FAE 2017

Qwert6

jus_tin4 wrote: »

Anyone back studying today?

I haven't opened a book. I cant face it.

Faecanditate

Qwert6 wrote: »

I hate FAE's. don't think ive passed on BL now as I don't think ill have done enough on either days. Im totally terrified but sure gotta try focus on elective. Hope the tax one is a nice paper

What did you think of the tax indicators on the papers?

jus_tin4

AtticusFinch86 wrote: »

Yeah, doing APM now. I've already done a bit on it in the last 2 weeks and I'm bringing a HC in from the interim so I'm going at a leisurely pace today.

Very good! I'm going in with a bc again! So does that mean I need 4 c?

I had a broken hand at the time of doing the interim so can't really give out... was just glad I was able to do it

jus_tin4

Qwert6 wrote: »

I hate FAE's. don't think ive passed on BL now as I don't think ill have done enough on either days. Im totally terrified but sure gotta try focus on elective. Hope the tax one is a nice paper

Would have to say if it wasn't for the amount that needs to be covered the FAES were easier than cap 2. A lot more room for to get a good answer with an overall knowledge( with the exception of FR). I think I will have missed out on core but definitely won't be as nervous about what you need to do

Qwert6

Faecanditate wrote: »

What did you think of the tax indicators on the papers?

Thought the losses were tricky for the comp very specific to corporation tax and there was 2 trades in the company and case V so had to think about them all and also the anti avoidance provision. hopefully to get BC just to even mention the anti avoidance and a few other bits.

R&D was a nice question though for the SIM no tricks or surprises with the calcs and then cap allowances on the building. think it will be easy enough to get a BC for this one once the credit is mentioned and some form of calc is done.

Qwert6

jus_tin4 wrote: »

Would have to say if it wasn't for the amount that needs to be covered the FAES were easier than cap 2. A lot more room for to get a good answer with an overall knowledge( with the exception of FR). I think I will have missed out on core but definitely won't be as nervous about what you need to do

ye I suppose they aren't as technical as cap2 but failing one subject means having to do the whole thing which is a pain in the hole. I also think ive missed the core too which means we could have a ****e xmas

westerner01

On the MA indicator in the comp I (stupidly) forgot to divide my billing rate by the no. of employees (had something like €1,300 and should have divided by 30 employees to get €44) - I know I should have spotted the rate was a bit off the wall but was just in such a rush!

Fairly certain I used the correct approach for the b/e point and flex afterwards, but with the wrong rate.
Anyone think that my scrape a BC, as I don't think I've enough in the target citing to get a BC either??

jus_tin4

Qwert6 wrote: »

ye I suppose they aren't as technical as cap2 but failing one subject means having to do the whole thing which is a pain in the hole. I also think ive missed the core too which means we could have a ****e xmas

True, but a lot of the works done!be just about polishing up on some areas!

Humour Me

jus_tin4 wrote: »

Very good! I'm going in with a bc again! So does that mean I need 4 c?

I have a BC from the interim as well. The elective is measured at sufficiency only, so 9 indicators is 36 points max, so only 18 points required to pass. If I get a BC on all of the indicators tomorrow, I will scrape a pass.

Faecanditate

westerner01 wrote: »

On the MA indicator in the comp I (stupidly) forgot to divide my billing rate by the no. of employees (had something like €1,300 and should have divided by 30 employees to get €44) - I know I should have spotted the rate was a bit off the wall but was just in such a rush!

Fairly certain I used the correct approach for the b/e point and flex afterwards, but with the wrong rate.
Anyone think that my scrape a BC, as I don't think I've enough in the target citing to get a BC either??

I've seen in previous papers that the requirement for MA BC is very low. Sometimes even just some commentary with an attempt at a calculation will get you there. As long as something is on the paper they can award some marks to it.

AtticusFinch86

Qwert6 wrote: »

ye I suppose they aren't as technical as cap2 but failing one subject means having to do the whole thing which is a pain in the hole. I also think ive missed the core too which means we could have a ****e xmas

The FAEs generally aren't too bad in that they're nowhere near as technical as the CAP 2's but yeah, the volume of information and fact you need to get a minimum "competency" in each subject is the problem. It's hard to pick up on everything. I missed a few bits that I'm kicking myself over (depreciation in finance lease, late payment in finance indicator and capital allowances in tax indicator) but overall I think I did better than I expected. And I expect most other people will be pleasantly surprised by their results too


I wonder what sort of marks you need to rank in the top 10 for the FAEs? I'm guessing it'll be in and around 14-16 HC's. I can't even fathom the amount of effort needed for that level of grade

jus_tin4

Faecanditate wrote: »

I've seen in previous papers that the requirement for MA BC is very low. Sometimes even just some commentary with an attempt at a calculation will get you there. As long as something is on the paper they can award some marks to it.

