Cap 2 SFMA Assessment Study Group

thumbelinda wrote: »

...
In the mock for the planning material variance, the formula I use is

Revised Standard Quantity - Original standard quantity x Original standard price

But in the mock solution, they use Revised Standard Quantity - Original Standard Quantity x Revised Standard Price

Can someone check what formula you use?

Hope this might help someone:-

First point: Always be careful to note what's adverse and what's favourable as the signs swap around depending on whether it's adding or reducing profit. This is so easy to make a mistake on.

Second point: Recognise that variances will usually* have one 'monetary' and one or more 'physical' factors.
(*'Usually' since for usage being split into mix and yield, there are two physical factor variances ... just ignore that situation for below)

General rule I use (I think this is the approach in Clarke):-
[1] for the monetary factor variance, use the actual physical factors
[2] for the physical factor variance, use the Standard monetary factor

I think you should then be able to reconcile Planning and Operating variances if you, for Planning:
in [1] use the (revised standard minus original standard) monetary, times the actual physical
in [2] use the (revised budget minus original budget) physical, times the original standard monetary amount
as well as for Operating variances you make sure you:
in [1] use the (actual minus revised standard) monetary, times the actual physical
in [2] use the (actual minus revised budget) physical, times the original standard monetary amount

...so when you add the two [1] together and add the two [2] together, you get back to the general rule since the difference is just the parts in bold

Whether or not this is the correct approach I don't know, but I think it should reconcile.

OMG will someone confirm to me Dwelling house exemption in the mock paper!!

The solution in q 1 deems the gift taxable as Tara has not lived in the house for 3 yrs


If you follow the rule then she should get dwelling house relief as it is a gift
They are not cohabiting
She has no other dwelling house
It will be her PPR

annabbt wrote: »

Hi guys,

Could anybody tell me if the attached dates are right for the return of each tax, looking back on my notes the lecturer has them totally different in class and I'm starting to panic that I have them wrong, don't want to loose easy marks! Thanks.

Your dates are right

If the comp is not a close co is there non of the adjustments to interest on loans etc that there is with a close company. Do we just allow interest etc

littlemiss123 wrote: »

On the CAT, should the due date for 1 Sept to 31 Dec not be 31 Oct 2013? You have Oct 2012.

Sorry little miss is right, I'm gone brain dead

autumnbelle wrote: »

Your dates are right

With the 0.0219 % per day ... I have some foggy memory of there being some other rate given somewhere... but it's definitely 0.0219?
Remember also the due date changes from 23rd to 21st for calculating interest days

Also - just an idea - you could add the restriction element of group relief that kicks in if the returns are late: I think it's a reduction 25% if late but within 2 months, and 50% if 2 months or more....

littlemiss123 wrote: »

Don't worry....I'm struggling at the simplest day to day life tasks at the moment cos my head is so full of this crap!

I have another tax question, on page 408 regarding liquidation payment dates. In the example, why is the tax payable for the period ended 30 June 2012 still due by 23 March 2013, should it not be due 3 months after start of liquidation, 23rd Sept 2012?

I've not even looked at liquidation yet

autumnbelle wrote: »

I've not even looked at liquidation yet

It's literally only one page in the book, you'll learn it in 10 mins!!

It's in the main hall facing the main road that the exams r in isn't it?

You know the way some of the rules in tax are backed up by UK case law, do we need to know those cases?

PhilipLuke wrote: »

Right gonna do one more exam paper and leave it at that my head is all over the place need a break to be fresh tomorrow!!!


Best of luck to everyone, hope we all ace it!!

Same as that going to do mock after this go over rules then pack as I'm staying in dub over the few days. I hope we all ace it, we'll deserved by everyone on this thread

littlemiss123 wrote: »

I'm the same, having to stay away for the few days! Feeling like I'm moving house and home the amount of books I have!!

Definitely best of luck everyone! Think positive, we can pass them all :-)

I have suitcase and boot full of books and folders and no clothes yet and only going up in morn so will be panicing about getting there on time still can I as quick q if its an investing co in a loss group can u transfer losses

littlemiss123 wrote: »

I'm very weak on group losses but I'd say not because an investing co income would be case III/IV/V which isn't eligible for group losses.

However excess management expenses can be grouped. And I'd say any excess case V capital allowances can be grouped.

I could be completely wrong too....

Thank u your gonna ace this exam tommorrow

autumnbelle wrote: »

Thank u your gonna ace this exam tommorrow

So will you! Best of luck!

The one good thing I don't have to travel but living in a hotel for a week might not be a bad thing either for the exams

Imported but wrote: »

Hope this might help someone:-

First point: Always be careful to note what's adverse and what's favourable as the signs swap around depending on whether it's adding or reducing profit. This is so easy to make a mistake on.

Second point: Recognise that variances will usually* have one 'monetary' and one or more 'physical' factors.
(*'Usually' since for usage being split into mix and yield, there are two physical factor variances ... just ignore that situation for below)

General rule I use (I think this is the approach in Clarke):-
[1] for the monetary factor variance, use the actual physical factors
[2] for the physical factor variance, use the Standard monetary factor

I think you should then be able to reconcile Planning and Operating variances if you, for Planning:
in [1] use the (revised standard minus original standard) monetary, times the actual physical
in [2] use the (revised budget minus original budget) physical, times the original standard monetary amount
as well as for Operating variances you make sure you:
in [1] use the (actual minus revised standard) monetary, times the actual physical
in [2] use the (actual minus revised budget) physical, times the original standard monetary amount

...so when you add the two [1] together and add the two [2] together, you get back to the general rule since the difference is just the parts in bold

Whether or not this is the correct approach I don't know, but I think it should reconcile.

The most important thong with variances is to be able to comment on them i.e. what are the implications.
If you are asked for operational variances this is comparing performance against a standard, if the performance is adverse then investigations will look at the operational side of a business.
If you are looking at planning variances then mgt are answerable.
Also for other variances comment on te obvious e.g. if prices for raw materials go up then you will have adverse usage variances, or if sales prices go down owing to competition then you will have adverse sales variances.
Often its the interpretation that will get you good marks.
Best of luck!