FAE September 2012

lar05

This tax indicator sounds like it was tricky, I see it as a trading company, the trade is a day spa, it doesnt derive its revenue from land of buildings held in the state but from the day spa trade so i went with the participation relief and sale of the company shares as the better option, the purchaser taking over the massive creditors. The sale of the building gave a double tax hit after liquidation and the group had to still repay the creditors. i said aswel that if the company is sold the employees may be still kept on as the trade is continuing and this wouldnt happen if its closed down and they didnt want to effect the staff.
was so hard to spot the indicators clearly today, they are are just to long, so hard to structure properly!

Szewinska

Bill Williams wrote: »

Paul Monahan is a superb lecturer in my view. Most of the other lecturers are obsessed with their own subjects, but he brings it all together and emphasises what you need to know and the level if detail you need to know. If I get through Core, I owe a lot of thanks to Paul.

Jesus I'm only realising the amount of management accounting I did over the last two months...and it was basically a waste of time! Just that mickey mouse customer profitability stuff...

agree with you on Paul. I'd take very seriously on board what he has to say. His ear is very close to the ground in institute HQ.

chursy

Bill Williams wrote: »

Paul Monahan is a superb lecturer in my view. Most of the other lecturers are obsessed with their own subjects, but he brings it all together and emphasises what you need to know and the level if detail you need to know. If I get through Core, I owe a lot of thanks to Paul.

Jesus I'm only realising the amount of management accounting I did over the last two months...and it was basically a waste of time! Just that mickey mouse customer profitability stuff...

so what exactly do you owe to paul!!!!! he is an idiot!!!!!

tt1

Least the layout of the paper was readable today!! Yesterdays layout was shocking and should definitely be complained about the length and stupidity of how it was presented is only typical of the institute!!

I took the finance on q2 to be pm as well did a page on ifrs 5 so fecking better be pm.

Dont know if ur allowed participation exemp or not i said you were cause it wasnt land not sure though should have covered my ass n said to get specialist tax advice as im only recently qualified aca and due to the unique nature of the aca i am only expected to know everything with imp and strategy, marketing and chanage management crap!!

Very short tax indicator on paye late filing and payin, told them to dicuss it with client and pay it immediately a within 12 months and put it and fraud as weakness in management lettr and more substantive procedures as controls crap!!

Roll on audit ( least no strategy crap HOPEFULLY) and coopers tomorrow

Szewinska

chursy wrote: »

so what exactly do you owe to paul!!!!! he is an idiot!!!!!

that is harsh no. he teaches one how to approach these exams. anybody can go away and learn things off but he educates you in a different way. helps get you ready for these exams as they are unique. That is just my call but everybody sees these things differently.

Flange/Flanders

ferike1 wrote: »

You have to do

Advanced Financial Reporting
Professional accountant (corporate governance)
Business analytics (strategy)

Choice of two electives
APM
Advanced financial management
advanced audit
Advanced Tax.

Unless you have the exemption from college as well, the CAP1 law doesnt transfer over.

ferike1

I do

chursy

tt1 wrote: »

Least the layout of the paper was readable today!! Yesterdays layout was shocking and should definitely be complained about the length and stupidity of how it was presented is only typical of the institute!!

I took the finance on q2 to be pm as well did a page on ifrs 5 so fecking better be pm.

Dont know if ur allowed participation exemp or not i said you were cause it wasnt land not sure though should have covered my ass n said to get specialist tax advice as im only recently qualified aca and due to the unique nature of the aca i am only expected to know everything with imp and strategy, marketing and chanage management crap!!

Very short tax indicator on paye late filing and payin, told them to dicuss it with client and pay it immediately a within 12 months and put it and fraud as weakness in management lettr and more substantive procedures as controls crap!!

Roll on audit ( least no strategy crap HOPEFULLY) and coopers tomorrow

I think they forgot to print the appendices for Sim3!!! your man must have have been drunk when printing!! like they F**d up on giving the wrong answer booklets today!!! talk about professionalism!!! Bas**ds!

ferike1

I will hunt you down Bill if I fail on tax.

Szewinska

Bill Williams wrote: »

My understanding is that the test is what do the shares derive the greater part of their value from.

The trade's probably worthless whereas the building's worth €21m. The shares therefore derive the greater part of their value from specified assets (land or buildings in the State). I don't mean to be a d1ck or to burst anyone's bubble, but Section 626B does not apply.

Having said that, saying that 626B does apply isn't fatal by any means. The indicator appears to be "tax issues around share sale and sale of building". I'd see the key points being 626B, stamp duty of 1% or 6% for purchaser, no VAT on share sales, ignore VAT on property, no balancing allowance or charges re building, no VAT recovery on disposal costs, CGT for Mandalay on sale of building and minor stuff like saying "no indexation" and "get deduction for acquisition and disposal costs of building" for Mandalay.

