Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Full download Modern Advanced Accounting in Canada Canadian 7th Edition Hilton Solutions Manual all chapter 2024 pdf
Full download Modern Advanced Accounting in Canada Canadian 7th Edition Hilton Solutions Manual all chapter 2024 pdf
https://testbankfan.com/product/modern-advanced-accounting-in-
canada-canadian-7th-edition-hilton-test-bank/
https://testbankfan.com/product/modern-advanced-accounting-in-
canada-canadian-8th-edition-hilton-solutions-manual/
https://testbankfan.com/product/modern-advanced-accounting-in-
canada-6th-edition-hilton-solutions-manual/
https://testbankfan.com/product/modern-advanced-accounting-in-
canada-canadian-8th-edition-hilton-test-bank/
Modern Advanced Accounting in Canada 9th Edition Herauf
Solutions Manual
https://testbankfan.com/product/modern-advanced-accounting-in-
canada-9th-edition-herauf-solutions-manual/
https://testbankfan.com/product/modern-advanced-accounting-in-
canada-9th-edition-herauf-test-bank/
https://testbankfan.com/product/advanced-financial-accounting-
canadian-canadian-7th-edition-beechy-solutions-manual/
https://testbankfan.com/product/managerial-accounting-creating-
value-in-a-dynamic-business-environment-canadian-edition-
canadian-2nd-edition-hilton-solutions-manual/
https://testbankfan.com/product/advanced-financial-accounting-
canadian-canadian-7th-edition-beechy-test-bank/
Chapter 7
CASES
Case 7-1
In this case, students are asked to compare the accounting for an intercompany transaction
depending on whether the investee company was a controlled entity, a significantly influenced
entity, or a related party.
Case 7-2
In this case, students are asked to discuss how a loss on intercompany bondholdings should be
allocated to the parent and/or to the subsidiary.
Case 7-3
In this real life case, students are asked to determine the economic benefits of transferring a
machine from the subsidiary to the parent in order to increase the tax savings from depreciation
expense. The case also requires a discussion of various alternatives for reporting the tax savings
on the consolidated income statement.
Case 7-4
In this case taken from a CA exam, students are asked to prepare a memo for the partner to
address the accounting implications and disclosure requirements for transactions involving
convertible debentures and spin off of a division from a subsidiary to the parent and then to a newly
created subsidiary.
Case 7-5
In this case taken from a CA exam, students are asked to prepare a statement of loss to support an
insurance claim and to prepare an analysis of accounting issues involving nonmonetary
transactions, asset impairments and lease termination payments.
Case 7-6
In this case taken from a CA exam, students are asked to prepare a memo for the partner to
address the accounting issues for a new client in the waste management business. The accounting
issues include intercompany transactions in capital assets, revenue recognition, contingencies and
capitalization of expenditures.
WEB-BASED PROBLEMS
Web Problem 7-1
The student answers a series of questions based on the 2011 financial statements of Barrick Gold
Corporation, a Canadian company. The questions deal with accounting policies for tangible and
intangible long-term assets and the impact of changes in accounting policies on certain financial
ratios.
3. Yes. The realization of the intercompany profit through the adjustment to consolidated
depreciation is considered to be in effect an indirect sale of a portion of the equipment to
customers outside the consolidated entity. Further, if a depreciable asset is sold to a third
party, the remaining intercompany profit is then realized.
4. No. The only time an adjustment of this kind affects the non-controlling interest calculation
is when the subsidiary was the selling company in the transaction that created the original
intercompany gain.
5. As long as the purchaser continues to depreciate the depreciable asset an adjustment will
be required on consolidation to change depreciation expense to what it would have been
had the intercompany sale not taken place.
6. As the purchaser uses the depreciable asset and earns a profit by selling its own goods
and services to outsiders, a portion of the previously unrecognized gain is considered to be
realized from a consolidation viewpoint. As each year passes, the amount of unrealized
gain is reduced and, in turn, the adjustment of beginning retained earnings is reduced.
7. Rather than simply eliminating the unrealized gain from the purchaser’s cost of the asset,
both the cost of the asset and accumulated depreciation are adjusted to the amounts that
would have been reported by the seller had the intercompany transaction not occurred.
This usually means that the cost and accumulated amortization are both increased i.e.
grossed up to get to the target amount.
*8. The consolidated financial statements should report account balances as if the
intercompany transaction has not occurred. The transfer from cumulative other
comprehensive income to retained earnings should be reversed on consolidation. In turn,
the equipment should be remeasured to fair value with the adjustment to fair value being
added to/subtracted from cumulative other comprehensive income.
