[jeff]

REG Resources:

Free REG Notes & Audio – https://www.another71.com/cpa-exam-study-plan

REG 10 Point Combo: https://www.another71.com/products-page/ten-point-combo

REG Score Release: https://www.another71.com/cpa-exam-scores-results-release

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

[OCDisME]

Today is test day! Good luck to the others that are taking the exam today!

Becker Online - IL Candidate

FAR: 85
AUD: 85
BEC: 78
REG: 90

[OCDisME]

Today is test day! Good luck to the others that are taking the exam today!

Becker Online - IL Candidate

FAR: 85
AUD: 85
BEC: 78
REG: 90

[Skrier]

Good Luck OCD….you got this!!!!

AUD- 84
FAR- 75
REG- 78...I am DONE!!!
BEC- 79

[Skrier]

Good Luck OCD….you got this!!!!

AUD- 84
FAR- 75
REG- 78...I am DONE!!!
BEC- 79

[UCMCPA]

IY247, I'm bouncing back and forth between B and D, but since some contracts don't require a writing, I'd lean towards D.

FAR - 84
AUD - 94
REG - 86
BEC - 86

[UCMCPA]

IY247, I'm bouncing back and forth between B and D, but since some contracts don't require a writing, I'd lean towards D.

FAR - 84
AUD - 94
REG - 86
BEC - 86

[Skrier]

@IY247…I think the answer is D. A legal action for breach must be commenced within a certain period of time from the date of breach generally 4 to 6 year maximum.

The others do not fall under the statute of limitations in that answer C falls under the Parole of Evidence Rule and not Statute of Limitations. Answer B applies to Statute of Frauds, only the party trying to avoid the contract must sign. And answer A, I think falls under Breach of Contract, since Statute of Limitations does not dictate what can be recovered and for what kind of breach, only the amount of time you have to take legal action.

Does this make sense?

AUD- 84
FAR- 75
REG- 78...I am DONE!!!
BEC- 79

[Skrier]

@IY247…I think the answer is D. A legal action for breach must be commenced within a certain period of time from the date of breach generally 4 to 6 year maximum.

The others do not fall under the statute of limitations in that answer C falls under the Parole of Evidence Rule and not Statute of Limitations. Answer B applies to Statute of Frauds, only the party trying to avoid the contract must sign. And answer A, I think falls under Breach of Contract, since Statute of Limitations does not dictate what can be recovered and for what kind of breach, only the amount of time you have to take legal action.

Does this make sense?

AUD- 84
FAR- 75
REG- 78...I am DONE!!!
BEC- 79

[Anonymous]

Question…In determining basis of gifted property, is the amount of gift tax paid by donor added to donee's basis only if it was APPRECIATED property? I thought this was right, but then I had a problem last week where I thought it was added when the property weas depreciated. I may be remembering incorrectly.

[Anonymous]

Question…In determining basis of gifted property, is the amount of gift tax paid by donor added to donee's basis only if it was APPRECIATED property? I thought this was right, but then I had a problem last week where I thought it was added when the property weas depreciated. I may be remembering incorrectly.

[Skrier]

@Cupcake, from what I can see, your assumption is correct. The gift tax paid increases the recipients basis by the amount of gift tax paid on appreciated property only.

AUD- 84
FAR- 75
REG- 78...I am DONE!!!
BEC- 79

[Skrier]

@Cupcake, from what I can see, your assumption is correct. The gift tax paid increases the recipients basis by the amount of gift tax paid on appreciated property only.

AUD- 84
FAR- 75
REG- 78...I am DONE!!!
BEC- 79

[Anonymous]

Can someone also help with this…. These are considered sufficent consideration to form a CONTRACT:

-Services performed in past and services promised in future

However, in creating a holder in due course, a promise to pay or perform in future is NOT considered VALUE (antecedent debt is okay here too). I am confused…why is a future promise okay for a contract but not in creating a HDC?

I seem to be getting lost in all the small details now…not good.

[Anonymous]

Can someone also help with this…. These are considered sufficent consideration to form a CONTRACT:

-Services performed in past and services promised in future

However, in creating a holder in due course, a promise to pay or perform in future is NOT considered VALUE (antecedent debt is okay here too). I am confused…why is a future promise okay for a contract but not in creating a HDC?

I seem to be getting lost in all the small details now…not good.

[Skrier]

@Cupcake…not sure if this is helpful for you, but a contract is created for that very reason, a promise of some future service…i.e. I will pay you $500 to cut my grass each Friday in July. Where as to be a holder in due course, consideration must be given to be a holder in due course, meaning value must be given to be a HDC, a future event does not constitute value. T

AUD- 84
FAR- 75
REG- 78...I am DONE!!!
BEC- 79

[Author]

Replies