FAE September 2014

autumnbelle

I'd say no chance mick, too detailed. Notifications for exams are out .... Scary

Accountant81

Email with FAE exam number just arrived... Sh*t just got real.

acastudent

Seat number includes two 6s . Bad luck already started

Philip1988

Anybody else finding it difficult to see where a lot of the figures in solutions are coming from?

autumnbelle

Quick question about the corp gov code, ned's have to put themselves forward for reelection if they are on the board >9 years. Does the timeframe for exec directors chair or CEO matter? Or is it irrelevant if they are working for the company

LOccitane

Guys and girls, the FAE 2014 Exam Regulations were just emailed and for those looking for some light hearted relief; see the following:

17. Smoking and the consumption of alcohol is not prohibited in the examination hall at all times.

Now while I had planned on a few stiff drinks for the evening of the 4th September, this seems to be suggesting the possibility of such in the exam...

That's the kind of typo that I don't think you'd even get RC with...!

Torres999

Anyone finding the suggested times on the self study cases impossible, did a case called Quancore with a suggested time of 100 mins, takes over 30 mins to read the thing, 100 mins is a joke

acastudent

LOccitane wrote: »

Guys and girls, the FAE 2014 Exam Regulations were just emailed and for those looking for some light hearted relief; see the following:

17. Smoking and the consumption of alcohol is not prohibited in the examination hall at all times.

Now while I had planned on a few stiff drinks for the evening of the 4th September, this seems to be suggesting the possibility of such in the exam...

That's the kind of typo that I don't think you'd even get RC with...!

Lol

20 Times 20 Times

LOccitane wrote: »

Guys and girls, the FAE 2014 Exam Regulations were just emailed and for those looking for some light hearted relief; see the following:

17. Smoking and the consumption of alcohol is not prohibited in the examination hall at all times.

Now while I had planned on a few stiff drinks for the evening of the 4th September, this seems to be suggesting the possibility of such in the exam...

That's the kind of typo that I don't think you'd even get RC with...!

When the BIG BAD Management Accounting indicators come up !!! You might need a whiskey or two !

maninblack

Nerves kicking in big time. 2 weeks to go, and some indicators are still flying straight over my head on these Steps cases.

The steps cases are unrealistically hard... right..... RIGHT?????

maninblack

Nerves kicking in big time. 2 weeks to go, and some indicators are still flying straight over my head on these Steps cases.

The steps cases are unrealistically hard... right..... RIGHT?????

acastudent

maninblack wrote: »

Nerves kicking in big time. 2 weeks to go, and some indicators are still flying straight over my head on these Steps cases.

The steps cases are unrealistically hard... right..... RIGHT?????

Gave up on step cases last week . Just couldn't do them ...

myshirt

Lads, you can't also bring in calculators which need their own power outlet in the wall.

Just a heads up.

littlemiss123

LOccitane wrote: »

Guys and girls, the FAE 2014 Exam Regulations were just emailed and for those looking for some light hearted relief; see the following:

17. Smoking and the consumption of alcohol is not prohibited in the examination hall at all times.

Now while I had planned on a few stiff drinks for the evening of the 4th September, this seems to be suggesting the possibility of such in the exam...

That's the kind of typo that I don't think you'd even get RC with...!

I'll be packing the hip flask so!

autumnbelle

Grand to know we can all have a few drinks to calm the nerves!!! Fae party in the rds on the Thursday!

Mark1916

Another brilliant day of wondering what the hell was going on!

autumnbelle

Mark1916 wrote: »

Another brilliant day of wondering what the hell was going on!

Story of the past few weeks, roll on two weeks to get back to normality

womandriver

womandriver wrote: »

Has anyone done the audit report questions from Core audit lecture 9 and 10? (Relevant to both core and AAE) The last question in the pack of questions for that lecture Tex Limited, in the solution under taxation issue is a paragraph about material uncertainty, "in determining whether an uncertainty is material the auditor must consider a, b and c..."

Can anyone tell me what standard this para relates to? Can't seem to find it. Also the bit above it, "events which are not under the direct control of the entity"

Seems to be from the same standard but I just can't see where it's taken from.

Thanks.

Does anyone know anything on this? Sounds like it relates to ISA 540 but can't see it in the standard.

Mark1916

womandriver wrote: »

Does anyone know anything on this? Sounds like it relates to ISA 540 but can't see it in the standard.

Is it ISA 570 para 17 to 24?

womandriver

Mark1916 wrote: »

Is it ISA 570 para 17 to 24?

I thought it was but there's no reference in ISA 570 (that I can see anyway)to the outcome of the uncertainty being under the control of the entity/outside the control of the entity as per the solution to this question.

