FAE September 2012

Username2011

LR987654 wrote: »

yep I did, auditors are required to report that stuff to the revenue when discovered.

Sugar.

supernova84

ferike1 wrote: »

Wow supernova I really feel for you.

We can share ACCA notes next year

Don't think I'll be able to face another exam. As Danny Glover would say 'I'm getting too old for this sh1t'

Dogshow87

FAE4EVA wrote: »

Anybody notice that there is dates on bottom of papers, 10th and 14th of august for two of them. Hmmm...

Ya, I seen that, I would imaging that was maybe when they were finalised or possibly printed.

LR987654

Bill Williams wrote: »

You're spot on I reckon.

I'm f..ked in that indicator.

really, that bonus is contingent on 12 mths of performance, employees still being there in June of the following year.
that is a b*llsh*t indicator if it is in there as you would need some decent analysis to work out the probability of that being payable.

Dogshow87

LR987654 wrote: »

really, that bonus is contingent on 12 mths of performance, employees still being there in June of the following year.
that is a b*llsh*t indicator if it is in there as you would need some decent analysis to work out the probability of that being payable.

I think that whole case was BS, definitely the main reason I could fail this exam. All we can do is be positive I suppose at this stage.

limklass2011

Dogshow87 wrote: »

That last case was badly laid out and hard to actually understand exactly what was being asked, shame that I done it last. In my opinion the language used was very high level, no need for that level in my opinion. Fairly sick after it. I really feel this exam is more a critical thinking assessment than anything. I don't really think that this is the best way to decide whether an individual is a competent accountant. I feel like its down to fine margins on the day rather than the months of study. Can't do anything about it now, whats done is done.

Hard to study after that exam but all eyes towards the finish tomorrow with audit:

Internal Controls
Going Concern
Related Parties
Service organisations
Financial Reporting

Hopefully all the case studies I have done will be of more significance than it was for the core. Suppose it couldn't be any less significance anyway.

I attended the CGS this year and what yer man Dave O D recommended we know is the following,
Ethical Stds
ISA 250 Laws and Reg
Reports
ISA 560 PBSE
Going Concern
Fraud
Groups

Of course dont be surprised if none of the above come up at same time!

lar05

ferike1 wrote: »

6 months

You can do in December and June

Max 3 exams one sitting.

where did u see what ACCA exams we would have to do to qualify? i think im gona contact them and see how to go about it. these exams are just ridiculous, u could spend all year studying these again and on the day not get through due to the exam format!!

Saint Sonner

lar05 wrote: »

ferike1 wrote: »

6 months

You can do in December and June

Max 3 exams one sitting.

where did u see what ACCA exams we would have to do to qualify? i think im gona contact them and see how to go about it. these exams are just ridiculous, u could spend all year studying these again and on the day not get through due to the exam format!!

Let me know what they tell you!

ferike1

I don't know how I know I just do lol.

3 exams per sitting

3 core exams and 2 electives.

ferike1

Ha you guys were saying complain to your L&D departments,

They would just laugh and think I didn't study enough.

Nom-IzZ

Accounts Student wrote: »

Username2011 wrote: »

I thought it was PM and that there was
IAS 20 Grants
IAS 37 Provisions
IAS 8 Accounting estimates, errors and policies

Because
The year end was 31/12/2011 in SIM 3 but the bonus was for 1 July 2010 - 31/June/2011.
They said the only accrual they had at year end was the december payroll.
So I thought that seeing as though the bonus is based on call response times every day, that 6 months of the bonus that will be paid on 1 July 2012 relates to 2011 and so per IAS 37 a provision needs to be made in the Dec 2011 accounts for the 6 months July - Dec 2011

dr IS Bonus
Cr SOFP Bonus

Then assuming they did it incorrectly in the prior year, it would constitute a PY error and retrospective adjustment required.

Good spot - missed that , did it say the only accrual was December payroll tax though? Thought that was more to point out that there was no July payroll tax accrual, not to say that the bonus wasn't being accrued for.

To me it looked like they did not pay the ee share of paye, USC and prsi

Therefore dr wages and credit tax due to revenue and the another dr for penalties and cr amounts due to rev.

Also said we need to test for er share of prsi. The fact that december only payroll was ok and paid in jan is irrelevant as he never booked the 300 odd k from the bonus. Went on about penalties, directors resposponsibilities, speaking to legal, reporting to third parties. To be honest there was a number of issues so if you addressed them then be grand.

The boss wanted to know three specific things in the audit memo, the indicators will just fall in behind it

ferike1

Distinct lack of reo49...

Username2011

Nom-IzZ wrote: »

Accounts Student wrote: »

Username2011 wrote: »

I thought it was PM and that there was
IAS 20 Grants
IAS 37 Provisions
IAS 8 Accounting estimates, errors and policies

Because
The year end was 31/12/2011 in SIM 3 but the bonus was for 1 July 2010 - 31/June/2011.
They said the only accrual they had at year end was the december payroll.
So I thought that seeing as though the bonus is based on call response times every day, that 6 months of the bonus that will be paid on 1 July 2012 relates to 2011 and so per IAS 37 a provision needs to be made in the Dec 2011 accounts for the 6 months July - Dec 2011

dr IS Bonus
Cr SOFP Bonus

Then assuming they did it incorrectly in the prior year, it would constitute a PY error and retrospective adjustment required.

Good spot - missed that , did it say the only accrual was December payroll tax though? Thought that was more to point out that there was no July payroll tax accrual, not to say that the bonus wasn't being accrued for.

To me it looked like they did not pay the ee share of paye, USC and prsi

Therefore dr wages and credit tax due to revenue and the another dr for penalties and cr amounts due to rev.

