REG Study Group Q1 2016 - Page 24

Viewing 15 replies - 346 through 360 (of 1,064 total)
  • Author
    Replies
  • #748176
    mcohen1993
    Participant

    I figure LKE are pretty important as Becker has literally dozens of them where they just change a few facts and numbers around and ask recognized vs realized. NINJA may have a ton you may just have gotten a few right early on like myself. My “Taxation of Property Transactions” is at 94% so I don't see them much.

    Only thing to remember is boot is only recognized as gain when received and not reduced by boot given. Only exception is with liabilities given and received. Then you do a netting.

    REG: 91!!
    BEC: 80!!
    AUD: TBA
    FAR: TBA

    In the order I plan to take the exams.

    #748177
    rosecpa
    Participant

    Mcohen, if your goal is to pass, a score in the 80's is more than enough. Unless you plan to be an Elijah Watt scholar…

    amor d and ahugemistake, is the qualification for a lease under the statute of frauds due to the fact t that is a contract for land (in which case a lease for under a year should also be in writing) ? Or does it qualify only if the duration is lost than a year, simply because of the length of the contract?

    #748178
    melody_pinaycpa
    Participant

    @bin thank you!

    FAR (Apr 2015) - 88
    AUD (July 2015) - 86
    BEC (Oct 2015) - 82
    REG - 73, 70, retake Sept 2016

    #748179
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    @Rose
    Land – always need in writing, regardless of time.
    Lease – need not in writing if less than a year. Any lease contracts (other than land transactions) less than a year need not in writing. Correct?

    Now, I have more questions.
    What about leasing one apartment unit for six months only?
    What about a car lease for EXACTLY ONE YEAR (i.e., 12 months or 365 days)?

    #748180
    JS867_5309
    Member

    Q: Sands purchased 100 shares of Eastern Corp. stock for $18,000 on April 1 of the prior year. on February 1 of the current year, Sands sold 80 shares of Eastern for $7,000. Fifteen days later, Sands purchased 25 shares of Eastern for $3,750. What is the amount of Sand's recognized gain or loss?

    A. $0
    B. $500
    C. $1,000
    D. $2,000

    A: C. A wash sale takes place when securities are sold at a loss and replaced with substantially identical securities within 30 days before and after the loss.

    I answered A. Because the transactions qualify as a wash sale, the loss on the securities is disallowed. Why is it C?

    Exam:I'm done 🙂 🙂 🙂
    REG - 71 (2/22/14); 67 (4/3/14); 74 (8/29/15); 83 (2/29/16)!!!
    BEC - 72 (5/24/14); 85 (1/3/15)!!!!
    AUD - 72 (8/23/14); 76 (10/15/14)!!!
    FAR - 77 (5/26/15)!!!

    Started in 2013 using Kaplan and failed REG, REG, BEC, AUD. Switched to NINJA suite in Sept 2014 and passed AUD...then BEC...then FAR!
    REG took 2 tries but I finally got it in too!
    I'm a hard convert - Using NINJA method with NINJA video/book/notes/MCQ

    Education: Check
    Experience: 3 months left! I hit 4 years on May 30 🙂

    #748181
    marqzho
    Participant

    JS867_5309

    Please check if this “Sands sold 80 shares of Eastern for $7,000” is a typo. The question should be sold 50 shares instead of 80.

    Answer
    Purchase 100 shares for $18,000/100=$180 per share
    Sold 50 shares for $7,000/50=$140 per share
    Buy back 25 shares for $3750/25=$150 per share

    Because Sands buy back share within 30 days, only the portion that he didn't buy back recognizes gain / loss.

    ($180 – $140)*25 share = $1000 loss ( 25 share represents the portion that he didn't buy back)

    And new basis would be 50 share for $9000 (50*$180) plus 25 share for $4750 ($3750+$1000 wash sales loss)

    hope that helps!

    REG 90
    FAR 95
    AUD 98
    BEC 84

    #748182
    Claudia408
    Participant

    This is from a SIM about an M-1 Recon….The task is to insert the M-1 adjustment and determine if it increases/decreases taxable income….So, can someone explain to me in simple terms what is going on here? To me it sounds like the company appropriately depreciated the computer using MACRs , but it sounds like they didn't depreciate it enough?

