FAE September 2012

7upfree

ferike1 wrote: »

reo49 wrote: »

Do you not know where nice guys finish?

We are accountants (sadly) and not investment bankers so who are you competing with :rolleyes:?? The nature of life in the big four doesn't even make for competition. If you stay there long enough through simple attrition you will be promoted (as sane and rational people simply won't stay there).

I think apart from you no one here wants to place and most would be happy to finish with just a pass

I'd be happy just to pass these exams. Frankly I'm already a year behind in my pay grade from failing one cap 2 exam. So a pass in these would certainly do me fine.

The forum is about helping each other out as we are a in the same boat so being nice to people might make them more enclined to help.

faer2203

Hi all, just wondering are people bringing kinda generic answers with them for IMP or is there anything of particular focus? Thanks

funkymonkey9

Re EIIS:

My query to the institute:

I have a query regarding the EIIS scheme in the tax course for FAE. At the time of teaching,the EIIS scheme had not been approved by the EU and since its approval, a document was put up on the student site with some information about the scheme. If an indicator were to come up regarding funding the business, should we discuss BES or EIIS or both? Thanks

Response from the Institute:
This is covered off in the syllabus: Item 3.1 on page 20 (3rd item listed after the introductory line) "Optimum use of seed capital relief, business expansion relief (RoI) and Employment and Investment Incentive Relief (RoI)"
Hence all are examinable.

...............

Probably could have worded my query a little better in hindsight but from my understanding, EIIS replaces BES only and per this link:
http://www.simple.ie/news/eiis-approved-press-release-25th-nov-2011/

"The Minister also took the opportunity to announce the end of relief under the Business Expansion Scheme. The latest date for tax relief under this scheme will be for shares issued on or before 31 December 2011."

Therefore in a q, I think we need to determine when the shares were issued (before or after 31 December 2011) to know which relief applies.

I honestly don't think it will come up as it is an area of transition that they haven't given us much clarity on through lectures and therefore they know we could all go crazy if we did poorly in an indicator on it.

Flange/Flanders

Just in relation to the auditing ISA's, I think someone was enquiring about a summary of them, I genuinely dont think that we really need to know them that much, just maybe have the list of them (which is easily found on wikipedia or at the back of the auditing book) but from looking at the case studies they dont really look for specific paragraphs or even details. The ES's seem to be more looked for. I'm actually even surprised that I havent seem any specific mention of paragraphs from the IAS's in the case studies....tho I am open to correction

Moorstown

Mock Exam Papers Core 2010.

Can someone please upload these or a provide a link please.

I tried the attachments and I can't find them.

Thanks in advance

louise1985

Moorstown wrote: »

Mock Exam Papers Core 2010.

Can someone please upload these or a provide a link please.

I tried the attachments and I can't find them.

Thanks in advance

they are in the fae 2011 thread. i have them saved on laptop but dont have it with me but can upload later if you cant find them

Daizy0

luco123 wrote: »

FAE4EVA wrote: »

Hi Daisy,

Just checked there..

The only two I have that you don't have are Precision Cut and Flexum. They are attached to this thread. See paper clip on front accountancy page.

Also I don't have the O' Shea's pub and there is a Marlborough House case on the thread with no solution..

Anybody have it??

Your also missing Canny Milking Equipment and Tekron, they are both on here someplace!

Do you have overcoatings?

Yes, I will upload it 4 u later if ur still looking 4 it??

Accrual Intentions

ferike1 wrote: »

Yeah that should cover it but then you may not get the sufficiency if you are missing that many indicators. Overall you need x RC's out of 18/23ish to get sufficient.

How do you know this, what is that based on?

Jame Gumb

Accrual Intentions wrote: »

ferike1 wrote: »

Yeah that should cover it but then you may not get the sufficiency if you are missing that many indicators. Overall you need x RC's out of 18/23ish to get sufficient.

How do you know this, what is that based on?

Doubt that would be enough for sufficiency.

You'd need a few Cs or HCs too (on top of the Cs required for depth).

Accrual Intentions

Jame Gumb wrote: »

Doubt that would be enough for sufficiency.

You'd need a few Cs or HCs too (on top of the Cs required for depth).