Also said we need to test for er share of prsi. The fact that december only payroll was ok and paid in jan is irrelevant as he never booked the 300 odd k from the bonus. Went on about penalties, directors resposponsibilities, speaking to legal, reporting to third parties. To be honest there was a number of issues so if you addressed them then be grand.

The boss wanted to know three specific things in the audit memo, the indicators will just fall in behind it

The three things being...?

supernova84

tt1 wrote: »

Fair play supernova 3 times is some committment!! This is my first time and if things dont go right i ll defo move to acca!!

It's harder to move the further you get. Got my elective the first year and thought feck it I'll do the core again, then went down on finance last year, then a made a decision do 5 ACCA's or have one final crack at fae.

My advise to anybody starting out would be do ACCA. At the end of the day there's little different between the two and if anything ACCA is more widely recognised if you want to work abroad.

upnorthchick

so deflated after today!!! pure bull! honestly cannot understand this crap anymore.... its so far fetched!!!!

mrduffy

If I go down in audit or tax or finance all they have to do is look at my cap2 results ! and pass me when they sit down

upnorthchick

mrduffy wrote: »

If I go down in audit or tax or finance all they have to do is look at my cap2 results ! and pass me when they sit down

well if they do that we all have just the same right to pass!!
anything over 50 is a waste but i do see your point!

Nom-IzZ

Username2011 wrote: »

Nom-IzZ wrote: »

Accounts Student wrote: »

Username2011 wrote: »

I thought it was PM and that there was
IAS 20 Grants
IAS 37 Provisions
IAS 8 Accounting estimates, errors and policies

Because
The year end was 31/12/2011 in SIM 3 but the bonus was for 1 July 2010 - 31/June/2011.
They said the only accrual they had at year end was the december payroll.
So I thought that seeing as though the bonus is based on call response times every day, that 6 months of the bonus that will be paid on 1 July 2012 relates to 2011 and so per IAS 37 a provision needs to be made in the Dec 2011 accounts for the 6 months July - Dec 2011

dr IS Bonus
Cr SOFP Bonus

Then assuming they did it incorrectly in the prior year, it would constitute a PY error and retrospective adjustment required.

Good spot - missed that , did it say the only accrual was December payroll tax though? Thought that was more to point out that there was no July payroll tax accrual, not to say that the bonus wasn't being accrued for.

To me it looked like they did not pay the ee share of paye, USC and prsi

Therefore dr wages and credit tax due to revenue and the another dr for penalties and cr amounts due to rev.

Also said we need to test for er share of prsi. The fact that december only payroll was ok and paid in jan is irrelevant as he never booked the 300 odd k from the bonus. Went on about penalties, directors resposponsibilities, speaking to legal, reporting to third parties. To be honest there was a number of issues so if you addressed them then be grand.

The boss wanted to know three specific things in the audit memo, the indicators will just fall in behind it

The three things being...?

Don't make me pull out the paper


1 was something about the issue of the bonus as I say it, then the next step for the company then the actions required for the audit firm

2 was something about adjustments required

3 was something about how the firm should approach this and the relationship with the client?

BESman

If you made a complete balls of Sim 3 (which seems to have caused difficulty for a lot of people here) how good are one's chances... Think I'll be here next year.

upnorthchick

IAS 20 specifically states that IAS 8 comes into play when a grant is repayable

upnorthchick

but it doesnt tell us whether they wrongly accounted for the grant in 2010 ??
did say they received it in 2011 but not if they accounted for it.
i can see your point and im probably just digging myself out of a hole because i f'd up lol

Elle2012

What's so disheartening is that you could spend another summer studying and be on the same boat next yr!

The amount of study put into preparing for these exams is absolutely unreal- I felt what i put down the last 2 days was no reflection of what I actually know

Nom-IzZ

Bill Williams wrote: »

upnorthchick wrote: »

IAS 20 specifically states that IAS 8 comes into play when a grant is repayable

Yeah I know that but it's February 2012 and we're auditing the 2011 draft financial statements. You spot that a condition of a subsidy has been breached in late 2011 and nothing's been done in the financial statements. Just do a journal and fix the accounts. They're draft accounts. I don't see how IAS 8 is relevant? The caveat is that I'm not an auditor so I could be wrong. I just can't see it being a PM indicator. Yes it relates to a government grant but it's only peripherally related to IAS 20. "We got a grant years ago but have to keep 200 employees. In 2011 we lost 56. What do we do?" "Dr P&L Cr Bank/Payables"

That point was more of any audit area, we were asked to identify other issues by the partner, eg going concern, adverse opinion, increase in testing due to poor internal controls and also need to review the reasonableness that the grant may be repaid given the pressure the business is under, the may have lost x ee but it did not say if any were gained, I firmly believe it was an audit issue rather then a pm issue

ferike1

Honest to God. We are all struggling here. How the hell do 75% pass core???

upnorthchick

aww god knows. sick to back teeth...

ferike1

I really have to stop thinking about this because I am just getting more and more angry at the probable thought of repeating.

upnorthchick

aww im not repeating!! past caring. this is my second time - enough is enough

Accounts Student

Username2011 wrote: »

Actually on second look it does say that he looked at the accrual at year end for payroll taxes...but wouldnt they have to accrue for taxes on 6 months of the bonus too?

Yea - I think your right. Didn't think of that either.

- but normally C is just "makes a reasonable effort at journals" or something of the like - so even if you neglected that I think your ok as you got that far!

Username2011

Someone mentioned there couldn't be 6 PM (INCL AAFRP). Well there were six PM and six BL in 2010

nightpark

Farce that there was so little tax and finance. The amount of time I spent on tax and fr is a joke. No point studying for these exams at all.