Also the part about the estimate being subject to change etc. can't see where it's coming from.

heathcliff101

Has anyone tried Brilliant Bee 2011 Mock Comp? Case seems to be riddled with Corp Gov (dominant individual, clear shareholder factions, Co considering listing and not nearly compliant with corp gov code etc..), and clearly an ethical issue (on secondment from an advisory practice to client and client offers to buy a company you run on the side in exchange for shares in client)....and not a mention of either in the solution? Also, client raises a concern about a strategic issue and also never dealt with........I had 11 indicators picked out and knew something was wrong!!

LOccitane

Just after doing the Full Metal Jacket case..

The Financial Reporting adjustments (the background workings rather than the journals) are just sickening and if CAI expect that students would compute 2/3 of those (to get competent according to solution) accurately under exam conditions then I'm lost for words...

Also, the indicator in the case asked for Strategic Risks to be addressed and instead Financial Risks were addressed in the solution...!

myshirt

This is the Leathers of Ireland question.

It's a challenging one, but good on management accounting.

vnervous

thanks a mil - can you upload the solution whenever you get a chance

iwishihadaname

Does anyone know is there a difference between buying the trade of the company and just buying the company?

myshirt

Guys, we all know the soul destroying cases.

What cases did people find ok?

I thought Motorvation; Elite Academy of Sport; Morker Hotels; Stent Up & Fight were ok...

Mark1916

iwishihadaname wrote: »

Does anyone know is there a difference between buying the trade of the company and just buying the company?

Yep you can buy the assets or you can just buy the shares both different or tax reasons stamp duty, cgt etc

womandriver

Can somebody please post the slides/notes for the Core audit online corporate governance lecture please?

Thanks

LOccitane

Mark1916 wrote: »

Yep you can buy the assets or you can just buy the shares both different or tax reasons stamp duty, cgt etc

And where we only purchase the assets and trade rather than shares ISA 510 won't be applicable as any Opening Balances won't be transferring across for Consolidation etc.

cson

That Leathers of Ireland case reads like a ****ing novel. Who writes these? :eek:

myshirt

Our good friend Paul of the Monahan clan writes them.

A very good case on testing your mgmt accounting.... and eating your soul.

ASOT2012

cson wrote: »

That Leathers of Ireland case reads like a ****ing novel. Who writes these? :eek:

Where is that one?

maninblack

LOccitane wrote: »

Just after doing the Full Metal Jacket case..

The Financial Reporting adjustments (the background workings rather than the journals) are just sickening and if CAI expect that students would compute 2/3 of those (to get competent according to solution) accurately under exam conditions then I'm lost for words...

Also, the indicator in the case asked for Strategic Risks to be addressed and instead Financial Risks were addressed in the solution...!

I did that case about a month ago, got it COMPLETELY wrong (naturally) and it scared the absolute sh1t out of me at the time.

Gave it another bash today and while I found it much more approachable (second time round :cool:), I still struggled big time with those journals. Got one half-correct, which would be most likely see me hitting the dirty NC bracket if it was the real exam.

It's so frustrating but you mustn't place too much emphasis on it. I took a step back and thought, would 75% of people in that exam hall be able to get these journals out perfectly? Not a chance!

When they're looking to examine journals, they need to give us a couple of gimmes to maintain the 75%. That's been my approach to revising FR anyway. Like, if they ask us say 5 journal adjustments, 3 should be reasonably OK, then probably 1 tough one and 1 insane one probably. I'd be very surprised if they asked some ridiculous garbage like you're seeing in these Paul Monagan cases if they're to keep up the 75% pass rate, especially given how disastrous the AAFRP was :pac:

m1ck007

Is anyone using the aafrp book and consolidation notes as their main basis of study for FR?

iwishihadaname

m1ck007 wrote: »

Is anyone using the aafrp book and consolidation notes as their main basis of study for FR?

No I've been using the IFRS book and the Derry Cotter book is good for questions on consol.

Mark1916

m1ck007 wrote: »

Is anyone using the aafrp book and consolidation notes as their main basis of study for FR?

Using Derry cotter notes and the book of questions for IFRS!

laser08

Does anyone know where if the exam info is on the cai website. I didn't get an email from cai.

FAEStudent2014

Can anyone explain how retirement relief works with liquidation please? It has me all confused!

LOccitane

Mark1916 wrote: »

Using Derry cotter notes and the book of questions for IFRS!

Same here. I'm not doing the entire book but with Section 3 of the AAFRP book and about 8 Cases from the DC Cases Book.

I think at minimum it's advisable to have covered cases in the DC Book for the 4 Business Combination scenarios: Investment in Associate, Associate to Subsidiary, Subsidiary to Subsidiary and Subsidiary to Disposal.

