Forman's outside basis is $2,000. The partnership assets were distributed equally between the partners. What is Forman's tax basis in the property received?

So, I understand how to solve what this question is asking. However, I was wondering what the “Capital – Forman” account in the extra information represented. Does anyone know? I understood the capital account to be the partner's outside basis – share of liabilities. Is this what those capital accounts represent? If so, why are there no liabilities on the balance sheet?

[BBHYX]

@MedoOmar Becker removed Third Party Assignments, and Uniform Commercial Code section 2 from blaw. For #3, that is a really small topic and I believe most of it was also in the old chapter as well. Not sure about #2.

I think the tax procedures/tax planning category stuff ninja has is still tested, but has just been combined into the other sections in the blue print and by becker.

[CPA so close, so far away]

Those two capital accounts listed in the facts are the partner's inside basis. It's different than outside basis. For tax purposes, the outside basis is what is used for calculating taxable events/adjustments to basis.

[Omar]

@xyz107, thank you for your response. Actually I'm studying directly from Becker 2016 Final Review as i don't have enough time to go through the whole materials, so I think I will skip the small parts. I did it before on March, I had only 10 days to study REG and I studied it from final review only and got 70. I hope it works this time. 🙂

About your question, from searching on google I understand that outside basis is the deference between contributed assets tax basis and it's FMV, I never go through any questions about the effect of outside basis on tax basis while liquidation but i think it's not relevant (If you know better please explain).
GR, always work with the information you have. If there is no liabilities then take the given Capital as the net after liabilities.

FAR: 73, 85
BEC: 79
REG: TBA
AUD: TBA

[CPA so close, so far away]

When it comes to health insurance benefits paid to partners, are they deductible on Form 1065? Becker says they are included as guaranteed payments to partners (which I know are deducted on 1065) but they had a Simulation that showed both guaranteed payments to partners and health insurance premiums, but only the guaranteed payments were deducted on 1065.

Anyone know?

[gguzman]

@CPA Premiums paid to the insurance company for the coverage is considered a guaranteed payment. The benefits paid by the insurance company are netted against medical expenses on their individual tax return and excess expenses are reported on Schedule A subject to the 10% AGI limitation, if they itemize.

Someone correct me if I a m wrong. I am not sure how the SIM was worded either.

[Author]

Replies