Get a few of the above and you'll get RC in my view. I'd consider the specified assets point as non core and a bit obscure if I'm honest. I've been around the block tax wise and I'd already written "626B applies"...then I'd a Damascus moment about specified assets.

Don't worry - I don't see tax killing people.

i paused at it and thought about L&B but then thought no couldn't be as its tailor made for participation exemption.

I can see the board giving credit for both as its not clear. Without the building there is no trade as somebody pointed out to me.

chursy

Szewinska wrote: »

that is harsh no. he teaches one how to approach these exams. anybody can go away and learn things off but he educates you in a different way. helps get you ready for these exams as they are unique. That is just my call but everybody sees these things differently.

He is our key contact who relays us info directly from the CAI board.

I dont think putting alot of management accounting in the new cases and scaring everybody off by setting unrealistic expectations in terms of management accounting, helped anyone today!!! He clearly misintrepreted what the CAI board said and basically mislead all students towards mastering management accounting, i am sure there will be alot of people who focussed on management reporting only ( certainly not me) and will probably end up screwing up on Reporting, which was yet again heavily tested this year.

The focus should have been on how to talk non-sense quickly! :P frankly thats what you do when you get indicators like communication strategy and knowledge management and then you expect people to give you specific answers .... ya right!

haribo12

Szewinska wrote: »

chursy wrote: »

so what exactly do you owe to paul!!!!! he is an idiot!!!!!

that is harsh no. he teaches one how to approach these exams. anybody can go away and learn things off but he educates you in a different way. helps get you ready for these exams as they are unique. That is just my call but everybody sees these things differently.

Agree that Paul Monaghan is a bull ****er them lectures havnt a clue what's coming up

Acc7777

Bill Williams wrote: »

My understanding is that the test is what do the shares derive the greater part of their value from.

The trade's probably worthless whereas the building's worth €21m. The shares therefore derive the greater part of their value from specified assets (land or buildings in the State). I don't mean to be a d1ck or to burst anyone's bubble, but Section 626B does not apply.

The textbook provided to us states

This exemption does not apply where the shares in the subsidiary derive the greater part of their value from land, minerals or exploration rights in Ireland (i.e. Irish 'Specified assets')

No mention of buildings in the State. Therefore if you are correct doesn't seem fair because the actual textbook doesn't even mention it

rums08

From the last two days I am seriously confused for what qualification we are actually writing these exams for!!!!

Seriously, come on, I thought being an ACA is having an indepth knowledge in accounting principles, auditing and tax and finance.

What percentage of newly qualified accountants immediately become senior managers and immediately start planning strategy, HR, marketing and change management issues?

In reality, we need to have a good grasp of accounting and interpreting standards. Instead what are we doing? Waffling about strategy, HR....

My better half is an IT project manager and was shocked to see the extent of IMP - said these are quite high level decisions!!!

Shocking that today I hardly used my calculator in the exam!!

It is a disgrace!!! Should have done ACCA - would have qualified by now and would be working with a decent salary!!!

Am so angry at the way the institute is making fools of students who work hard for months only to feel disappointed!!!!

This is my first stab at FAEs and I had put in so much of my time and effort - All for what I wonder!!!!

November 23rd cannot come soon enough!!

Good luck to all doing the elective tomorrow!
Hopefully we get a decent and relevant paper!

BESman

None of the lecturers, examiners or anyone in the Institute has actually qualified through this system. How do they expect us to? They can't teach it or mark it. Ridiculous.

lar05

Bill Williams wrote: »

My understanding is that the test is what do the shares derive the greater part of their value from.

The trade's probably worthless whereas the building's worth €21m. The shares therefore derive the greater part of their value from specified assets (land or buildings in the State). I don't mean to be a d1ck or to burst anyone's bubble, but Section 626B does not apply.

Having said that, saying that 626B does apply isn't fatal by any means. The indicator appears to be "tax issues around share sale and sale of building". I'd see the key points being 626B, stamp duty of 1% or 6% for purchaser, no VAT on share sales, ignore VAT on property, no balancing allowance or charges re building, no VAT recovery on disposal costs, CGT for Mandalay on sale of building and minor stuff like saying "no indexation" and "get deduction for acquisition and disposal costs of building" for Mandalay.

Get a few of the above and you'll get RC in my view. I'd consider the specified assets point as non core and a bit obscure if I'm honest. I've been around the block tax wise and I'd already written "626B applies"...then I'd a Damascus moment about specified assets.

Don't worry - I don't see tax killing people.

****, and i got green last year in tax and is my best part, if i cant get green in that i have no hope!!!and now im thinking i left out the s.d on it aswel even though i had it in my planning! so easy to do when rushing through it

BESman

I can't stress how important it is that every student causes a shítstorm when CASSI do their survey. FAE is a disgraceful exam and the Institute need to know this. It's not like we're in school, most of us are 3 years in professional practice, our firms are paying good money to the Institute for these courses and it can mean the difference of a permanent job offer and a payrise if we pass.

