REG Study Group Q1 2015 - Page 102

Viewing 15 replies - 1,516 through 1,530 (of 2,393 total)
  • Author
    Replies
  • #652562
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    next saturday. I reviewed it briefly today it's ok I feel like if I look at it again the day before/morning of the exam I will be fine. I cant imagine them asking TOO MANY questions on that specific topic.

    I am so sick of studying I am starting to make stupid mistakes on the questions that i am practicing on that I know for sure i could get right a week ago/if my mind was in the right place. I still have to review business law again because I probably forgot everything from those chapters and I have yet to do any of the Becker exams (plan on doing on either tomorrow or sunday). Really dont know what to expect with those.

    #652563
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    Banks Corp., a calendar year corporation, reimburses employees for properly substantiated qualifying business meal expenses. The employees are present at the meals, which are neither lavish nor extravagant, and the reimbursement is not treated as wages subject to withholdings. What percentage of the meal expense may Banks deduct?

    a. 50%

    b. 100%

    c. 80%

    d. 0%

    Explanation

    Choice “a” is correct. Only 50% of business meal and entertainment expense is deductible.

    Choices “d”, “c”, and “b” are incorrect. Each of these is an incorrect percentage.

    What if the question asks, “What percentage of the meal expense may an employee deduct?”

    How different it will be for a nonaccountable or accountable business meal reimbursement reporting? I remember encountering a question with “nonaccountable” reporting that's somehow 50% or 100% taxable/deductible. Which is which?

    #652564
    jennyh1
    Member

    @funtiks

    I believe incentive stock option is used to Calculate AMT. If you have any other info, please let me know.

    I believe Beckers doesnt have enough questions for MCQ.

    REG 67 (01/11) 68(11/12) 67(05/13) 61(08/13) 68(10/13) 68(05/14) 71(09/14) 68(12/14) --- Using Becker, not enough MCQ
    BEC 69 (11/12) 46(05/13) 70(08/13) 70(10/13) 68(02/14) 78(05/14) ** Thanks to Wiley CPA, Using Becker....
    FAR
    AUD

    Material: Becker (not enough MCQ)! I did not buy additional MCQ question from Becker

    #652565
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    Does anyone have notes to share about C Corporations Formation in recognizing basis of property and stocks? Thanks.

    #652566
    Tncincy
    Participant

    @AmorD, Do you have ninja notes?

    It begins with a 75
    Been here too long as a cheerleader....ready to pass

    #652567
    NotTooLate
    Member

    I am really confused about Sec. 179 2013 or 2014 figure. Here is a question:

    A taxpayer purchased and placed in service during the year a $761,000 piece of equipment. The equipment is 7-year property. The first-year depreciation for 7-year property is 14.29%. There is an allowable Section 179 limit in 2014 of $25,000. What amount is the maximum allowable depreciation without using bonus depreciation?

    A. $25,000

    B. $105,174

    C. $130,174

    D. $108,747

    I choose D, because for 2014, Sec 179 says business can deduct $25,000 from the purchase, but the amount will be lose dollar to dollar if the total purchase is over $200,000. In this question, since the total is $761,000, is far over 200,000, so I just go ahead apply MACRS rate to the total purchase price. But it was wrong. The correction answer is C, after deducting $25,000 Sec 179 amount.

    Could somebody possibly tell me why? Thanks!

    AUD:5/30/2013 (74, so close!) 5/2014 (90 first pass!)
    REG: 2/27/2015 (85)
    FAR: 8/2011(64) 4/2012(74) 8/31/2015 (80 finally!)
    BEC: 11/24/2015 Let's do this!

    #652568
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    @tncincy, thanks. Yes, I do have NINJA notes. I literally forgot I had it. I am so overwhelmed with my own notes late last night. I could neither get the concept straight and nor get the answer right even with my open notes. It's so tricky even when I was trying to apply practical reasoning in selling/distribution of property, recognizing gain, and determining the basis.

    #652569
    NJPRU
    Member

    FINALLY finished up R8 including optional questions. a day and a half ahead of schedule… R1 is up!

    Hope everyone is having a successful weekend! Good luck. 🙂

    AUD: DONE
    FAR: DONE
    BEC: DONE
    REG: DONE

    IM GOING TO BE A CPA!!!!!

    #652570
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    Aztec, a C corporation, distributed an asset to Burn, a shareholder. The asset had a fair market value of $30,000 and was subject to a $40,000 liability, assumed by Burn. The asset had an adjusted basis of $25,000. What amount of gain must Aztec recognize?

    a. $0

    b. $15,000

    c. $5,000

    d. $10,000

    Explanation

    Choice “b” is correct. When a corporation distributes assets to a shareholder, the corporation recognizes a gain as if it had sold the asset. The gain is calculated as follows:

    $40,000 Amount realized (Greater of FMV of asset OR Liability assumed by the shareholder)

    -$25,000 Less: Adjusted basis of property sold


    $15,000 Realized and recognized gain

    =======

    Choices “a”, “c”, and “d” are incorrect per the above explanation.

    I took into account the {1st} exception here that when it's over 80% ownership, no G/L recognized.

    However, {per 2nd exception} since liability assumed is more than the adjusted basis, a gain is recognized. I've seen two formulas for gain and I am not so sure when to use them appropriately.

    a) FMV — AB = Gain

    b) Amt. Realized* — AB = Gain ……………………… ( *Greater of FMV or Liability Assumed)

    #652571
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    for DRDs, what do you deduct as DRD if both the percentage of taxable income and the percentage of the dividend both create a NOL? Is it the lesser of the two or always the dividend percentage? I've never had a problem like this come up, but just trying to play it safe

    #652572
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    Soooo.. I had a lot of theory slash law questions on my exam. YIKES. To those people who asked if farming or ISO is important, well, it is. *hint* I just feel like you have to know the entire textbook since it is not like university where you can “predict” what's going to be on the exam! The waiting begins… *fingers crossed*

    This REG exam reminds me of my FAR exam. I had a lot of theory questions on my FAR exam than calculations.

    #652573
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    I am probably going to start studying for AUD tomorrow or whenever and man, more theory. This is so exciting… 😐

    #652574
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    Ashley, go for BEC if you want calculations or formulas. My exam, yesterday, was full of them. I'd say about 40%.

    Today was a good day. Played video games and thought about a nap. Tomorrow more of the same. Monday break is over and I'll start REG.

    #652575
    lauren725
    Member

    cpasucks – you would take the percentage of dividend if it would create an NOL. You would ignore the % of taxable income in that case.

    AUD - 73,91
    FAR - 79 - Thank you God!
    BEC - 73,79!!!!
    REG - 92 whatttt??!

    I used Becker review + flashcards, Ninja Audio, Ninja MCQ supplement on BEC and REG.

    Done! Praise God!

    #652576
    WANNABE_CPA
    Member

    Which of the following types of conduct renders a contract voidable?

    A.

    Mutual mistake as to facts forming the basis of the contract

    B.

    Unbreached contract

    C.

    Duress through physical compulsion

    D.

    Duress through threats of a civil suit

    FAR : 68, 74, 83 Thank you God 🙂
    BEC : 78 (8/27) 🙂
    REG : 72 ,80 (2/25) 🙂
    AUD : 69,67, 07/23

Viewing 15 replies - 1,516 through 1,530 (of 2,393 total)
  • The topic ‘REG Study Group Q1 2015 - Page 102’ is closed to new replies.