As a general point, looking back on the Material covered in the lectures I attended:

IFRS had a heavy focus on DC cases around Business Combinations.

Finance focused on FX risk and the valuation of a business in terms of questions covered.

MA focused on TP and Div PM in terms of questions covered.

We have seen a follow up focus on ISA 600 post the Mocks.

Again, obviously there is no predicting but I think there is at least a (possibly coincidental) trend there in terms of areas emphasised through questions.

Accountant81

myshirt wrote: »

This is the Leathers of Ireland question.

It's a challenging one, but good on management accounting.

Thanks for this. Do you have the solution by any chance?

iwishihadaname

Anyone know somewhere to buy tax notes? Haven't got anything on VAT, capital allowances or any CAP1 stuff really

PhilipLuke

Anyone spot any small errors in the exam solutions. Just the Comp 2012 and the valuation based on the earnins multiple. Surely they should have added back the full amortisation of 120k

Also the case states that there will be 3 redundancies and they only included the cost of one in their calculation

conor1979

PhilipLuke wrote: »

Anyone spot any small errors in the exam solutions. Just the Comp 2012 and the valuation based on the earnins multiple. Surely they should have added back the full amortisation of 120k

Also the case states that there will be 3 redundancies and they only included the cost of one in their calculation

Did it last week and noticed a couple of mistakes alright.

I am nearly sure the sims for 2012 is the same. I was looking at the answers and for the life of me cant find where they are getting some from.

One indicator was for business risks and they listed what were to me audit risks. Another answer had figures in it that were not given in the case and completely changes any answer that you might give.

I checked to see if I was comparing an old answer to an update case but they both looked the same!

Chris Partlow

Audit Elective Q:

SxMaxx Case Re the Chairman's note. If mgt refuse to let us see this, is it not a limitation of scope as we have to ensure Other Info is not inconsistent?

The solution suggests EOM as the correct response.

PhilipLuke

conor1979 wrote: »

Did it last week and noticed a couple of mistakes alright.

I am nearly sure the sims for 2012 is the same. I was looking at the answers and for the life of me cant find where they are getting some from.

One indicator was for business risks and they listed what were to me audit risks. Another answer had figures in it that were not given in the case and completely changes any answer that you might give.

I checked to see if I was comparing an old answer to an update case but they both looked the same!

I will Sims tomorrow, only doing one a day from now on and brushing up on technical in the afternoon so that I am not worn out going into the exams!!

Imagine they were used to correct previous years exams!! I know it wouldn't make any difference to your result but still

Blarney92

PhilipLuke wrote: »

Anyone spot any small errors in the exam solutions. Just the Comp 2012 and the valuation based on the earnins multiple. Surely they should have added back the full amortisation of 120k

Also the case states that there will be 3 redundancies and they only included the cost of one in their calculation

Déjà vu here but (shock horror) the solution is right. They had incorrectly capitalised some costs in the IA so were overstating amortisation.

womandriver

Chris Partlow wrote: »

Audit Elective Q:

SxMaxx Case Re the Chairman's note. If mgt refuse to let us see this, is it not a limitation of scope as we have to ensure Other Info is not inconsistent?

The solution suggests EOM as the correct response.

Revised ISA 700 says you can not date and sign audit report until you have reviewed all other info, so it wouldn't be an eom now. It's not a qualified report either as you can't actually issue report. Think it's paragraph 20 or 21 in the revised ISA 700, somewhere around there anyway.

Edit: it's para 24 and A20 & A21.

suref

Chris Partlow wrote: »

Audit Elective Q:

SxMaxx Case Re the Chairman's note. If mgt refuse to let us see this, is it not a limitation of scope as we have to ensure Other Info is not inconsistent?

The solution suggests EOM as the correct response.

ISA 720 is the standard here as it is essentially a directors report (notes are elective 1/2). You'd only qualify on material difference in numbers or disclosures. This is 'other information' and so there's no qualification - just need to bring it to attention of reader

womandriver

suref wrote: »

ISA 720 is the standard here as it is essentially a directors report (notes are elective 1/2). You'd only qualify on material difference in numbers or disclosures. This is 'other information' and so there's no qualification - just need to bring it to attention of reader

Genuinely believe that isn't correct. ISA 700 is the grounding standard in relation to audit reports and it says you don't sign audit report before seeing other info.

PhilipLuke

Blarney92 wrote: »

Déjà vu here but (shock horror) the solution is right. They had incorrectly capitalised some costs in the IA so were overstating amortisation.

Yes but they amortised 120 so to get EBITDA you had to add back the full 120.
They adjusted for the incorrect capitalisation correctly but only added back 67 to get EBITDA when they had amortised 120 so therefore the profit was understated by (120 - 67) 53K