Member Since: 8th Mar 2013
17th Sep 2015
FRSSE 2015 para 15.7
Thank you again TerryD. I was misreading this paragraph. I was probably trying to read into it something that wasn't there in order to save myself the trouble of putting all the related party information into the accounts- something the previous accountant hadn't done!
16th Sep 2015
Related party disclosure
Thank you for that TerryD. However, paragraph 15.7(c)(iv) states: Disclosure, as a related party transaction, is not required of (inter alia) transactions with the parties listed below as a result of their role as (inter alia) a customer or supplier. This would appear to give exemption from disclosure to transactions in the normal course of trade. Have I misinterpreted this?
11th Sep 2015
That is very helpful thank you. The bonds in question are in favour of various airlines. Presumably, as you say, these are non IATA authorised airlines. The thing that confused me a bit is that Barclays actually charge the agent annually for the bond. Effectively they are charging the agent for holding their money on deposit! I will point out to the agent that they have not been disclosing the bonds correctly in the balance sheet. Once again, thank you for your help.
23rd Jan 2015
Definition of fixed asset
I have reviewed paragraph 20 of FRS 3 and see what Terry was getting at.
My thinking was that it could be argued that the leasehold property was a fixed asset, although it wasn't shown on the balance sheet as it had no cost. After all, if an initial premium had been paid for the lease, presumably it would have been shown on the balance sheet as a fixed asset and written down over the term of the lease. The amount received on surrender over and above the written down value would then be a profit on the disposal of a fixed asset. However, I am happy to take advice if I have missed the point.
23rd Jan 2015
surrender of lease
Thank you for your prompt response. I was going to describe it as "Gain on surrender of lease", which is what it is.
Leasehold property is not shown on the balance sheet as there was no premium for the lease and no other costs have been incurred in respect of the leasehold property. The client is continuing to trade at new leasehold premises.
I think that fundamental reorganisation, or sale of an operation, are overstating what is a fairly straightforward transaction.
4th Nov 2013
There is an Accountants' Digest on LLPs although it may be a bit out of date by now.
Also, CCAB has published a SORP: "Accounting by LLPs"
LLPs are transparent for tax purposes although they need, of course, to file a partnership tax return.
I hope this helps.