FAE September 2014

IR1SH RANG3R

arnie_ni wrote: »

Still failed lol

If you got decile 1 and failed does that mean more than 90% of people failed the mock? Decile 1 means you're in the top 10% in the country results wise right?

arnie_ni

IR1SH RANG3R wrote: »

If you got decile 1 and failed does that mean more than 90% of people failed the mock? Decile 1 means you're in the top 10% in the country results wise right?

According to paul yea. Thats why i asked incase they gave everyone a 1. Id like to think everyone from 1 to 7 would pass in the real thing abd the majority of 8.

Elvis2012

What did people recommend for Sim 1 Strategic Options Fastfoods or Leasing?

Torres999

Elvis2012 wrote: »

What did people recommend for Sim 1 Strategic Options Fastfoods or Leasing?

I thought that their main problem was not their inputs so I went with option 1, make your own raw material

Nonamerequired

I said go with the fast food but still have the farmers so as they cud still maintain there valued relationship but also be seen to more environmentally friendly by recycling the waste oil. Complementary to existing processes! If that makes sense LOL examiner will laugh...

Torres999 wrote: »

I thought that their main problem was not their inputs so I went with option 1, make your own raw material

TheDoctor

FAE 2014

ITS OVER, BY GOD ITS FINALLY OVER

autumnbelle

Freeeee (until repeats!!)

TheDoctor

Delete the thread

Start FAE 2015 I don't care anymore

2014fae

How many cs u need in elective?

TheDoctor

2014fae wrote: »

How many cs u need in elective?

9/10 indicators in elective. 5 should do you

ASOT2012

TheDoctor wrote: »

9/10 indicators in elective. 5 should do you

How does that work when its not competency based as far as I know!!

What if you got all RC's I wonder would that be the equivalent to 5 C's?

TooLate

Tax Elective:

Am i right in sayin 3 Indicators in each case?

This is what i went for, proab missed a few things anyone else got any ideas:

Sim 1:

1.Company buy back of shares: Relief available and also retirement relief so no tax paid by James:

2.Seperate the trades: Went with setting up a holding company and then seperate the trade in to another company, Relief was available (Not sure about this

3.Then spoke on the share disposal advantages and disadvantages as well as participation exemption if held new company for a year

Sim 2:

1. Retirement relief available for share disposal to son and nephew..nephew took sons threshold too, business relief available to both but not the investment asset, Stamp Duty 1%, spoke about connected persons and market value.

2. CGT on property to neice worldwide gain, to tax to niece as resident in Spain, Spanish tax???

3. Grandhildren gift of 3,000 p/a spoke about the group B threshold??

Sim 3:

1.Revenue spoke abou prompt disclosure and unprompted disclosure, mitigation of penalties.

2. Vat issue 1. Charge Vat but it cancels out as input and output in same return
Vat issue 2. Spoke above reverse charge basis and giving Irish Vat number to german trader
Vat issue 3. Charge tax on lease and reclaim vat on the purchase and then charge vat on rent of 23%

3.Wasnt sure about the boliva brazil france indicator spoke about unilaterial relief for boliva and brazil
PE in brazil, dividends credit available


Anyone else do something similar for these cases or am I way off the mark!!

Thank God its over (until next year anyway) Now to the pub

sodabread

Somebody do me a favour and start the FAE 2015 thread already!!!

maninblack

TooLate wrote: »

Tax Elective:

Am i right in sayin 3 Indicators in each case?

This is what i went for, proab missed a few things anyone else got any ideas:

Sim 1:

1.Company buy back of shares: Relief available and also retirement relief so no tax paid by James:

2.Seperate the trades: Went with setting up a holding company and then seperate the trade in to another company, Relief was available (Not sure about this

3.Then spoke on the share disposal advantages and disadvantages as well as participation exemption if held new company for a year

Sim 2:

1. Retirement relief available for share disposal to son and nephew..nephew took sons threshold too, business relief available to both but not the investment asset, Stamp Duty 1%, spoke about connected persons and market value.