I think I forgot to flex it tbh! I calculated the b/e tho in hours and rate so I think that will def get me a bc at least maybe a c! Flexing was really just a re do on your calculations so I'd hope for a bc with no flexing for sure

AtticusFinch86

westerner01 wrote: »

On the MA indicator in the comp I (stupidly) forgot to divide my billing rate by the no. of employees (had something like €1,300 and should have divided by 30 employees to get €44) - I know I should have spotted the rate was a bit off the wall but was just in such a rush!

Fairly certain I used the correct approach for the b/e point and flex afterwards, but with the wrong rate.
Anyone think that my scrape a BC, as I don't think I've enough in the target citing to get a BC either??

I'd say you'll be fine. Looks like your approach is correct but just a miscalculation. I'd don't think that error would even preclude you from getting a C, depending on the rest of your approach

Jsmac67

AtticusFinch86 wrote: »

The FAEs generally aren't too bad in that they're nowhere near as technical as the CAP 2's but yeah, the volume of information and fact you need to get a minimum "competency" in each subject is the problem. It's hard to pick up on everything. I missed a few bits that I'm kicking myself over (depreciation in finance lease, late payment in finance indicator and capital allowances in tax indicator) but overall I think I did better than I expected. And I expect most other people will be pleasantly surprised by their results too


I wonder what sort of marks you need to rank in the top 10 for the FAEs? I'm guessing it'll be in and around 14-16 HC's. I can't even fathom the amount of effort needed for that level of grade

Wouldn't be too concerned about your depreciation in the finance lease, wasn't relevant as asset was leased on the last day of the year, no depreciation till next year! 😀

Faecanditate

jus_tin4 wrote: »

I think I forgot to flex it tbh! I calculated the b/e tho in hours and rate so I think that will def get me a bc at least maybe a c! Flexing was really just a re do on your calculations so I'd hope for a bc with no flexing for sure

Ya a lot of people were thrown by the flexing. I'd say a reasonable attempt at calcs with some comments should get it.

jus_tin4

AtticusFinch86 wrote: »

The FAEs generally aren't too bad in that they're nowhere near as technical as the CAP 2's but yeah, the volume of information and fact you need to get a minimum "competency" in each subject is the problem. It's hard to pick up on everything. I missed a few bits that I'm kicking myself over (depreciation in finance lease, late payment in finance indicator and capital allowances in tax indicator) but overall I think I did better than I expected. And I expect most other people will be pleasantly surprised by their results too


I wonder what sort of marks you need to rank in the top 10 for the FAEs? I'm guessing it'll be in and around 14-16 HC's. I can't even fathom the amount of effort needed for that level of grade

I'm guessing a massive bonus for that! But other than that I couldn't even imagine the work that went in there!im disappointed about FR.the issues weren't bad at all! Consol was one of the easier things to deal with. I just struggled to decide what I was doing! Same with sale and lease back.i never thought of looking for a question with it cos I was so panicked about time! Ah as mcgregor says win or learn

jus_tin4

Faecanditate wrote: »

Ya a lot of people were thrown by the flexing. I'd say a reasonable attempt at calcs with some comments should get it.

Does would be the things for a HC I'd imagine!

Faecanditate

AtticusFinch86 wrote: »

The FAEs generally aren't too bad in that they're nowhere near as technical as the CAP 2's but yeah, the volume of information and fact you need to get a minimum "competency" in each subject is the problem. It's hard to pick up on everything. I missed a few bits that I'm kicking myself over (depreciation in finance lease, late payment in finance indicator and capital allowances in tax indicator) but overall I think I did better than I expected. And I expect most other people will be pleasantly surprised by their results too


I wonder what sort of marks you need to rank in the top 10 for the FAEs? I'm guessing it'll be in and around 14-16 HC's. I can't even fathom the amount of effort needed for that level of grade

I was definitely pleasantly surprised with the papers in general. There was nothing absolutely terrible which I would have expected. I also got two C' in AAFRP and Apm. I just made some silly mistakes by rushing etc so hope that doesn't cost me.

Lyra Fangs

I'm legit too tired to study for tomorrow -_-

Humour Me

I'm literally just looking through my folder to remember where I have everything saved. There isn't a hope my brain will do any studying.

