REG Study Group Q2 2015 - Page 218

  • Creator
    Topic
  • #192517
    jeff
    Keymaster

    Welcome to the Q2 2015 CPA Exam Study Group for REG.

    “Death and Taxes” – Individual Tax for the CPA Exam

    Posted by Another71 on Monday, November 24, 2014

    Free NINJA: https://www.another71.com/cpa-exam-study-plan/

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

Viewing 15 replies - 3,256 through 3,270 (of 3,544 total)
  • Author
    Replies
  • #680484
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    Anyone ever had a real life research tab where it asks you to find the paragraph of the code and not just the section/subsection? Ninja asked me for that twice on one test; it threw me off and my exam rehearsal went from what would have been an 86 to a 71.

    Also did anyone else notice that the practice research tab NASBA posts are wrong? At least for FAR and REG. I emailed them to get it fixed and they sent me jumping through hoop after hoop after hoop, so I gave up.

    #680485
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    coloradorit, as I said, your posts are delayed, that's why it probably feels like we are ignoring you 🙂

    #680486
    No_one
    Member

    @Meddik Can you please explain what you mean, when you say that if we take entire 2500/- as gross income it means we took 3500/- last year itemized deduction.

    Sorry, but dont understand whats going on there…

    and why we add in last example entire 1000/-?

    CA Candidate
    FAR: You are down...
    Aud: Surprised me...Thanks
    BEC: 75% work done
    REG: It's 80 but I am 100% done 🙂

    #680487
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    I feel like in one of the previous question they were allocating land and and computer, and one of them was at FMV? Do they just use lower one?

    Also, I didn't realize they were allocating the excess only (9000), I thought 21000*(10/30) and 21000*(20/30). Is there a difference?

    so it's established now that basis of the inventory is used for distribution and liquidation, but fmv for sale of partnership interest

    Thanks for posting and formatting!

    #680488
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    yes, I remember that one research sim in ninja AUD. I entered the paragraph # and it graded it 0, we didn't ask you for paragraph, just a section. No, I've never seen that on a test

    never noticed anything wrong with tabs too, but hoops and giving up sounds about right

    #680489

    @coloradorit…This is how i calculated.

    39000- 3000-15000( Hot assets )= We are left with 21000

    Now 10000/30000*21000 and 20000/30000*21000 is the basis left for the 2 parcel of lands .

    Thanks for posting.

    BEC Passed
    FAR Passed
    AUD Passed
    REG Passed

    #680490
    No_one
    Member

    Sorry guys I missed many posts looks like some delay/tech glitch..

    CA Candidate
    FAR: You are down...
    Aud: Surprised me...Thanks
    BEC: 75% work done
    REG: It's 80 but I am 100% done 🙂

    #680491

    Parent sold stock with cost of 8000 to their child for 6000., its fmv. after 6 months child sold it for 7000 to unrelated party. what is proper treatment of this transaction. How much gain or loss parent did parent recognize and how much gain did child recognize

    BEC Passed
    FAR Passed
    AUD Passed
    REG Passed

    #680492
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    0; 0?

    #680493
    Meddik
    Member

    I think the parent is 0, and the child will recognize a loss of $1,000.

    Parent sells to related party, no G/L. But there is a built in loss on the item of $2,000 now, so that when it eventually is sold to an unrelated party, the loss of $2,000 is recognized.

    @no_one

    What I mean is that you only include the state tax refund in your gross income if it is in excess of the standard deduction.

    You would have had $3,950 deductible from the standard deduction, no matter what. So if you paid 6k in taxes last year and received a 2.5k refund, you are down to $3,500 (now less than the std deduction amount). The government would give you that $450 (3950 – 3500) amount tax free anyway had you used a standard deduction. So they let you have that and only charge you the excess amount of $2,050 (6000-3950).

    If you had paid 6k taxes and only got a refund of $1,000, now you're at $5,000 (6000-1000). You are above the std deduction, so you include all $1,000 in your gross income. Because the itemized deductions still gave you a $5,000 deduction instead of the lower std deduction of $3,950.

    Basically, if your refund puts you in a position where your std deduction would have been better than your itemized amount, you will not be including the full amount of the refund in gross income. Only the tax that you benefited from, by deducting it last year (hence tax benefit rule).

    FAR - 86
    REG - 83
    AUD - 97
    BEC -

    #680494
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    where is logic here? what makes cost of rent – just damages, and lost profit – special damages?

    The Johnson Corporation sent its only pump to the manufacturer to be repaired. It engaged Travis, a local trucking company, to deliver the pump and to redeliver it to Johnson promptly upon completion of the repair. Travis did not know that Johnson’s entire plant was inoperative without the pump. Travis delayed several days in returning the repaired pump. During the time it expected to be without the pump, Johnson incurred $5,000 in lost profits. At the end of that time, Johnson rented a replacement pump at $200 per day. What is Johnson entitled to recover from Travis?

    A. The $200-a-day cost incurred in renting the pump.

    Answer (A) is correct.

    The failure of Travis to perform with reasonable promptness was a breach of contract for which Johnson could recover monetary damages. Johnson may recover its general damages, which were those likely and foreseeable as a result of the breach (the pump rental costs).

    B. Nothing because Travis is not liable for damages.

    C. The $200-a-day cost incurred in renting the pump plus the lost profits.

    Answer (C) is incorrect.

    Special damages, those flowing from some unique aspect of the case, are recoverable only if the defendant knew or should have known at the time of contracting of the possibility of their incurrence. By not informing Travis that the plant would be inoperative without the pump, Johnson was precluded from recovering lost profits.

    D. Actual damages plus punitive damages.

    #680495
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    I have love–hate relationship with gleim

    #680496
    Meddik
    Member

    Anjajna, I believe that since Travis didn't know of the urgency of the pump he is not liable for the lost profits because it was not a reasonably foreseeable consequence of his breach of contract. So by special they mean not reasonably foreseeable.

    However, he did delay the delivery despite being engaged to “promptly deliver it after repairs were made.” He failed to do so. Johnson Corporation took the necessary measures to mitigate the loss of profits, by renting the pump at $200 per day. One may recover the damages if they took reasonable steps to mitigate the loss once breach of contract occurred.

    Had Travis known of the importance of the pump, he would have been liable for profits as well…I think…because it would have been a “reasonably foreseeable consequence” of his breaching the contract.

    FAR - 86
    REG - 83
    AUD - 97
    BEC -

    #680497
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    Meddik,

    right, but based on this logic (Travis didn't and couldn't know of the importance of the pump) why does he even have to pay rent? If the need of pump is not foreseeable, why recover rent, if it is foreseeable, why not recover losses

    #680498
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    i guess it's just one of those questions

Viewing 15 replies - 3,256 through 3,270 (of 3,544 total)
  • The topic ‘REG Study Group Q2 2015 - Page 218’ is closed to new replies.