Question

Problem One: On January 1, 2015, Weez Ltd acquired a block of land for $100,000, and,...

Problem One:

On January 1, 2015, Weez Ltd acquired a block of land for $100,000, and, on the same day, Will Ltd purchased the adjacent, virtually identical block, also for $100,000. Buildings existed on both blocks, and the land and buildings were classified as PP & E by both companies. Also, both companies initially adopted the cost model.

The two blocks of land were appraised at $120,000 each on June 30, 2016 and at $180,000 each on June 30, 2017. Weez Ltd adopted the revaluation model for its land on June 30, 2017, whereas Will Ltd retained the cost model. Both businesses have June 30 financial year ends. On April 30, 2018, each company sold its block of land for $200,000. (Note: Weez Ltd recorded no further revaluations after June 30, 2017.) Ignore GST for this problem.

Required:

In relation to the land, how much profit would each company report for the following financial years? Explain your answer.

June 30, 2016?

June 30, 2017?

June 30, 2018?

Suppose that the valuations on June 30, 2017 had shown the value of the land to be $80,000 instead of $180,000. Assume the land was still sold for $200,000 in 2018. Now how much profit would each company report for the following financial years? Explain your answer.

June 30, 2017?

June 30, 2018?

Comparability is an enhancing qualitative characteristic; however, it is sometimes compromised by the results achieved from legitimate accounting choices permitted by the standards. Suppose you are an investor evaluating the 2017 and 2018 financial statements of Weez Ltd and Will Ltd under scenario a), above. Construct an argument that comparability is compromised and that the accounting appears illogical under the facts.

Identify the inconsistency inherent in the revaluation model for PP & E. Should this be justified by prudence? Does this same inconsistency exist for investment property? Explain your answer.

Investment property also may be valued under either the cost or revaluation model. Is depreciation handled consistently under both models? Explain your answer. Make an argument for not depreciating investment property at all.

Homework Answers

Answer #1
WEEZ LTD WILL LTD.
JUNE 30TH 2016
COST OF LAND 100000 100000

THERE WILL BE NO PROFIT RECORDED BY BOTH THE COMPANIES AS BOTH COMPANIES OPTED FOR COST MODEL

WEEZ LTD WILL LTD.
JUNE 30TH 2017
COST OF LAND 180000 100000
THERE WILL BE NO PROFIT RECORDED BY WILL LTD AS THE SAME IS STILL OPTING FOR COST MODEL.
WEEZ LTD WILL RECORD A PROFIT OF $80,000

$80,000 WILL BE CREDITED TO OTHER COMPREHENSIVE INCOME AND ACCUMULATED IN EQUITY UNDER THE HEADING REVALUATION SURPLUS

JUNE 30TH 2018

WEEZ LTD WILL RECORD A PROFIT OF $ 20,000 AND WILLS LTD WILL RECORD A PROFIT OF $ 100,000 AS THE FORMER WAS FOLLOWING REVALUATION MODEL AND THE LATER WAS FOLLOWING COST MODEL

Know the answer?
Your Answer:

Post as a guest

Your Name:

What's your source?

Earn Coins

Coins can be redeemed for fabulous gifts.