Alfred Borden

For MA yesterday, a two line description of target costing with the 5 stages in bullet points with the correct calculation and 2/3 ways to get to target cost would surely get you to BC?

jus_tin4

Alfred Borden wrote: »

For MA yesterday, a two line description of target costing with the 5 stages in bullet points with the correct calculation and 2/3 ways to get to target cost would surely get you to BC?

Id say thats C or higher tbh!

Alfred Borden

jus_tin4 wrote: »

Id say thats C or higher tbh!

Sound, thank you! I know a few went into detail about the stages as it was in 2015 paper but it only said outline, so I went for bullet point approach on stages.

D.92

For the FR lease indicator would you still get a C if you answered that it was a fiance leaseback but didn't have disclosure notes?

jus_tin4

Alfred Borden wrote: »

Sound, thank you! I know a few went into detail about the stages as it was in 2015 paper but it only said outline, so I went for bullet point approach on stages.

If you went into that detail then would imagine it! I didn't tbh and i would be looking at a bc at least. If I don't get it, my whole view on the grade is completely wrong!

jus_tin4

D.92 wrote: »

For the FR lease indicator would you still get a C if you answered that it was a fiance leaseback but didn't have disclosure notes?

Id say so! Given the confusion as to if it was an operating or finance. Saying that its hard to given all the discussion!

jus_tin4

Anyone know does the repeats be in early Jan? Any idea of cost?

Alfred Borden

jus_tin4 wrote: »

Anyone know does the repeats be in early Jan? Any idea of cost?

They were on from 5th - 7th January last year so should be similar. Not sure on cost.

Qwert6

jus_tin4 wrote: »

Anyone know does the repeats be in early Jan? Any idea of cost?

I need to know this too!! Can't find anywhere. Assume a few hundred?

Qwert6

D.92 wrote: »

For the FR lease indicator would you still get a C if you answered that it was a fiance leaseback but didn't have disclosure notes?

Who knows anymore I'm so confused over that indicator with all the theories. Hopefully HCs all round 😂

Alfred Borden

Anyone mention that the auditors assumed fraud risk would be heightened for us trying to select the circulation sample and posting incorrect journals for Sim 1 yesterday?

meath100908

Hi, just like everybody else concerned about the FR indicators. Just wondering on the provisions indicator for the bad debt with 150K owed at end of year and 215k in total including post year-end sales.
Under 'IAS10 - events after the SOFP Date' can the the whole lot 215K be provided for in the 2017 accounts as the company went bust shortly after year-end ?.
My thinking was that the additional sales were part of the same receivable of the company going bust ?

AtticusFinch86

meath100908 wrote: »

Hi, just like everybody else concerned about the FR indicators. Just wondering on the provisions indicator for the bad debt with 150K owed at end of year and 215k in total including post year-end sales.
Under 'IAS10 - events after the SOFP Date' can the the whole lot 215K be provided for in the 2017 accounts as the company went bust shortly after year-end ?.
My thinking was that the additional sales were part of the same receivable of the company going bust ?

No, you can only provide for the amount outstanding at the end of the year i.e. 150k (or whatever it was). The remainder (65k?) is included in a disclosure note only if it is material. If that was your only error, you have nothing to worry about.

jus_tin4

Alfred Borden wrote: »

Anyone mention that the auditors assumed fraud risk would be heightened for us trying to select the circulation sample and posting incorrect journals for Sim 1 yesterday?

I didn't but good point! I just mentioned the effect that it would have on audit report as her tone was sorta pushy basically!

Faecanditate

AtticusFinch86 wrote: »

No, you can only provide for the amount outstanding at the end of the year i.e. 150k (or whatever it was). The remainder (65k?) is included in a disclosure note only if it is material. If that was your only error, you have nothing to worry about.

Would you not write it all off in the current accounts seeing as there (my assumption) is likely no chance of recovery? So I debited reserves and credited receivables?

meath100908

cheers for that. I got a bit confused and thought it was part of the same event. Do you think hitting 3 out of 4 of those adjustments with a mistake such as the above on one on the other is enough for a C or are you looking at BC?

AtticusFinch86

Faecanditate wrote: »

Would you not write it all off in the current accounts seeing as there (my assumption) is likely no chance of recovery? So I debited reserves and credited receivables?

No, only the 150k is allowable at the year end as these sales were made during that financial year. Wouldn't really make sense to write off €65k of sales made in 2018 in the 2017 period.

AtticusFinch86

Faecanditate wrote: »

Would you not write it all off in the current accounts seeing as there (my assumption) is likely no chance of recovery? So I debited reserves and credited receivables?