    Book depreciation on computers for 2015 was $10,000. These computers, which cost $50,000, were placed in service on January 2, 2014. Tax depreciation used MACRS with the half-year convention. No election was made to expense part of the computer cost and Reliant elected not to use bonus depreciation.

    Answer M-1 adjustment: $6,000 decreases taxable income.

    BEC - 75 (3x)
    AUD - 78 (3x)
    REG - 67, 66, Aug 1
    FAR - 54, Sept 8

    #748183
    marqzho
    Participant

    Claudia408

    Tax depreciation for 2014 : 50000*(1/5 year )*200% declining balance*(1/2 year convention) = 10000
    Tax depreciation for 2015 : (50000-10000)*(1/5 year )*200% declining balance = 16000
    Book depreciation for 2015 : $10000

    when we reconcile in M-1, We need to subtract $6000 from book income to get to tax income.

    hope that makes sense

    REG 90
    FAR 95
    AUD 98
    BEC 84

    #748184
    Claudia408
    Participant

    @marqzho – i understand where the math is coming from…. but if i understand the problem correctly… in 2014 and 2015 the depreciation was too low for book and it should be more for tax, hence adding back $6,000 to decrease taxable income?

    BEC - 75 (3x)
    AUD - 78 (3x)
    REG - 67, 66, Aug 1
    FAR - 54, Sept 8

    #748185
    marqzho
    Participant

    It is always a good idea to make up some numbers to see a better picture

    Let say you have income for $100000 and no other expense beside depreciation.

    In book income you will have $100000-$10000 =$90000
    In tax income you will have $100000-$16000 =$84000

    So in M-1,
    book income 90000
    depreciation XXX
    Tax income 84000

    XXX has to be a decrease adjustment.

    REG 90
    FAR 95
    AUD 98
    BEC 84

    #748186
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    @Claudia, I've been following the sample SIM you laid out above along with the explanation. What's the final answer of this M-1 recon? Does the problem suggest addition or subtraction of $6,000?

    #748187
    nib
    Participant

    when i solved ninja regulation sim of 1040 form . i am not understanding calculation of self employment tax . please help me .
    simulation question and answer given below.

    ————————-

    ,Mrs. Vick is a part-time real estate agent and income =5000 and is considered to be self-employed. She may owe self-employment tax. In order to calculate the amount of self-employment tax owed, she would fill in Schedule SE (Form 1040). One-half of the self-employment tax is a deduction before AGI.

    1. Net profit from Schedule C $5,000.00
    2. Multiply above amount by 92.35% (0.9235) 4,617.50
    3. Multiply the lesser of $117,000 or line 2 amount by 15.3% (0.153) 706.48
    4. Multiply line 3 amount by 50% (0.50) 353.24

    so self employement tax deducted =353.24

    #748188
    marqzho
    Participant

    @bin

    Schedule C income * 0.9235 * 0.153 = self employment tax

    50% of self employment tax is a deduction to AGI.

    So let say this question,

    5000*0.9235*0.153 = $706.48 is your self employment tax

    50% of 706.48 or $353.24 is a deduction to arrive at AGI.

    I think the calculation is pretty straight forward in ninja explanation. Which part you are having problem with?

    REG 90
    FAR 95
    AUD 98
    BEC 84

    #748189
    nib
    Participant

    @ marqzho ,
    thks , you made it just 1 step n easy.
    what about 3 rd step
    3. Multiply the lesser of $117,000 or line 2 amount by 15.3% (0.153) 706.48

    1,17,000 is some limit amt or phaseout amt ?

    #748190
    marqzho
    Participant

    117000 is the max subject amount on social security tax for 2014.

    The long version of this calculation is

    92.35% of income (max at 117000) * 12.4% social security tax
    + 92.35% of income * 2.9% medicare tax
    = self employment tax

    let say income is 150,000, self employment tax will be:

    117000*12.4% + 138525*2.9% = $18525

    Hope that helps

    REG 90
    FAR 95
    AUD 98
    BEC 84

Viewing 15 replies - 346 through 360 (of 1,064 total)
  • The topic ‘REG Study Group Q1 2016 - Page 24’ is closed to new replies.