- This topic has 1,171 replies, 126 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 10 months ago by
Lamis.
-
CreatorTopic
-
May 31, 2017 at 7:00 am #1563001
jeff
KeymasterWelcome 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/
-
AuthorReplies
-
August 13, 2017 at 1:31 pm #1599276
GinjaNinja
Participant@Pharaoh I believe the answer is “D.” Under the 2005 Bankruptcy Reform Act, an attorney must file an affidavit indicating that he/she has informed the client of the different types of bankruptcy and their relief. Also under the 2005 Bankruptcy Reform Act, the attorney is required to sufficiently review the filings for errors and omissions in order to avoid misrepresentation.
August 13, 2017 at 3:41 pm #1599324pharaoh
ParticipantCorrect Ginja
FAR 8/2016
AUD 1/2017
REG TBD
BEC TBDAugust 13, 2017 at 3:42 pm #1599327pharaoh
ParticipantCan someone explain in an easy way or tell me where i can find an easier explanation for Attachment and Perfection
FAR 8/2016
AUD 1/2017
REG TBD
BEC TBDAugust 13, 2017 at 4:49 pm #1599333CPA so close, so far away
ParticipantSo for attachment you need 3 things to occur…
1. There must be a Security Agreement. This can be written or oral. The only time it can be oral is when the creditor has possession of the collateral. If it is written, the debtor needs to sign it. This agreement basically says that if you don't pay, I'm taking the asset.
2. You need to creditor to provide value to the debtor. This can be extending credit or giving money.
3. The creditor needs to have rights in the collateral. The debtor must have control or own it.
Once all three occur, there is attachment. It does not occur until the last of all three take place.Perfection is basically telling the rest of the world “Hey, this collateral is mine if the debtor defaults.” You could have a security interest that attached 20 years ago, but if someone else perfects today, then you no longer have priority. So by perfecting you are protecting yourself from other creditors advancing on the collateral if there is a default. There are five key ways to perfect.
1. Filing a financing statement
2. Automatic perfection (in the case of the sale of consumer goods NOT Inventory or Equipment)
3. Temporary perfection (you get 20 days to perfect equipment and you are perfected for four months if the debtor moves to another state).
4. Having physical possession of the asset (Like a pawn shop that holds your item until you pay)
5. Having control (used for intangible collateral. For example, having control over a debtors accounts receivable.Attaching and then Perfecting should hopefully protect you from most creditors who have a security interest in the same collateral. But remember, a BUYER IN THE ORDINARY COURSE OF BUSINESS owns the asset free and clear if they buy. This means that you or I could go to Wal-Mart and buy inventory that is actually collateral from a supplier and not have to worry about the supplier knocking on our door and asking for the goods back. We owe them free and clear.
Hope that helps, and sorry for any typos. Wrote this fast.
August 13, 2017 at 4:57 pm #1599339In it to earn it
ParticipantAugust 13, 2017 at 5:10 pm #1599348CPA so close, so far away
ParticipantI use Ninja as a supplement to Becker. I take my exam on Wednesday and have reverted back to Becker's MCQ because I feel as though they are more similar to the real exam. I find Ninja questions good at showing you the little details, but I have always found that you never really see some of those concepts on the real exam. But seeing that this is tax, they can always get you on the details since there are just so many.
August 13, 2017 at 5:31 pm #1599354CPATY
ParticipantDoes anyone have an easy way to understanding surety and when one surety is realeased how it affects the other sureties. I understand the reading material but i am really struggling with the questions. For example:
At the request of Pax, Somes and Tabor became co-sureties on a loan from Cox to Pax. At the time they agreed to become sureties, Somes placed a limit of $30,000 on his liability, and Tabor placed a limit of $20,000 on his; the loan was in the amount of $30,000. Somes and Tabor mutually intended to be co-sureties, and each promised to pay the loan to the extent of the limit placed should Pax default on payment at maturity. Based on these facts,
A. A release of Tabor by Cox would result in a complete discharge of Somes.
B. A release of Somes by Cox, reserving Cox’s rights against Tabor, would not reduce Tabor’s obligations.
C. Insolvency of Somes would discharge Tabor.
D. Bankruptcy of Tabor before maturity of the note would limit Somes’ potential liability to $18,000.Answer is B. But I thought that if a surety is released(Somes) without being notified, Tabor would only be liable for $18k, therefore reducing his obligation. Just a little confused here.