Copyright © 2013 McGraw-Hill Ryerson Limited. All rights reserved.
Solutions Manual, Chapter 7 7
*9. This statement is true. There should never be a gain on the consolidated income statement
from an intercompany sale of equipment regardless of whether the companies are using
the historical cost model or the fair value model to value the equipment because there has
not been a transaction with outsiders. However, there could be a gain or loss on the
separate entity income statement for the selling entity because the transaction may occur
at a point in time when the financial statements have not been updated to the most recent
fair value for the equipment. For example, the equipment may have been updated to fair
value at the end of the previous period but the sale took place late in the current year when
the fair value was higher than previously reported.
Approach (d) is conceptually superior because each affiliate will actually record the gain
(loss) so allocated when it amortizes the premiums or discounts that caused the
consolidated gains (losses) in the first place. As a result, the eliminations in consolidated
statements mirror the entries made by both the purchaser and the issuer.
12. The holdback of an intercompany asset gain results in the creation of a deferred tax asset
in the preparation of the consolidated balance sheet because, although the selling affiliate
has recorded the tax in its income statement, it will not be an expense of the entity until the
asset is sold to outsiders. The adjustment in the preparation of a consolidated income
Copyright © 2013 McGraw-Hill Ryerson Limited. All rights reserved.
8 Modern Advanced Accounting in Canada, Seventh Edition
statement creating a gain on bond retirement results in a deferred tax liability in the
consolidated balance sheet because none of the constituent affiliates has paid (or recorded)
the tax on the gain, but will do so in future periods when they amortize the premiums or
discounts that caused the gain.
13. Gains (losses) on the intercompany sales of assets are realized for consolidated purposes
when the assets have been used up or sold outside the entity. This event occurs in periods
that are subsequent to the period in which the selling affiliate recorded the gain.
Gains (losses) resulting from the elimination of intercompany bondholdings are realized for
consolidation purposes in the period in which the intercompany acquisition takes place.
The affiliates' share of the gain (loss) is recorded in subsequent periods when the
discounts or premiums that caused the gain (loss) are amortized by each affiliate.
14. Gains should be recognized when they are realized i.e., when there has been a transaction
with outsiders and consideration has been given/received. When the parent acquires the
subsidiary’s bonds for cash in the open market, it is transacting with an outsider and giving
cash as consideration. From the separate entity perspective, the parent is investing in
bonds. However, from a consolidated point of view, the parent is retiring the bonds of the
subsidiary when it purchases the bonds from the outside entity. Therefore, when the
investment in bonds is offset against the bonds payable on consolidation, any difference in
the carrying amounts is recorded as a gain or loss on the deemed retirement of the bonds.
15. The matching principle requires that expenses be matched to revenues. When
intercompany bondholdings are eliminated, a gain or loss on the deemed retirement of the
bonds is recognized on the consolidated financial statements. In turn, the income tax on
the gain or loss must be recognized to match to the gain or loss. Since the income tax is
not currently payable or receivable but deferred until the temporary differences reverse, it
is set up as deferred income tax.
SOLUTIONS TO CASES
Case 7-1
1. If Enron controlled LIM2, Enron did overstate its earnings by reporting a profit of $67 million
Copyright © 2013 McGraw-Hill Ryerson Limited. All rights reserved.
Solutions Manual, Chapter 7 9
on a transaction with LIM2. When consolidated financial statements are prepared, the
intercompany transaction between Enron and LIM2 would be eliminated and the fibre optic
cable would be remeasured to the carrying value of this asset prior to the sale. The profit on
the fibre optic cable would only be recognized on the consolidated income statement when
LIM2 sells this cable to outsiders or through reduced depreciation expense over the useful
life of this asset.
2. If Enron only had significant influence over LIM2, it would use the equity method to report its
investment. Since Enron does not control LIM2, it would not be able to dictate the selling
price of the cable. Since Enron only has significant influence, the interests’ of the other
shareholders would have to be considered in setting the price. It would be similar to Enron
selling to outsiders. IAS 28 states that profit pertaining to the other shareholders’ interest
would be considered realized and need not be eliminated; only the investor’s percentage
interest in the investee times the profit must be eliminated. The unrealized profit would be
eliminated from investment income.
3. IAS 24 does not deal with the measurement of related party transactions. It only deals with
the disclosure requirements for related party transactions.
If the transaction were to be reported at carrying amount, Enron would not report the gain. If
the transaction were to be reported at exchange amount under IAS 24, Enron would be able
to report the gain.
In most of the situations considered in this question, Enron should not have reported the gain.