I'm pretty certain you don't need any HCs. I was under the impression that HCs and Cs counted the same towards sufficiency.

whytenc

Accrual Intentions wrote: »

I'm pretty certain you don't need any HCs. I was under the impression that HCs and Cs counted the same towards sufficiency.

Yeah they said in the continuous assessment that HC was only used to decide who has placed......defo not too concerned about that at this stage!

Dogshow87

Accrual Intentions wrote: »

Well la dee fu<king dah. I think you are whats known as, in accountancy terms, a w@nker.

Well said.

notanocelot

Accrual Intentions wrote: »

Well la dee fu<king dah. I think you are whats known as, in accountancy terms, a w@nker.

I congratulate reo on being happy about her/his mock results!

7upfree

notanocelot wrote: »

Accrual Intentions wrote: »

Well la dee fu<king dah. I think you are whats known as, in accountancy terms, a w@nker.

I congratulate reo on being happy about her/his mock results!

Fair play to passing the mocks but when people are asking genuine questions there's no need to be so arrogant about it you could just be nice and give them the answer.

Accrual Intentions

7upfree wrote: »

Fair play to passing the mocks but when people are asking genuine questions there's no need to be so arrogant about it you could just be nice and give them the answer.

I don't really care about someone being nice. But someone who has passed the mocks shouldn't even be on this forum, they're already comfortably in a position to pass the exams and have nothing to worry about. Meanwhile back in the real world the rest of us are 13 days from the most important exams of our lives and working desperately hard towards them.

With brains like he has (and presumably he's got a decent work rate too) to pass those difficult mocks at that early stage he really shouldn't even be doing Chartered Accountancy. He should be off trying to find a cure for cancer somewhere or crack cold fusion.

Bravo sir, you have wasted your life.

ferike1

To be honest I feel I have made some mistakes in my life too, to have ended up in CA.
Either that or I was a bad budhist in my previous life and this is my punishment.

Jame Gumb

Accrual Intentions wrote: »

Jame Gumb wrote: »

Doubt that would be enough for sufficiency.

You'd need a few Cs or HCs too (on top of the Cs required for depth).

I'm pretty certain you don't need any HCs. I was under the impression that HCs and Cs counted the same towards sufficiency.

Yep.

That's why I said "Cs or HCs" rather than "Cs and HCs".

Accrual Intentions

Jame Gumb wrote: »

Yep.

That's why I said "Cs or HCs" rather than "Cs and HCs".

Dead on, this whole thing is doing my head in. Have never gone into an exam before in my life where I didn't have a clue what I needed to do to pass.

On that, what do we think about the elective? I'm completely guessing here but if there are 9-10 indicators then surely getting competent in 5 would be enough?

ferike1

Sorry I gathered that from the board report

Sufficiency - This is measured by allocating a value to each “Reaching Competence” attained by the candidate, and a higher value to “Competent” and “Highly Competent”.
Candidates are required to meet the appropriate sufficiency level as set by the FAEB.

So therefore to just pass on level 1 sufficiency you need a certain amount of RC's out of all the indicators. C's carry more value but you still need to hit at least RC x times out of all the indicators. For example you could get green in PM by hitting the 3 C's out of 5 but fail on sufficiency if you don't get enough indicators overall.

Jame Gumb

Accrual Intentions wrote: »

Jame Gumb wrote: »

Yep.

That's why I said "Cs or HCs" rather than "Cs and HCs".

Dead on, this whole thing is doing my head in. Have never gone into an exam before in my life where I didn't have a clue what I needed to do to pass.

On that, what do we think about the elective? I'm completely guessing here but if there are 9-10 indicators then surely getting competent in 5 would be enough?

I'm pretty sure that they said that they assign points to RCs, Cs and HCs.

Say 5 for an RC and 10 for a C or a HC.

Say there are 10 indicators.

They decide that (say) 65 points is "the standard". How you get to 65 is your own business but that's the standard.

So 5 Cs, 3 RCs and 2 NAs would do it.

Or 7 Cs and 3 NAs.

Not gospel - Just my take on it.