August 13, 2017 at 5:36 pm #1599363gguzman
ParticipantI am using Ninja as my main source of MCQ's. I feel like I have been doing too well on the Becker progress tests and wanted to switch it yup to make sure I wasn't just sued to the questions. I mainly use Becker Progress tests to solidify whether or not I understand a specific area.
Hope I did not cause any more confusion. 4 Days!
How often is everyone doing sims? every 150 or 200 MCQ's? Whenever they get bored of MCQ's? Not at all?
August 13, 2017 at 5:41 pm #1599365CPATY
ParticipantI usually like doing the sims toward the end, once i've gone through everything and I have a better grasp on the information. I feel like if i do them early on, I spend too much time on them as I don't fully understand the concepts. I am using Becker as my main source of material and Gleim as supplemental material as it goes into more details I get to see if I fully understand the material.
August 13, 2017 at 5:55 pm #1599392CPATY
ParticipantExtension of my question above… For example like this one:
Mane Bank lent Eller $120,000 and received securities valued at $30,000 as collateral. At Mane’s request, Salem and Rey agreed to act as uncompensated co-sureties on the loan. The agreement provided that Salem’s and Rey’s maximum liability would be $120,000 each. Mane released Rey without Salem’s consent. Eller later defaulted when the collateral held by Mane was worthless and the loan balance was $90,000. Salem’s maximum liability is
A. $30,000
B. $45,000
C. $60,000
D. $90,000Answer (B) is correct.
When a creditor releases a co-surety without the consent of, or without reserving rights against, the other co-surety, the other co-surety is released to the extent (s)he cannot obtain contribution from the released co-surety. The share of each co-surety would have been half of the unpaid amount, or $45,000.August 13, 2017 at 6:21 pm #1599408BBHYX
ParticipantAugust 13, 2017 at 6:35 pm #1599411In it to earn it
Participant@gguzman, I haven't done many SIMS yet. I started to do some Wiley SIMS, but most of the DRS don't work. Either the answers are all jumbled up or you have to download each document to a PDF, which takes forever. I went through all of the IRC SIMS. Like CPATY, I am going to do them towards the end after the MCQ test bank has been gone through a couple times. It can be overwhelming to them too early.
August 13, 2017 at 7:11 pm #1599431BBHYX
ParticipantThe antifraud provisions of Rule 10b-5 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934:
A.apply only if the securities involved were registered under either the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
B.require that the plaintiff show negligence on the part of the defendant in misstating facts.
C.require that the wrongful act must be accomplished through the mail, any other use of interstate commerce, or through a national securities exchange.
D.apply only if the defendant acted with intent to defraud.
Answer: Rule 10b-5 applies to any sale of securities, including unregistered securities. Scienter, not just negligence, is required under this provision. The rule applies to a wrongful act using the mails, interstate commerce, or one of the stock exchanges. It requires intent by the defendant, not mere negligence.
Even reading the answer, it seems C and D both seem equally correct. Can anyone explain the thought process behind this one?
August 13, 2017 at 7:45 pm #1599441CPATY
Participant@xyz1027 I think that is why, just haven't come across another one like that. i'll just keep plugging away and hopefully the process of elimination is on my side when i take the exam and come across one like that.
August 13, 2017 at 8:22 pm #1599464CPA so close, so far away
Participant -
AuthorReplies
- The topic ‘REG Study Group July August 2017 - Page 61’ is closed to new replies.