[jeff]

Welcome to the Q1 2016 CPA Exam Study Group for REG.

Some BLITZ videos to help your exams: https://www.another71.com/ninja-blitz

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

[nib]

@ amor D ,

I also got this new knowledge of foreign charitable contribution not deductible .Thanks for it .

I have confusion in parole evidence rule.Please provide me easy understandable explanation .

.Please find below one example of parole rule .

Dunne and Cook signed a contract requiring Cook to rebind 500 of Dunne’s books at 80¢ per book. Later, Dunne requested in good faith, that the price be reduced to 70¢ per book. Cook agreed orally to reduce the price to 70¢. Under the circumstances, the oral agreement is:
Ans=unenforceable, because Dunne failed to give consideration, but proof of it is otherwise admissible into evidence.

Generally, the parol evidence rule will not allow oral evidence to alter the terms of a written contract. The parol evidence rule will only allow the admission of evidence that is not in the written contract in limited circumstances.

[nib]

@ amor D ,

I also got this new knowledge of foreign charitable contribution not deductible .Thanks for it .

I have confusion in parole evidence rule.Please provide me easy understandable explanation .

.Please find below one example of parole rule .

Dunne and Cook signed a contract requiring Cook to rebind 500 of Dunne’s books at 80¢ per book. Later, Dunne requested in good faith, that the price be reduced to 70¢ per book. Cook agreed orally to reduce the price to 70¢. Under the circumstances, the oral agreement is:
Ans=unenforceable, because Dunne failed to give consideration, but proof of it is otherwise admissible into evidence.

Generally, the parol evidence rule will not allow oral evidence to alter the terms of a written contract. The parol evidence rule will only allow the admission of evidence that is not in the written contract in limited circumstances.

[nib]

I have confusion in parole evidence rule.Please provide me easy understandable explanation .

.Please find below one example of parole rule .

Dunne and Cook signed a contract requiring Cook to rebind 500 of Dunne’s books at 80¢ per book. Later, Dunne requested in good faith, that the price be reduced to 70¢ per book. Cook agreed orally to reduce the price to 70¢. Under the circumstances, the oral agreement is:
Ans=unenforceable, because Dunne failed to give consideration, but proof of it is otherwise admissible into evidence.

Generally, the parol evidence rule will not allow oral evidence to alter the terms of a written contract. The parol evidence rule will only allow the admission of evidence that is not in the written contract in limited circumstances.
– See more at: https://www.another71.com/cpa-exam-forum/topic/reg-study-group-q1-2016/page/11#post-853121

[melody_pinaycpa]

Can someone please post AMT formula/computation starting from gross income down to Alternative Minimum Tax..I am seeing different items under adjustments and preferences from different sources.

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

[Pandarama]

@bin – the parole evidence rule just means that anything that means that anything that was agreed on before the written agreement can't be admitted to evidence if they were to go to court. Anything that happens after the written agreement can be used though, just not before.

So in the example you gave, they had made an agreement and then made changes to the agreement afterwards. Because the changes happened afterwards, it can be “admissible in to evidence” (it'll be allowed to be used against the other party).

The agreement afterwards was unenforceable because of a separate rule. They could've honestly split this question into two questions: 1. Is the request from Dunne enforceable? No, because Dunne asked Cook to do the job he was already going to do but for a lower price. Cook doesn't gain anything from getting less money for the work. Dunne would need to give some sort of “consideration” for Cook to benefit from taking less money for the same amount of work.

BEC - 80
AUD - 64, 75 - credit lost, 90!!
REG - 73, 74, 83
FAR - 61, 72, 85

Feels good finishing on my best note. Time to watch the mailbox.

[Anonymous]

@Bin, Imagine going to the court and facing Judge Judy for the lowered price per unit you previously (orally) agreed with the dealer after the parole evidence rule date. How are you going to prove that little sweet judge that you requested the dealer in good faith and that dealer graciously agreed without any proof except that first (written/signed) contract that in itself contradicts your claim?
I doubt if Judge Judy spares you her precious five seconds to listen to your petition.

[Anonymous]

Is there a way to compute for the depreciation rate (beyond first year of depreciation) when the problem provides only the depreciation method (MM/HY/MQ) and depreciable years?

[CPA2B_NJ]

I'm having a hard time understanding property transactions (1231 etc). Can anyone shed some light into this topic?

FAR - 50, 78
BEC - 67, 72, 75
AUD - 72, 80
REG - 70, 85

To God be the glory! Forever, amen!

NJ License

[Anonymous]

@CPA2B_NJ watch this youtube video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g2rwfBexF2s
hope this will help you.

[Anonymous]

@CPA2B_NJ, can you be more specific with your S-1231 question?

[Tncincy]

@rvelez,
How are you coming, Have you started? Got your books out? are you ready to take this thing on?

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

[nib]

@ Amor D
@Pandarama

Thanks . when I solved parole role questions , I was imagining myself standing in front of judge in court room.

[nib]

@ Amor D
In your problem you mentioned about following term. What is that term ?
depreciation method (MM/HY/MQ) .

[nib]

@CPA2B_NJ

Section 1231 defines “property used in the trade or business” ———–
1)property used in the trade or business, of a character which is subject to the allowance for depreciation and real property used in the trade or business.
2) held for > 1 yr
3) Sale or exchange of real or depreciable business property
4) Involuntary conversion of:
(1) real or depreciable business property
(2) any capital asset that is held >1 yr and is held in connection with a trade or business or a transaction entered into for profit

c. Certain farming transactions involving crops and livestock
d. Certain transactions involving timber, iron ore, and coal

——————–

1231 PROPERTY
real or personal business-use property
Inventory is nevr 1231 property
SLM depr

holding period > 1 yr
net L= ordinary loss
net G = Combine with other 1231 gain

1231 net gain > 1231 losses = LTCG
1231 losses > 1231 gain = ordinary losses

[nib]

hello friends ,

In below problem , my answer was ‘
“duke can claim only from pierce , because Pierce owed Duke $3,000.”
If we use the same principal from previous mortgage problem discussed earlier . pierce is primary borrower from duke The main loan agreement was between pierce and duke .So in case of lodge's default , pierce must pay to duke .
but the answer says
” Ans= Both Pierce and Lodge liable to duke “

please help me to understand. what am i missing here .

problem=
Pierce owed Duke $3,000. Pierce contracted with Lodge to paint Lodge's house and Lodge agreed to pay Duke $3,000 to satisfy Pierce's debt. Pierce painted Lodge's house, but Lodge did not pay Duke the $3,000. In a lawsuit by Duke against Pierce and Lodge, who will be liable to Duke?

Ans= Both Pierce and Lodge

explanation=
Pierce is still liable to Duke for $3,000. Since Lodge agreed to pay Duke $3,000 if Pierce would paint Lodge's house, Lodge is now also liable to Duke for $3,000 and Lodge has breached the contract by nonpayment. Duke can collect from both Pierce and Lodge, but only for the $3,000. Unjust enrichment prohibition would require payment from Lodge. However, Pierce is still a debtor to Duke no matter what Lodge does.

[Author]

Replies