2. CGT on property to neice worldwide gain, to tax to niece as resident in Spain, Spanish tax???

3. Grandhildren gift of 3,000 p/a spoke about the group B threshold??

Sim 3:

1.Revenue spoke abou prompt disclosure and unprompted disclosure, mitigation of penalties.

2. Vat issue 1. Charge Vat but it cancels out as input and output in same return
Vat issue 2. Spoke above reverse charge basis and giving Irish Vat number to german trader
Vat issue 3. Charge tax on lease and reclaim vat on the purchase and then charge vat on rent of 23%

3.Wasnt sure about the boliva brazil france indicator spoke about unilaterial relief for boliva and brazil
PE in brazil, dividends credit available


Anyone else do something similar for these cases or am I way off the mark!!

Thank God its over (until next year anyway) Now to the pub

AFAIK you can't get the option to tax lease payments if its a residential property

Said we'd have to discuss potential tenants and their likely use for the premesis and evaluate the option to tax from there

also elective thread is separate thread :pac:

ke14

Can u Tell me is a n/a and a rc enuf to get a pass imp

maninblack

ke14 wrote: »

Can u Tell me is a n/a and a rc enuf to get a pass imp

all depends on how they mark IMP and how many people missed it in sim 2

chatting to someone to day who has a contact in CAI. Confirmed that IMP was on sim 2 alright, IP protection

I'm not OVERLY worried tbh. From talking to a good number of people I'd say at least half the exam hall missed it and they'll HAVE to adjust accordingly, either by bumping people up on the Core IMP or else taking notice of IP mentions in things like SWOT and the strategic analysis

I filled out the student feedback survey and went on a bit of a rant about how filthy it was to hide an IMP. As if we're not under enough fcking pressure during these exams. The least they can do is make the issues obvious and stop fcking us about :mad:

m1ck007

maninblack wrote: »

all depends on how they mark IMP and how many people missed it in sim 2

chatting to someone to day who has a contact in CAI. Confirmed that IMP was on sim 2 alright, IP protection

I'm not OVERLY worried tbh. From talking to a good number of people I'd say at least half the exam hall missed it and they'll HAVE to adjust accordingly, either by bumping people up on the Core IMP or else taking notice of IP mentions in things like SWOT and the strategic analysis

I filled out the student feedback survey and went on a bit of a rant about how filthy it was to hide an IMP. As if we're not under enough fcking pressure during these exams. The least they can do is make the issues obvious and stop fcking us about :mad:

So there was 6 indicators in one sim? I find that hard to believe and given that tommy already sought ip protection through patents and copyright.

myshirt

Need to skull a full bottle of whiskey and sleep for 3 days.

Shattered!

vnervous

How did people find Audit ??

Conaldo87

maninblack wrote: »

all depends on how they mark IMP and how many people missed it in sim 2

chatting to someone to day who has a contact in CAI. Confirmed that IMP was on sim 2 alright, IP protection

I'm not OVERLY worried tbh. From talking to a good number of people I'd say at least half the exam hall missed it and they'll HAVE to adjust accordingly, either by bumping people up on the Core IMP or else taking notice of IP mentions in things like SWOT and the strategic analysis

I filled out the student feedback survey and went on a bit of a rant about how filthy it was to hide an IMP. As if we're not under enough fcking pressure during these exams. The least they can do is make the issues obvious and stop fcking us about :mad:

Just went on a rant myself there to them also! There was 5 clear indicators in that Sim, the max you can get is 5. There wasn't enough info given to be an indicator there. In my eyes, they put up 6 indicators when the max is 5 or else there was only 1 IMP indicator when there should have been two. Highly INcompetent on their part I would say. If they really had to put a non directed indicator in there, why do it on one that can't be repeated next year!?

arnie_ni

m1ck007 wrote: »

So there was 6 indicators in one sim? I find that hard to believe and given that tommy already sought ip protection through patents and copyright.