This system is completely unacceptable and is a big fúck you to all the students' hard work over the past year or more.

Finding it hard to even get motivated for tomorrow!

ferike1

They don't care man.

Every year people kick up a fuss and the institute always come up with some smart arse answer as to why we are just whinging and they are right and reasonable.

Until the firms vote with their feet (switch to acca) the institute will do what they want.

Its like ryanair.

tt1

Rums08 is completely right its a joke all this strategy and imp give me some numbers!!

Also is any one else really annoyed about the amount of folders they brought in (3bags) worth and all i ended up using was derry cotters book which was great and the tax book ( which excluded buildings from the page about participation exemption)!!

The rest was waffle of the highest order, will never eat waffles again and i liked them!! But on a good note they dam cant give out to me for being generic!!

ferike1

Truth be told I could have set these exams a month ago and it wouldn't have made a lick of difference.

funkymonkey9

Think we need to move on from participation exemption,you wrote what you wrote and you can't change it,doesn't matter who's right or wrong,it's not going to drop you to nc either way I wouldn't say,just focus on tomorrow now

mano79

After dragging in so much books and notes in the past few days im looking at my tax pile and getting a bit worried.

I have my tax notes, tax elective text book, tax acts books and thats about it - am i missing something here?? Seems like very little after the suitcase full the past few days :eek:

galr

funkymonkey9 wrote: »

Think we need to move on from participation exemption,you wrote what you wrote and you can't change it,doesn't matter who's right or wrong,it's not going to drop you to nc either way I wouldn't say,just focus on tomorrow now

i'm with u monkey boy! can't wait till over tmrw can't even be bothered anymore screw it! what will be will be..;)

Trend Setter in Training

Guys, we all know how subjective and unfair these exams can be. Just make sure to have your voices heard in the CASSI Report. You will get an e-mail with a link to the Survey to be completed from the Institute and it should also be announced at the elective exam tomorrow. I will put up a link here tomorrow for anyone who doesn't get it. Let everyone else who is unhappy know, if you don't voice your concerns through the CASSI Report or Directly to the CAI then they won't get heard and nothing will be done in terms of the marking scheme.

There is strength in numbers, if enough people missed an indicator or complain about the layout / style of indicator then it will be taken into consideration in the marking scheme. Still doesn't make it right but it might make the difference in the end.

I'm in the same boat as far as the style of BL & IMP Indicators and the lack of calculator use.

Remember to use the report to voice concerns on lecturers, exam materials and exam location.

ferike1

The most depressing thing for me is this. If I fail I don't know what I would do differently next year.

I am sure this is the case for repeaters and I really feel for them.

I studied loads and did all the cases, had plans etc.

If you fsck up a consolidation or a corp tax comp you practice them til you know them inside out. Here you can only practice so much. The rest is just luck on the day. Like WTF was up with that communication strategy. Never came across that anywhere. Yeah we are closing a business. Here you go champ we don;t know what to do. You sort it out.

Saint Sonner

ferike1 wrote: »

You have to do

Advanced Financial Reporting
Professional accountant (corporate governance)
Business analytics (strategy)

Choice of two electives
APM
Advanced financial management
advanced audit
Advanced Tax.

FML wish I had of done that when I failed first time - how long does that take to get those 5?

ferike1

6 months

You can do in December and June

Max 3 exams one sitting.

Accounts Student

I think the company qualifies for participation exemption - It derives it's value from the spa - i.e. the building's trade. The case said there was no development potential, and the buildings value was in use. Hence it's a trade and qualifies.

I'd say tax will get a lot of people though! only two indicators (I think! - cash extraction and Application of Revenue penalties and trying to minimize them.) Both of them were quite tricky!

Overall (and tax aside), I don't think it was as bad as people are saying - I agree more technical stuff and less wordy stuff would be better - but while the balance was a bit off I don't think anything asked was out of bounds. (except maybe the communication strategy - WTF? I went with it actually being a HR indicator, Hope it was OK) Just very long! I think most will be alright if they look back at what they actually said as long as you addressed relevant points it'll be OK!

haribo12

BESman wrote: »

I can't stress how important it is that every student causes a shítstorm when CASSI do their survey. FAE is a disgraceful exam and the Institute need to know this. It's not like we're in school, most of us are 3 years in professional practice, our firms are paying good money to the Institute for these courses and it can mean the difference of a permanent job offer and a payrise if we pass.

This system is completely unacceptable and is a big fúck you to all the students' hard work over the past year or more.

Finding it hard to even get motivated for tomorrow!

Totally agree dude busting your ass all summer

ferike1

Well at least I know if I fail I won't be wasting my time studying next year.