Gains from intercompany transactions are typically eliminated and not reported on the seller’s
financial statement. Gains are typically not reported until they are realized in a transaction with
a non-related party. This requirement applies to consolidated financial statements and
investments reported under the equity method but does not necessarily apply under related
party transactions.
Case 7-2
(a)
This case is designed to give life to a theoretical accounting issue discussed within the chapter: If a
subsidiary's debt is retired, should the resulting gain or loss be assigned to the parent or to the
Students should note that the decision as to assignment only becomes necessary because of the
presence of the non-controlling interest. Regardless of the level of ownership all intercompany
balances are eliminated on consolidation. Not until the time that the non-controlling interest
computations are made does the identity of the specific party become important.
All financial and operating decisions are assumed to be made in the best interest of the business
entity as a whole. This debt would not have been retired unless corporate officials believed that
Penston/Swansan would benefit from the decision. Thus, a strong argument can be made against any
assignment to either separate party.
(b)
Students should be required to pick one method and justify its use. Discussion usually centers on the
following issues:
• Parent company officials made the actual choice that created the loss. Therefore, assigning the
$300,000 to the subsidiary directs the impact of their reasoned decision to the wrong party. In
effect, the subsidiary had nothing to do with this transaction (as indicated in the case) so that its
financial records should not be affected by the $300,000 loss.
• The debt was that of the subsidiary. Because the subsidiary's debt is being retired, all of the
$300,000 should be attributed to that party. Financial records measure the results of
transactions and the retirement simply culminates an earlier transaction made by the subsidiary.
The parent is doing no more than acting as an agent for the subsidiary (as indicated in the
case). If the subsidiary had acquired its own debt, for example, no question as to the
assignment would have existed. Thus, changing that assignment simply because the parent
chose to be the acquirer is not justified.
• Both parties were involved in the transaction so that some allocation of the loss is required. If, at
the time of repurchase, a discount existed within the subsidiary's accounts, this figure would
have been amortized to interest expense (if the debt had not been retired). Thus, the $300,000
loss was accepted now in place of the later amortization. This reasoning then assigns this
portion of the loss to the subsidiary. Because the parent was forced to pay more than face
value, that remaining portion is assigned to the buyer.
The consolidated entity paid taxes of $13,200 at the end of year 2 and gained a tax saving of
$10,000 - $4,200 = $5,800 per year in years 3 through 6. In nominal terms, it gained $5,800 x 4
- $13,200 = $10,000. In present value terms, it realized a return of nearly 30%. Therefore, the
intercompany sale was a good financial decision.
(b) 40% of Slum’s after-tax gain on the sale of the machine would now be credited to the non-
controlling interest i.e., ($44,000 - $13,200) x 40% = $12,320. Since this amount is
greater than the overall tax saving of $10,000, Plum would realize an overall loss of
$2,320 on the intercompany transaction. From Plum’s perspective, it is not a good
financial decision.
(c) As a result of the intercompany transaction, amortization expense has increased from
$14,000 to $25,000 per year. The extra $11,000 must be eliminated on consolidation so
that only $14,000 of amortization expense is reported on the consolidated income
statement. Income tax on the $11,000 must also be eliminated. Three alternatives are
presented below for the elimination of tax on the excess amortization for each of Years 3
to 6:
The controller’s suggestion of 30% can be supported on the basis that the total tax eliminated
over 4 years will be $13,200 which is equal to the tax paid by Slum when the gain was reported
for tax purposes. This results in reporting a tax saving of $6,700 on amortization expense of
$14,000 on the consolidated income statement. This is $2,500 per year more than Slum’s tax
saving of $4,200 per year before it sold the machine to Plum. This fairly presents the actual
situation because Plum is achieving an incremental tax benefit of $2,500 per year (i.e. $10,000
overall gain spread over 4 years) as a result of the intercompany transaction.
The other option can initially be supported on the basis that it would report a tax saving of
$4,200 on amortization expense of $14,000 on the consolidated income statement which is
consistent with what was reported before the intercompany transaction occurred. However, it
would eliminate a total of $23,200 of tax over 4 years, which is $10,000 more than the tax paid
on the original sale of the machine. Therefore, this alternative does not fairly present the true
tax situation for the consolidated entity or the non-controlling interest. The manager’s
suggestion would produce similar results as the other option.
Case 7-4
Memo to: Partner
From: Stephanie Baker, CA
Subject: Canadian Developments Limited (CDL) Engagement
As requested, I have analyzed the accounting implications, financial statement disclosure, and other
matters of importance relating to several transactions that CDL entered into during the Year 8 fiscal
year.