But they were in his own name, not the company that they were proposing to set up. So if he left the patent left with him

m1ck007

arnie_ni wrote: »

But they were in his own name, not the company that they were proposing to set up. So if he left the patent left with him

Yea which would be a weakness in the swot. Not a seperate indicator.

arnie_ni

m1ck007 wrote: »

Yea which would be a weakness in the swot. Not a seperate indicator.

Fair enough, I took no chances cause I ran out of time day 1 to do the IMP indicator. I was also under the impression there had to be at least 2 indicators for every subject.

bonni

m1ck007 wrote: »

Yea which would be a weakness in the swot. Not a seperate indicator.

arnie_ni wrote: »

Fair enough, I took no chances cause I ran out of time day 1 to do the IMP indicator. I was also under the impression there had to be at least 2 indicators for every subject.

So do you reckon there was just one IMP indicator?

m1ck007

bonni wrote: »

So do you reckon there was just one IMP indicator?

Tbh im not sure at all. I think the first one was a marketing indicator. But thats just my opinion.

myshirt

The valuation of the IP will be labelled an IMP indicator I think.

The hedging in the Comp and the debt factoring/discount in the Sims were the finance.

No?

m1ck007

myshirt wrote: »

The valuation of the IP will be labelled an IMP indicator I think.

The hedging in the Comp and the debt factoring/discount in the Sims were the finance.

No?

I donno, im worried about imp/finance

LOccitane

myshirt wrote: »

The valuation of the IP will be labelled an IMP indicator I think.

The hedging in the Comp and the debt factoring/discount in the Sims were the finance.

No?

Section 5.5 of the Competency Statement:

'Advise on the identification, retention and valuation of IPR'...

That is what was asked yesterday. The indicator was largely around the valuation. But I think it will have been important to stress somewhere in the SIM: we need full sight of the agreements, are they (the right) transferred to the newly incorporated entity, cannot be so in case of copyright anyway normally; what period registered for as that could impact the disposal proceeds and something around Tommy and finding a replacement for him but that was more along the SWOT...

No way were there 6 indicators yesterday on Sim 2. If there were, they are gonna pull down 90% of people I have spoken to.

20 Times 20 Times

Was the finance indicator not overtrading on day 2?

arnie_ni

20 Times 20 Times wrote: »

Was the finance indicator not overtrading on day 2?

Who was over trading?

Mark1916

LOccitane wrote: »

Section 5.5 of the Competency Statement:

'Advise on the identification, retention and valuation of IPR'...

That is what was asked yesterday. The indicator was largely around the valuation. But I think it will have been important to stress somewhere in the SIM: we need full sight of the agreements, are they (the right) transferred to the newly incorporated entity, cannot be so in case of copyright anyway normally; what period registered for as that could impact the disposal proceeds and something around Tommy and finding a replacement for him but that was more along the SWOT...

No way were there 6 indicators yesterday on Sim 2. If there were, they are gonna pull down 90% of people I have spoken to.

Agreed, 5 indicators max the imp indicator was the valuation of the IP which is specifically covered in the IMP syllabus, finance indicator was the one about factoring etc that was my take on it!

20 Times 20 Times

arnie_ni wrote: »

Who was over trading?

Right either I'm going mad or failed there was overtrading in the core exam day 2

danko2012

Sim 1 was over trading, ur man Liam in cgs specified an increase in AP, AR, Stock and revenue with a big decrease in cash is typical over trading.... This was also stated due to he fact that they couldn't keep up with demand

20 Times 20 Times

danko2012 wrote: »

Sim 1 was over trading, ur man Liam in cgs specified an increase in AP, AR, Stock and revenue with a big decrease in cash is typical over trading.... This was also stated due to he fact that they couldn't keep up with demand

Finance indicator

RichFTW

20 Times 20 Times wrote: »

Right either I'm going mad or failed there was overtrading in the core exam day 2

99% sure that working capital/overtrading was an indicator. You're told he has concerns about it and to take a look. Also it's clear as day they are overtrading, they even hint at it during the case saying things like rapid growth, can't keep up with demand.