And yeah, it's all written off but you're writing off 150k of it in the 2017 accounts, the rest is written off in the 2018 accounts, which haven't been prepared yet

Faecanditate

AtticusFinch86 wrote: »

No, only the 150k is allowable at the year end as these sales were made during that financial year. Wouldn't really make sense to write off €65k of sales made in 2018 in the 2017 period.

Fair point. I should (hopefully) be ok on the rest!

Qwert6

Good luck tomorrow everyone! So close to freedom!!

s15r330

Failed that for sure.

MrSzyslak

Audit was tough no? All the standards I had slaved through. nothing that handy or straight forward came. No ethics :-(

AtticusFinch86

I sat the APM today. It was by far the hardest exam of the week. It examined financial services and the "disaster relief" charity sectors i.e. no traditional business. I spent 40 minutes at least on the NPV and still didn't get it finished even though I was working at a reasonable speed. I'm kicking myself about the "business case for Ireland" indicator as I gave what I would have thought was a strong response but I completely forgot to put in any drawbacks of selecting Ireland.

Other than that, I attempted everything and gave, for the most part, what I think were solid responses so it should get enough to get me over the bar. It was a very tricky exam though, probably as hard as anything I've come across in the past papers.

Lyra Fangs

MrSzyslak wrote: »

Audit was tough no? All the standards I had slaved through. nothing that handy or straight forward came. No ethics :-(

I found it very tough, very tricky indicators with a lot of time pressure. It felt very much like a combined fr and audit exam.

Clare2007

Can someone confirm what the restructuring option in sim 1 was for the tax elective?

Also, what were your views on the first indicator in the second sim?

chazzy100

AtticusFinch86 wrote: »

I sat the APM today. It was by far the hardest exam of the week. It examined financial services and the "disaster relief" charity sectors i.e. no traditional business. I spent 40 minutes at least on the NPV and still didn't get it finished even though I was working at a reasonable speed. I'm kicking myself about the "business case for Ireland" indicator as I gave what I would have thought was a strong response but I completely forgot to put in any drawbacks of selecting Ireland.

Other than that, I attempted everything and gave, for the most part, what I think were solid responses so it should get enough to get me over the bar. It was a very tricky exam though, probably as hard as anything I've come across in the past papers.

It was tough but I don't think it was anything out of the ordinary. Jan 17 exam was harder. We had an NGO in the mock which was a warning for different business structures, all of the asks in Sim 1 were straightforward, you just had to apply material to an NGO. Sim 2 was a bit tougher alright, not sure on the NPV or the bond calc.

We were warned of a tough APM exam this year to be fair.

John.burke

Clare2007 wrote: »

Can someone confirm what the restructuring option in sim 1 was for the tax elective?

Also, what were your views on the first indicator in the second sim?

I went for paper for paper to create a holding structure, seemed too straight forward though as did the whole paper

For second sim I combined the basic termination payment with the balance been extracted via the pension. Has to get a C I would think

AtticusFinch86

chazzy100 wrote: »

It was tough but I don't think it was anything out of the ordinary. Jan 17 exam was harder. We had an NGO in the mock which was a warning for different business structures, all of the asks in Sim 1 were straightforward, you just had to apply material to an NGO. Sim 2 was a bit tougher alright, not sure on the NPV or the bond calc.

We were warned of a tough APM exam this year to be fair.

Thought this one was trickier than Jan 2017 but different strokes. Yeah sim 2 was the harder of the two. Couldn't figure out the bond indicator initially but gave it a stab in the end. I just talked about the various options and which would be best for the client given that he would want a short maturity date, low risk and regular interest payments in light of his age.

The transfer pricing one was tricky too given that the normal transfer pricing policies weren't really applicable (they wouldn't be exchanging products/services therefore the cost based pricing wouldn't apply). I just looked at it from the PoV of the Irish sub charging a mgmt charge to shift the profits

Humour Me

The NPV in APM was very time consuming, it really threw me off for a while. Managed to just finish the paper as they announced the end of the exam, but I'm not feeling to confident. Definitely the hardest paper of the week for me.

MrSzyslak

Lyra Fangs wrote:

I found it very tough, very tricky indicators with a lot of time pressure. It felt very much like a combined fr and audit exam.

Did you get everything attempted?.

I didn't get time to review the second part of the testing on the acquisition the provision bit what was that about anyway it read so difficult I stuck in a quick few generic procedures. Only had one issue for the audit report at the end too.

My head was sore afterwards.

Did you notice in the SIM 2 the audit senior retired? Wtf haha...