Overall, the policies suggested by CDL management lead me to conclude that there is a bias towards
adopting policies that maximize earnings and provide a strong balance sheet in order to attract new
investors.
Likelihood of conversion
The classification of the debenture will depend on the likelihood of the debenture being converted
to common shares. In this instance, the holders of the debentures are a relatively small group
(major shareholder (53%) and large institutions), and CDL may be able to find out from them what
their intentions are. If the majority of the holders confirm their intention to convert, the question of
uncertainty will be largely resolved.
CDL has the option to trigger (force) conversion by repaying the debt at maturity by issuing common
shares. The existence of the option, however, is not sufficient to permit accounting for the debenture on
the unsupported assumption that the conversion will occur. CDL must intend to force conversion if it
wishes to account for the debentures as permanent equity.
Unusual features
The lower interest rate on the debenture indicates that a large portion of the security's value lies in
the conversion feature, thus increasing the likelihood of conversion.
Other factors
There are other, less critical, factors that can be considered in determining whether the debenture
should be classified as debt or equity:
• In common with other forms of debt the debenture pays interest and therefore the return is not
dependent on earnings.
Copyright © 2013 McGraw-Hill Ryerson Limited. All rights reserved.
14 Modern Advanced Accounting in Canada, Seventh Edition
• The legal form of the instrument is debt; if CDL were liquidated, this debenture would take
precedence over equity.
• The debentures can be redeemed by the holder at the purchase price.
The most important consideration in this decision is the intention of CDL and the debt holders
regarding conversion. If we can establish that conversion is likely, then I would support the client's
classification of this debenture as equity.
There should be full disclosure in the notes to the financial statements regarding the classification of
this transaction. We must ensure that the income statement treatment of the interest payments is
consistent with the balance sheet presentation. That is, if this debenture is classified as equity, then
the interest payments should be disclosed as dividends. If Revenue Canada requires debt
treatment, then the dividends should be disclosed net of tax.
There will be no effect on CDL's basic earnings per share figure regardless of the balance sheet
treatment given to this transaction because the amount available to the common shareholders will
be the same under both presentations. However, if the conversion proved dilutive, then the effects
of the conversion would have to be incorporated in the calculation of the fully diluted earnings per
share. If CDL does not already disclose fully diluted earnings per share and the conversion is
dilutive, then fully diluted earnings per share will have to be disclosed.
Classification
Since the preferred shares are mandatorily redeemable in five years' time, they do not constitute a
part of CDL's permanent capital. CDL should classify share capital according to the substance i.e.
debt, which would result in the preferred shares being excluded from the permanent equity section
of the balance sheet.
Investors contribute cash to enterprises so that they can earn a return on their investment. Whether
a payment is made each year or not, an investor expects ultimately to receive the return earned
annually. In the case of a preferred share issue that is mandatorily redeemable, the return will be
provided either annually or at maturity, usually in a fixed form.
In this instance, the return has been fixed at $40 million payable in five years' time. The $40 million
represents both a return of capital and income over the five-year period until maturity. In substance,
the earnings on the invested capital are accruing over the five years and will be paid out in one
lump sum. Accounting for the substance of the transaction suggests discounting the $40 million
payment and accruing the annual dividend each year as a form of interest expense.
The conversion will need to be disclosed in the notes to the financial statements.
Case 7-5
Memo to: Engagement Partner
From: CA
Re: Accounting Issues for Bakersfield Ball Boys Limited (BBB)
Below I have outlined the major accounting concerns facing the BBB engagement for the June
30, Year 11 financial statements. Before proceeding to the specific issues, I want to bring
several broader issues to your attention.
BBB is a private company. Accordingly, it can use IFRS or ASPE. BBB’s majority shareholder,
Tall Bottle, is a public company. Since Tall Bottle must use IFRS, it will likely insist that BBB
also uses IFRS to facilitate the preparation of consolidated financial statements. My comments
below are made on the assumption that BBB is using IFRS.
In analyzing and recommending accounting policies for the new issues facing BBB in Year 11,
we must be sensitive to the fact that the objectives of the minority shareholders, Mr. Bill Griffin
and Excavating Inc., conflict with those of the management of BBB and, probably, the majority
shareholder of BBB, Tall Bottle Ltd. (Tall Bottle). Commencing with the current year,
management's remuneration contract includes a bonus based on annual pre-tax income.