I took it as the "big picture" issue and said if they took the factoring agreement and sorted out WC, they could afford all 3 strategic options at 1m a pop rather than just the one. Although I did pick the waste oil one as the best if only one could be taken on.

arnie_ni

danko2012 wrote: »

Sim 1 was over trading, ur man Liam in cgs specified an increase in AP, AR, Stock and revenue with a big decrease in cash is typical over trading.... This was also stated due to he fact that they couldn't keep up with demand

Memory is hazy but was that the one with that made oil or something? Where we had to pick between the three options?

LOccitane

danko2012 wrote: »

Sim 1 was over trading, ur man Liam in cgs specified an increase in AP, AR, Stock and revenue with a big decrease in cash is typical over trading.... This was also stated due to he fact that they couldn't keep up with demand

Yes but there actually was not an issue of liquidity. They were well covered on liquidity and solvency ratios, but they were overcapitalised on stock. I don't think I used the word overtrading..

But I suggested that with the much cheaper factoring arrangement and the choice of leasing local land (with caveats from Indicator 1) would allow them to materially reduce inventory levels. Remember also that AR movement was wrong by EUR 700K from the Revenue adjustment so initially situation looked worse than it actually was. That was my reading at least.

arnie_ni

RichFTW wrote: »

99% sure that working capital/overtrading was an indicator. You're told he has concerns about it and to take a look. Also it's clear as day they are overtrading, they even hint at it during the case saying things like rapid growth, can't keep up with demand.

I took it as the "big picture" issue and said if they took the factoring agreement and sorted out WC, they could afford all 3 strategic options at 1m a pop rather than just the one. Although I did pick the waste oil one as the best if only one could be taken on.

I completely missed that altogether. I left that discount or factoring to the end.

The more i read here the clearer it is i failed

danko2012

arnie_ni wrote: »

Memory is hazy but was that the one with that made oil or something? Where we had to pick between the three options?

That's the one yeah, it's all the one anyway, I'm repeating and the main thing found from this exam is that so many people see something that odours don't. And you and a bunch of people will recognise something that others won't... There is rarely a clear definition of what is correct on the post mortem!

20 Times 20 Times

LOccitane wrote: »

Yes but there actually was not an issue of liquidity. They were well covered on liquidity and solvency ratios, but they were overcapitalised on stock. I don't think I used the word overtrading..

But I suggested that with the much cheaper factoring arrangement and the choice of leasing local land (with caveats from Indicator and 1) would allow them to materially reduce inventory levels. Remember also that AR movement was wrong by EUR 700K from the Revenue adjustment so initially situation looked worse than it actually was. That was my reading at least.

You my friend are a level above :-)

arnie_ni

I think i had to much silo thinking in that case to pass.

LOccitane

20 Times 20 Times wrote: »

You my friend are a level above :-)

I definitely think overtrading is the right approach though! - I should have stated that in the answer, it's just it wasn't as bad as they initially thought due to the Revenue cut off issue... But still overtrading / overcapitalisation for sure

danko2012

LOccitane wrote: »

Yes but there actually was not an issue of liquidity. They were well covered on liquidity and solvency ratios, but they were overcapitalised on stock. I don't think I used the word overtrading..

But I suggested that with the much cheaper factoring arrangement and the choice of leasing local land (with caveats from Indicator 1) would allow them to materially reduce inventory levels. Remember also that AR movement was wrong by EUR 700K from the Revenue adjustment so initially situation looked worse than it actually was. That was my reading at least.

But didn't their cash balance drop,from something like 3.3m to 1.1m in year?

Again as I say so u may be right, so many people take things up differently from the exam I think they award credit on how you perceive things once you are clear in the paper how u reached the conclusion! Anyway nothing can be done now

LOccitane

danko2012 wrote: »

But didn't their cash balance drop,from something like 3.3m to 1.1m in year?

Again as I say so u may be right, so many people take things up differently from the exam I think they award credit on how you perceive things once you are clear in the paper how u reached the conclusion! Anyway nothing can be done now

Oh it did for sure and I noted that. Completely agreed. I just ran a Current Ratio and Quick Ratio and both were robust. Obviously much less so without the inventory and clearly cash collection was a massive issue, I just thought it wasn't as bad as he was stating....

