FAE 2016

daisy chain wrote: »

I think the E. coli provision yesterday were two separate indicators- audit and FR?

So one audit yesterday and one audit today

Three finance of covenants is finance

2 MA, 2 tax

BL- 3: ethics, corporate governance, SWOT

FR- IAS 17, IAS 20, IFRS 2 and IAS 37 so five indicators with the AAFRP?

TG860 wrote: »

Agreed. I didn't see anything that would indicate a finance lease.
I think the trick to that question was how you treated the rent free period.
There's a little standard in the standards book called SIC 15 which explains how to approach that and I'd say is where they got the idea from.
I took the the total payments of the lease (so 80% of the 2014 rent x 4 years) and divided that by 5 years to get the annual cost to recognise.
Then proposed a journal to recognise 6 months of that for 2015 as it started in July.

Agree with others that it's been quite hard to judge which subjects some of the indicators are falling under.
It does feel like the 2 days were quite finance heavy.

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

this is what i did but but never apportioned 6 months to the current period - I did 12 . Hopefully enough for a C.

Would have skewed my CT comp as well, but done think they would hold that against me a 2nd time.

davidblake wrote: »

Just wondering did anyone think that as the accounts were IFRS the general bad debt provision should have bee removed

galwaygent wrote: »

I found there to be 4 - FR 4 - BL 3 FIN and 2 in AA MA TAX.

Breakdown was:

FR:
1. AAFRP
2. Operating Lease (5 year lease on building would not suggest finance lease)
3. IFRS 2
4. Grant

BL:
1. Ethics (as was clearly an ethical issue - He has a "plan" to not post an expense, which by doing so will "help them meet their covenant").
2. Corporate Governance
3. Business plan
4. Outsourcing payroll

Finance:
1. Covenant ratios
2. Interest swap
3. NPV

Tax:
1. Cash extraction/ Retirement planning
2. CT Comp and capital allowances

Audit:
1. Legal claim with correcting journal
2. Controls over revenue/receivables and ethics

Management:
1. Bonus payment - how to set bonus
2. Staff performance - BSC

Anybody else seeing the same?

Found it strange that management accounting had 2 performance measurement indicators.
Shocked with 3 finance but all fair.
Not a fan of tax today, however yesterday was vague enough I'd imagine so RC should be achievable.
Audit seemed fair - ISA 501 has a section for litigation as well as inventory. Anybody else use this?
BL was strange. Hoping I got enough on ethics and corp gov or outsourcing. Didn't like business plan.
FR seemed challenging but at the end of the day cant complain with no consolidation.

superb choice of username wrote: »

No noone does, the grading isn't decided on until after they have reviewed scripts to make sure enough pass. If everyone did great, then the bar gets higher

Guin92 wrote: »

Anyone know how many indicators tomorrow for audit. I heard it was 9 (10 in total). Thought it was a bit much for 2 cases?? And we have a get BC overall to pass ?

superb choice of username wrote: »

You heard it from where? Per the FAE marking and adjudication document, it can be between 7 and 9 indicators.

It makes life easier when it is split 4 indicators per sim, but there surely can not be any guarantee of how many? It's not like many people have seen the paper?

Edit:
And yes Guin, overall BC (or easier to think of as an overall mark of 50%)

davidblake wrote: »

From the lecturer Sinead after the mock review

Kristina F wrote: »

See for the outsourcing payroll indicator..did anyone just talk about outsourcing payroll or did you do the general outsourcing too? I thought it would be the same so I didn't put them separately at all..I just applied it to payroll..wat did everyone do?