Not the answer you're looking for?
Ask your own homework help question
Similar Questions
Problem One: On January 1, 2015, Weez Ltd acquired a block of land for $100,000, and,...
Problem One: On January 1, 2015, Weez Ltd acquired a block of land for $100,000, and, on the same day, Will Ltd purchased the adjacent, virtually identical block, also for $100,000. Buildings existed on both blocks, and the land and buildings were classified as PP & E by both companies. Also, both companies initially adopted the cost model. The two blocks of land were appraised at $120,000 each on June 30, 2016 and at $180,000 each on June 30, 2017....
Builders Ltd purchased a block of land on 1 January 2018 for $50,000. On 1 January...
Builders Ltd purchased a block of land on 1 January 2018 for $50,000. On 1 January 2019, Builders Ltd hire an independent valuer to conduct the revaluation of land. The valuer assessed the value of land to its fair value at $100,000. The land was revalued again on 1 January 2020 and due to the COVID-19 pandemic environment the fair value of land decreased to $80,000. Note: Ignore income tax effect. Required: Prepare the journal entries required to record the...
Question 1: (25 marks) On 1 July 2015, I Ltd. acquired a 30% interest in one...
Question 1: On 1 July 2015, I Ltd. acquired a 30% interest in one of its suppliers, G Ltd., at a cost of 13,650. The directors of I Ltd. believe they exert 'significant influence' over G Ltd. The equity of G Ltd. at acquisition was: Share capital (20000 shares) $20,000 Retained earnings $10,000 All the identifiable assets and liabilities of G Ltd. at 1 July 2015 were recorded at fair value except for some depreciable non-current assets with a fair...
Question 1: (25 marks) On 1 July 2015, I Ltd. acquired a 30% interest in one...
Question 1: On 1 July 2015, I Ltd. acquired a 30% interest in one of its suppliers, G Ltd., at a cost of 13,650. The directors of I Ltd. believe they exert 'significant influence' over G Ltd. The equity of G Ltd. at acquisition was: Share capital (20000 shares) $20,000 Retained earnings $10,000 All the identifiable assets and liabilities of G Ltd. at 1 July 2015 were recorded at fair value except for some depreciable non-current assets with a fair...
Part A (7 marks) On 30 June 2018, the statement of financial position of Koala Ltd...
Part A On 30 June 2018, the statement of financial position of Koala Ltd showed the following non- current asset after charging depreciation: Buildings 300,000 Accumulated Depreciation 100,000 Carrying Amount 200,000 The company adopted fair value for the valuation of its non-current assets. This has resulted in the recognition in previous periods of an asset revaluation surplus for the building of $14,000. On 30 June 2019, an independent valuer assessed the fair value of the building to be $160,000. Required...
Hahndorf Ltd acquired 100% of the shares of Sarina Ltd on 1 July 2015 for $700,000,...
Hahndorf Ltd acquired 100% of the shares of Sarina Ltd on 1 July 2015 for $700,000, when the equity of Sarina Ltd consisted of: Share Capital                                       $500,000 General Reserve                                      80,000 Retained Earnings                                   30,000 All identifiable assets and liabilities of Sarina Ltd were fairly valued at acquisition except the machinery, which had a fair value of $140,000. The machinery had a further 7-year life with depreciation based on the straight-line method. Selected financial information of the two entities as at 1...
Max Ltd. purchased a building on 1 July 2018 for $200,000. The useful life of the...
Max Ltd. purchased a building on 1 July 2018 for $200,000. The useful life of the building was 20 years. After recognition as an asset, the company can choose either the cost model or the revaluation model as its accounting policy for measuring property, plant and equipment. On 30 June 2020, the fair value of the building was assessed as $240,000 by an independent valuer. Required: Prepare an extract of the Statement of Financial Position of Max Ltd. as at...
Meerbeck Ltd purchased equipment on 1 July 2015 for $39 800 cash. Transport and installation costs...
Meerbeck Ltd purchased equipment on 1 July 2015 for $39 800 cash. Transport and installation costs of $4 200 were paid on 5 July 2015. Useful life and residual value were estimated to be 10 years and $1800 respectively. Meerbeck Ltd depreciates equipment using the straight-line method to the nearest month, and reports annually on 30 June. The company tax rate is 30%.     In June 2017, changes in technology caused the company to revise the estimated total life from...
Problem Two: Ignore GST. Assume annual accounting periods ending on June 30. On January 1, 2014,...
Problem Two: Ignore GST. Assume annual accounting periods ending on June 30. On January 1, 2014, Malkin Ltd bought a building for $3,000,000; its useful life was 30 years, its residual value nil, and the straight-line method would be used for depreciation. The cost model was adopted. On June 30, 2016, Malkin Ltd decided to adopt the revaluation model for its building. Required: Calculate the book values of the building on June 30, 2014, June 30, 2015, and June 30,...
QUESTION 1. In the 30 June 2016 annual report of Cornet Ltd, the machinery was reported...
QUESTION 1. In the 30 June 2016 annual report of Cornet Ltd, the machinery was reported as follows: Machinery (at cost) $310,000 Accumulated depreciation ($130,000) $180,000 The machinery is measured using the cost model and is depreciated on a straight-line basis over a 10-year period. The residual value is zero. On 31 December 2016, the directors of Cornet Ltd decided to change the basis of measuring the equipment from the Cost model to the Revaluation model. The machine was revalued...