But as you say it's all down to interpretation and surely once we have rationalised everything they have to give credit? Let's hope so anyway! :-)

RichFTW

arnie_ni wrote: »

I completely missed that altogether. I left that discount or factoring to the end.

The more i read here the clearer it is i failed

There is no way you can know you failed unless you literally wrote nothing. I know a couple of people who were convinced they failed in previous years and passed so keep positive until the actual results come out.

I had a nightmare of a first day so I really needed to nail the second day meaning I was that extra bit focused for it. Spent about 5 mins looking out on Thomond Park before hand trying to psych myself up thinking of all the times I watched Munster pull it out of the bag. Hopefully it worked!

20 Times 20 Times

It was 100% over trading I said itvall quoted the article from accountancy Ireland a couple of months ago

arnie_ni

RichFTW wrote: »

There is no way you can know you failed unless you literally wrote nothing. I know a couple of people who were convinced they failed in previous years and passed so keep positive until the actual results come out.

I had a nightmare of a first day so I really needed to nail the second day meaning I was that extra bit focused for it. Spent about 5 mins looking out on Thomond Park before hand trying to psych myself up thinking of all the times I watched Munster pull it out of the bag. Hopefully it worked!

Suftum

laser08

LOccitane wrote: »

Section 5.5 of the Competency Statement:

'Advise on the identification, retention and valuation of IPR'...

That is what was asked yesterday. The indicator was largely around the valuation. But I think it will have been important to stress somewhere in the SIM: we need full sight of the agreements, are they (the right) transferred to the newly incorporated entity, cannot be so in case of copyright anyway normally; what period registered for as that could impact the disposal proceeds and something around Tommy and finding a replacement for him but that was more along the SWOT...

No way were there 6 indicators yesterday on Sim 2. If there were, they are gonna pull down 90% of people I have spoken to.

It's fairly simple. There has to be 2 indicators in every subject and 3 indicators in one of finance, tax, audit and imp.
Therefore the valuation of the ip was a finance indicator and the imp indicator was ip risk. So there was 6 indicators in that sim.
Time allowed was 150 mins roughly 25 mins per indicator. Just like every other case

LOccitane

laser08 wrote: »

It's fairly simple. There has to be 2 indicators in every subject and 3 indicators in one of finance, tax, audit and imp.
Therefore the valuation of the ip was a finance indicator and the imp indicator was ip risk. So there was 6 indicators in that sim.
Time allowed was 150 mins roughly 25 mins per indicator. Just like every other case

Whatever you want.. The exam is done and I'm not getting drawn on this much further. Pointless.

We had 90 mins for a case with three indicators but only 150 minutes for a case with six? Perhaps you're right, I don't know. I know in my case I addressed it implicitly in the valuation and the SWOT. If that's not enough and I fail then so be it.

I repeat that 90% of people I've spoken to found 5 indicators in that case. Is it a general rule that we MUST have 17 indicators? I never noted that in any briefings..

In any event... It's done now and we'll know @ the end of November!

Dreaming of sunshine

Can't believe we made it through the week and we're done!!!!

Don't forget to do the survey though guys, it could end up being the key to getting some of us over the line. I for one will definitely be mentioning that I didn't expect more than 5 indicators in the 2nd case and therefore missed IMP completely, stupid maybe because it has to come up twice so everyone has a fair chance of passing it i.e. 2 indicators but even knowing it was there now and re-reading the case I still don't see what they wanted.

I also thought the 2nd audit indicator was debatable as to whether it was audit, just hope I did enough in audit to get over the line because I definitely thought the indicators weren't great, particularly for someone not working in audit or doing the audit elective.

The exam was very strategy heavy think that was a bit crazy tbh and definitely wasn't a fan of the management acc indicator in Sim 2...actually most of Sim 2 for that matter.

If we don't get our views out there, they can't be taken into consideration so make sure you fill it out, then you can really forget FAE for 70 odd days! Woohooo!!!!!