Accordingly, management is likely to want to maximize income. It appears that Tall Bottle
supported the new bonus arrangement, possibly hoping to maximize income and net assets for
consolidation. However, Mr. Bill Griffin and Excavating Inc. were opposed to the bonus
arrangement. Therefore, these minority shareholders will want to ensure that income is not
unjustifiably overstated. A factor that could mitigate this conflict is that BBB may want to
decrease revenues, where possible, in order to minimize any payments (or maximize receipts)
under the new equalization program.
As a result of these conflicting objectives, our overall exposure on this engagement has
increased. This exposure risk will be further increased if we recommend accounting policies,
since they might ultimately cause financial harm to one of the users of the financial statements.
(Candidates failed to identify the conflicting objectives of the users of the financial statements
and the corresponding risks.)
Sportsplus contract
Exclusive rights
Since the minority shareholders may have concerns that the management of BBB and the
majority shareholder are benefiting from BBB at their expense, we must be careful in dealing
with the Sportsplus contract arrangement. During the year, Sportsplus granted valuable
advertising rights to Tall Bottle at no cost, in exchange for BBB's local television rights. It
appears that Tall Bottle may have benefited from this deal at the expense of the other
shareholders. We will need to determine whether BBB gave up any revenues in its deal with
Sportsplus so that Tall Bottle could become BBB's official sponsor. Specifically, was the sale of
television rights to Sportsplus at fair market value? This will be difficult for us to determine. If we
establish that the sale was not at fair market value, we could suggest that a receivable from Tall
Bottle be established for the difference between the contract price and fair value. Tall Bottle may
suggest that the free advertising they received was compensation for management services
provided to BBB. If so, BBB should recognize a management fee expense and revenue from
sale of TV rights. If Tall Bottle opposes this accounting treatment, as a minimum this related
party transaction should be disclosed in the notes to the financial statements so that other
shareholders can assess its implications.
Signing bonus
The $250,000 signing bonus received by BBB for renewing its contract with Sportsplus can be
accounted for in several ways. One approach is to take the full amount into income in the
current year. Management may argue, for example, that the critical event in earning the
An alternative approach is to consider the payment as part of the total revenue for the contract.
The amount of the signing bonus would then be taken into income over the contract term.
Management will obviously favour recognizing all the income in Year 11. However, given the
magnitude of the payment, the substance of the transaction is probably better portrayed by
treating the payment as part of the total revenue for the contract. In light of the stronger
theoretical support for amortizing this revenue over the contract term and the strong concerns
that the minority shareholders may raise, it is my recommendation that the signing bonus be
amortized over the three-year contract term.
(Although candidates identified the alternative methods of recognizing revenue for the signing
bonus, they did not analyze the merits of each alternative in adequate depth.)
(Candidates did not identify the accounting implications of the payments for high ratings. Most
candidates tried to analyze the signing bonus issue and the high ratings payment issue together,
even though they were based on different facts and therefore required separate analysis.)
Player contracts
Player contracts probably represent one of the most significant costs of BBB. Accordingly, these
commitments should be disclosed in the notes to the financial statements, as required by
generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP).
Frank Ferter
It is uncertain at this time whether Frank Ferter will be selected to play for the All Star Team,
which would oblige BBB to pay him a $50,000 bonus. Since Ferter is favoured to capture this
honour, it is likely that the amount will be paid by BBB and, therefore, the amount should be
accrued in the financial statements. If investigation reveals that his inclusion in the team is
unpredictable, then this contingent liability should be disclosed in the notes to the financial
statements. In any event, this amount is probably immaterial to the financial statements.
Management's proposal to amortize the cost of Ferter's three-year contract over ten years
seems overly aggressive. Their position is probably based on an attempt to increase their
bonus. It is very difficult to estimate the future benefit of this player to the future of the team-the
uncertainty of the future benefit is analogous to that of advertising expenditures. Given the
uncertainty, it is recommended that the contract be expensed over the three-year period.
(Overall, candidates were able to identify and appropriately discuss the accounting implications
of the player contracts.)
Termination payment
As a result of the move to its new premises, BBB was required to make a final payment of $3.6
million to NoWay Park to terminate its lease. This payment can be accounted for in several ways.
One approach is to expense the payment in the current year since no future benefit will be obtained
by BBB from this site.
An alternative approach is to amortize the payment over the ten-year term of the new lease with Big
Top stadium. This approach is supported by the fact that the termination payment was a cost that
had to be incurred in order to rent the new premises. This cost should therefore be matched to the
period during which the benefit is to be derived from the new stadium.
A final option is to amortize the cost over the remaining three-year period of the previous lease with
NoWay. However, this approach has little theoretical support, except perhaps the argument that it is
the first three years of the new lease that carry the highest cost.