7upfree

Accrual Intentions wrote: »

I don't really care about someone being nice. But someone who has passed the mocks shouldn't even be on this forum, they're already comfortably in a position to pass the exams and have nothing to worry about. Meanwhile back in the real world the rest of us are 13 days from the most important exams of our lives and working desperately hard towards them.

With brains like he has (and presumably he's got a decent work rate too) to pass those difficult mocks at that early stage he really shouldn't even be doing Chartered Accountancy. He should be off trying to find a cure for cancer somewhere or crack cold fusion.

Bravo sir, you have wasted your life.

I don't know what possessed me to become an accountant. I would advice anyone still in college don't even consider these exams unless all you want to do is auditing. I have no interest in auditing

7upfree

Jame Gumb wrote: »

I'm pretty sure that they said that they assign points to RCs, Cs and HCs.

Say 5 for an RC and 10 for a C or a HC.

Say there are 10 indicators.

They decide that (say) 65 points is "the standard". How you get to 65 is your own business but that's the standard.

So 5 Cs, 3 RCs and 2 NAs would do it.

Or 7 Cs and 3 NAs.

Not gospel - Just my take on it.

That gives me a little hope I thought if you completely missed an indicator then that was it you failed. Maybe there is hope after all

Jame Gumb

7upfree wrote: »

Jame Gumb wrote: »

I'm pretty sure that they said that they assign points to RCs, Cs and HCs.

Say 5 for an RC and 10 for a C or a HC.

Say there are 10 indicators.

They decide that (say) 65 points is "the standard". How you get to 65 is your own business but that's the standard.

So 5 Cs, 3 RCs and 2 NAs would do it.

Or 7 Cs and 3 NAs.

Not gospel - Just my take on it.

That gives me a little hope I thought if you completely missed an indicator then that was it you failed. Maybe there is hope after all

Definitely not...you can completely miss an indicator and still be fine.

These are only approximate stats, but 25% of people completely missed a reorg tax indicator in one of the real Comp papers, but then hardly anyone failed on foot of tax. Two RCs and an NA is enough for the breadth test.

supernova84

Guys don't drink too much Locust coffee before the exam or they could well fail you on the breadth test.

Accrual Intentions

supernova84 wrote: »

Guys don't drink too much Locust coffee before the exam or they could well fail us on the breadth test.

Boom! I worry about you lol. I hope you've been doing other cases.

Elle2012

Does anyone have the overcoatings case that they could upload?

Thanks

faer2203

Dee29 wrote: »

There is an EIIS article in this months Accountancy Ireland which explains it well. I would be inclined to mention the EIIS rather than BES, but no harm in stating that EIIS is replacing BES. Rules around EIIS are not as complex. Its purpose is to help SMEs in the current credit crunch. Perhaps worth mentioning on a question about sources of finance!

Thanks for that dee, just read it there, so does it work like if I invest say 100k into a qualifying co, I will get tax relief at 30%, or is that the company gets the tax relief, im a bit confused!!

BESman

faer2203 wrote: »

Dee29 wrote: »

There is an EIIS article in this months Accountancy Ireland which explains it well. I would be inclined to mention the EIIS rather than BES, but no harm in stating that EIIS is replacing BES. Rules around EIIS are not as complex. Its purpose is to help SMEs in the current credit crunch. Perhaps worth mentioning on a question about sources of finance!

Thanks for that dee, just read it there, so does it work like if I invest say 100k into a qualifying co, I will get tax relief at 30%, or is that the company gets the tax relief, im a bit confused!!

The investor gets the relief, not the company. Lads ye're getting way too hung up on this BES/EIIS scheme. The main differences between them is almost every type of company qualifies for EIIS whereas it was more restricted to certain industries under BES. Also the relief is restricted to 30% with the remaining 11% available if the company increases workforce or expenditure on R&D after 3 years. You won't need to know anything else as its pretty much the same as BES apart from that.

ferike1

I don't know what possessed me to become an accountant. I would advice anyone still in college don't even consider these exams unless all you want to do is auditing. I have no interest in auditing

We would probably be friends. I find that people who genuinely like audit are not people I want to be friends with lol.

Accrual Intentions

ferike1 wrote: »

We would probably be friends. I find that people who genuinely like audit are not people I want to be friends with lol.

There are people who like audit...? :eek: