During 2004, Yvo Corp. installed a production assembly line to manufacture furniture.

In
2005, Yvo purchased a new machine and rearranged the assembly line to install this
machine.
The rearrangement did not increase the estimated useful life of the assembly line, but it did
result in significantly more efficient production.

The following expenditures were incurred in connection with this project:

Machine $75,000
Labor to install machine 14,000
Parts added in rearranging the assembly line to provide future benefits 40,000
Labor and overhead to rearrange the assembly line 18,000

What amount of the above expenditures should be capitalized in 2005?

A. $147,000

Machinery rearrangement costs are capitalized because they

provide future benefit beyond one year. There is no
requirement that useful life be increased. An increase in
useful life is not the only benefit that may be derived by
expenditures on plant assets after they are purchased.
All four listed costs are capitalized for a total of $147,000
($75,000 + $14,000 + $40,000 + $18,000). The installation
is capitalized because it is a cost necessary to place the
asset into its intended condition and location. The last two
listed costs are necessary costs to achieve the benefits of
the rearrangement.
B. $107,000

C. $89,000

D. $75,000

This answer includes only the cost of the machine. The

installation costs and machinery rearrangement costs also
are capitalized because they provide future benefit beyond
one year. Installation is capitalized because it is a cost
necessary to place the asset into its intended condition and
location. The last two listed costs are necessary costs to
achieve the benefits of the rearrangement and thus are
capitalized.

Question #2 (AICPA.941116FAR-
FA)
On January 2, 2005, Well Co. purchased 10% of Rea, Inc.'s outstanding common shares for
$400,000. Well is the largest single shareholder in Rea, and Well's officers are a majority on
Rea's board of directors. Rea reported net income of $500,000 for 2005, and paid dividends
of $150,000.

In its December 31, 2005, balance sheet, what amount should Well report as investment in
Rea?

A. $450,000

B. $435,000

Well has significant influence over Rea given the facts in the
question. Thus, Well should use the equity method to
account for its investment.
 The balance in the investment account at the end of the first
year is:

$400,000 + .10($500,000 - $150,000) = $435,000.

C. $400,000

D. $385,000

Question #3 (AICPA.931127FAR-
P1-FA)
On December 31, 2004, Roth Co. issued a $10,000 face value note payable to Wake Co. in
exchange for services rendered to Roth.

The note, made at usual trade terms, is due in nine months and bears interest, payable at
maturity, at the annual rate of 3%. The market interest rate is 8%. The compound interest
factor of $1 due in nine months at 8% is .944.

At what amount should the note payable be reported in Roth's December 31, 2004 balance
sheet?

A. $10,300

B. $10,000

This note is a short-term note. Such notes are reported at

face value because the difference between present value and
face value is not considered significant due to the short note
term.
C. $9,652

D. $9,440

Question #4 (AICPA.950537FAR-
FA)
Rye Co. purchased a machine with a four-year estimated useful life and an estimated 10%
salvage value for $80,000 on January 1, 2003. In its income statement, what would Rye
report as the depreciation expense for 2005 using the double declining balance method?
A. $9,000

B. $10,000

The DDB method ignores salvage value in the annual

calculation of depreciation expense. The rate of depreciation
is 2/useful life. Preceding depreciation amounts are
subtracted from cost; the book value at the beginning of the
year is the base for computing depreciation for that year.

Depreciation, 2003 = $80,000(2/4) = $40,000

Depreciation, 2004 = ($80,000 - $40,000)(2/4) = $20,000
Depreciation, 2005 = ($80,000 - $40,000 - $20,000)(2/4) =
$10,000

The salvage value is 10%($80,000) = $8,000.

 Thus, 2005 depreciation does not reduce the book value of
the asset below salvage value. Therefore, the $10,000
amount calculated is the appropriate depreciation expense
for 2005.

C. $18,000

D. $20,000

Question #5 (AICPA.940518FAR-
FA)
Turtle Co. purchased equipment on January 2, 2002, for $50,000.

The equipment had an estimated five-year service life. Turtle's policy for five-year assets is
to use the 200% double declining depreciation method for the first two years of the asset's
life, and then switch to the straight-line depreciation method.

In its December 31, 2004 balance sheet, what amount should Turtle report as accumulated
depreciation for equipment?

A. $30,000

B. $38,000

Book value, end of year

Depreciation, 2002: (2/5)$50,000 = $20,000 $20,000
$50,000 - $20,000 = $30,000
Depreciation, 2003: (2/5)$30,000 = $12,000 $12,000
$30,000 - $12,000 = $18,000
Depreciation, 2004: $18,000/(3 years remaining) = $6,000
Accumulated depreciation, 12/31/04 $38,000
C. $39,200

D. $42,000

Question #6 (AICPA.950513FAR-
FA)
During 2005, Jase Co. incurred research and development costs of $136,000 in its
laboratories relating to a patent that was granted on July 1, 2005. Costs of registering the
patent equaled $34,000. The patent's legal life is 17 years, and its estimated economic life
is 10 years.

In its December 31, 2005, balance sheet, what amount should Jase report as patent, net of
accumulated amortization?

A. $32,300

The capitalized cost of the patent includes only the $34,000

cost of registration. The R & D costs are expensed as
incurred. Thus, the ending net book value of the patent
equals: $34,000 - $34,000(1/10)(1/2) = $32,300.

The economic life, rather than the legal life, is used for
amortization purposes because it is the shorter of the two
and represents a better estimate of the actual useful life of
 the patent. The one-half factor accounts for the one-half of a
year the patent was registered in the firm's name.

B. $33,000

C. $161,500

D. $165,000

Question #7 (AICPA.931123FAR-
P1-FA)
Weir Co. uses straight-line depreciation for its property, plant, and equipment, which,
stated at cost, consisted of the following:

12/31/05 12/31/04

Land $ 25,000 $ 25,000

Buildings 195,000 195,000
Machinery and equipment 695,000 650,000
915,000 870,000
Less accumulated depreciation 400,000 370,000
$515,000 $500,000
======= ======

Weir's depreciation expense for 2005 and 2004 was $55,000 and $50,000, respectively.
What amount was debited to accumulated depreciation during 2005 because of property,
plant, and equipment retirements?

A. $40,000

B. $25,000

Accumulated depreciation increased a net of $30,000 during

2005 (the change in the balance as reflected in the
comparative statements). Yet depreciation expense for 2005
is $55,000. This expense increases accumulated depreciation
by $55,000.

Therefore, there must have been a decrease in accumulated

depreciation of $25,000 in 2005 ($55,000 - $30,000) for
there to have been a net increase of $30,000 in the account.
Decreases in this account come about through the sale of
plant assets.

C. $20,000

D. $10,000

Question #8 (AICPA.931125FAR-
P1-FA)
On January 2, 2004, Judd Co. bought a trademark from Krug Co. for $500,000.

Judd retained an independent consultant, who estimated the trademark's remaining life to
be unlimited because the trademark will be renewed indefinitely. Its unamortized cost on
Krug's accounting records was $380,000. At the time of sale, Krug estimated the useful life
of the trademark to be 50 years.

In Judd's December 31, 2004 balance sheet, what amount should be reported as
accumulated amortization?

A. $7,600

B. $9,500

C. $10,000

This answer is incorrect. The trademark is not subject to

amortization, only impairment. The firm expects to renew
the trademark indefinitely. Therefore, the trademark is
considered to have an indefinite life. Indefinite life
intangibles are no longer amortized.
D. $0

The trademark is expected to be renewed indefinitely.

Therefore, it should be treated as an indefinite life
intangible. This category of intangibles is not subject to
amortization. There would be no need for an amortization
account.

Question #9 (AICPA.061202FAR)
Cart Co. purchased an office building and the land on which it is located for $750,000 cash
and an existing $250,000 mortgage. For realty tax purposes, the property is assessed at
$960,000, 60% of which is allocated to the building.

At what amount should Cart record the building?

A. $500,000

This response allocates the total cost equally to the land

and building. With the market value information provided,
the building should receive 60% of the total cost of the
purchase, or $600,000.
B. $576,000
C. $600,000

Based on the real estate tax information, the building

accounts for 60% of the total cost of the purchase, based
on market value. The total cost of both building and land is
$1 million ($750,000 cash + $250,000 mortgage assumed).
Market value is used as the means of allocating the total
cost to the two components. 60% of the $1 million total
cost yields $600,000 allocated to the building.
D. $960,000

Question #10 (AICPA.081233FAR-

SIM)
Up Company owns 60% of SideCo, and Down Company owns the other 40% of SideCo. Up
Company and Down Company are competitors in the same market. Which one of the
following sets reflects the most likely level of influence each company has over SideCo?
Up Company
Down Company
 Significant None

Control None

Because Up Company owns more than 50% of SideCo, it will have control of SideCo.
Because Down Company owns only 40% of SideCo, while Up Company owns
controlling interest and the two companies are competitors, Down Company is not
likely to be able to exert any influence over SideCo.
Significant Significant

Because Up Company owns more than 50% of SideCo, it will have control of SideCo,
not simply have significant influence over SideCo. Because Down Company owns only
40% of SideCo, while Up Company owns controlling interest and the two companies
are competitors, Down Company is not likely to be able to exert any (significant)
influence over SideCo.
Control Significant

Question #11 (AICPA.950510FAR

-FA)

On July 1, 2005, Casa Development Co. purchased a tract of land for $1,200,000. Casa
incurred additional costs of $300,000 during the remainder of 2005 in preparing the land
for sale. The tract was subdivided into residential lots as follows:

Lot Class Number of lots Sales price per lot

A 100 $24,000
B 100 16,000
C 200 10,000

Using the relative sales value method, what amount of costs should be allocated to the
Class A lots?

A. $300,000

B. $375,000

C. $600,000

The total cost is allocated to each lot class based on the

proportion of its sales value to the total sales value of all
lots.

Total cost equals $1,500,000 ($1,200,000 + $300,000).

Total sales value equals 100($24,000) + 100($16,000) +
200($10,000) = $6,000,000.
Cost allocated to class A lots = $1,500,000[100($24,000)/
$6,000,000] = $600,000.

D. $720,000

Question #12 (AICPA.051180FAR-

FA)
On January 2 of the current year, Cruises, Inc. borrowed $3 million at a rate of 10% for
three years and began construction of a cruise ship. The note states that annual payments
of principal and interest in the amount of $1.3 million are due every December 31. Cruises
used all proceeds as a down payment for construction of a new cruise ship that is to be
delivered two years after the start of construction. What should Cruise report as interest
expense related to the note in its income statement for the second year?
A. $0

The firm used the entire proceeds of the loan for

construction purposes. Average accumulated expenditures
thus equals or exceeds the note principal. The entire
amount of interest cost on the loan is capitalized to the
ship balance under FAS 34, which considers such interest
as a necessary part of the construction cost. If the loan
balance had exceeded the amount of proceeds from the
loan paid for construction, then some of the interest would
have been expensed. Interest capitalization is limited to
the average amount of construction expenditures in the
project for the period. As of the beginning of the second
year, the balance in construction in progress was equal to
or greater than $3 million because the entire proceeds
were immediately invested in the construction process.
B. $300,000

C. $600,000

D. $900,000

Question #13 (AICPA.010506FAR-

FA)
Puff Co. acquired 40% of Straw, Inc.'s voting common stock on January 2, 2005, for
$400,000.
The carrying amount of Straw's net assets at the purchase date totaled $900,000. Fair
values equaled carrying amounts for all items except equipment, for which fair values
exceeded carrying amounts by $100,000.
The equipment has a five year life. Goodwill, if any, is expected to have a useful life of 10
years. During 2005, Straw reported net income of $150,000.

What amount of income from this investment should Puff report in its 2005 income
statement?

A. $40,000

B. $52,000
Puff's 40% ownership of Straw's voting common stock (in
the absence of evidence otherwise) is assumed to give Puff
significant influence (but not control) over Straw and
requires that Puff account for its investment in Straw using
the equity method of accounting. At the date of its
investment, Puff must determine the difference, if any,
between the cost of its investment and
(1) the book value acquired, and
(2) the fair value acquired. Those calculations are:
Cost of investment $400,000
Book value acquired (.40 x $900,000) 360,000
Excess cost > Book value acquired $ 40,000
Allocated to:
FV of Equipment ($100,000 x .40) 40,000
Excess Cost > FV acquired $ -0- (No goodwill)

Under the equity method, Puff will recognize its share of

 Straw's reported net income, adjusted by depreciation on
its excess cost allocated to equipment. Thus, Puff will
report income from Straw as:

Straw's reported income $150,000 x .40 = $60,000

Less: Depreciation on FV of Equipment > BV
$40,000 x (1 year/5 years) = -8,000
Net income from Straw = $52,000

Note that if there had been goodwill (cost of investment >

FV of assets acquired), it would not have been amortized.
It would have been assessed at least annually for
impairment.

C. $56,000

D. $60,000

Question #14 (AICPA.940530FAR-

FA)
The discount resulting from the determination of a note payable's present value should be
reported on the balance sheet as a(an)
A. Addition to the face amount of the note.

B. Deferred charge separate from the note.

C. Deferred credit separate from the note.

D. Direct reduction from the face amount of the note.

The discount is often recorded in an account such as

"discount on note." This account is contra to the note
payable and is subtracted from the face value of the note in
determining the note's book value. Subtracting the
discount reduces the book value to present value.

Question #15 (AICPA.920512FAR-

TH-FA)
Land was purchased to be used as the site for the construction of a plant. A building on the
property was sold and removed by the buyer so that construction on the plant could begin.

The proceeds from the sale of the building should be

A. Netted against the costs to clear the land and expensed as

incurred.
B. Netted against the costs to clear the land and amortized over
the life of the plant.
C. Deducted from the cost of the land.

The cost to raze the old building is included in the cost of

the land because it is a cost incurred to prepare the land for
use. The salvage proceeds are a reduction in this cost, and
thus reduce the final cost of the land.
D. Classified as other income.

Question #16 (AICPA.910520FAR-

TH-FA)
Park Co. uses the equity method to account for its January 1, 2004, purchase of Tun Inc.'s
common stock.
On January 1, 2004, the fair values of Tun's FIFO inventory and land exceeded their
carrying amounts.

How do these excesses of fair values over carrying amounts affect Park's reported equity in
Tun's 2004 earnings?

Inventory
Land excess
excess
Decrease Decrease

Decrease No effect

Under the equity method, Park will recognize its share of Tun's net income in its own
income statement as investment revenue. The portion of Park's investment that is its
share of the excess of Tun's fair value over book value of the FIFO inventory no longer
exists at the end of 2004.

The inventory has been sold by Tun. Park must decrease its equity in income of Tun
because Tun's net income reflects the book value of the inventory. Tun's cost of goods
sold is the book value of the inventory sold but Park's corresponding amount must
reflect the price it paid (market value) and adjust its equity in income accordingly.

There is no adjustment for Park's share of the excess of Tun's fair value over book
value of land because land is not depreciated. Tun's income reflects no depreciation for
land and thus Park's equity in income requires no adjustment.

Increase Increase

Increase No effect

Question #17 (AICPA.900546FAR

-P1-FA)
On July 1, 2005, Pell Co. purchased Green Corp. ten-year, 8% bonds with a face amount of
$500,000 for $420,000. The bonds mature on June 30, 2013 and pay interest semi-annually
on June 30 and December 31. Pell has the intent and ability to hold the bonds until
maturity.

Using the interest method, Pell recorded bond discount amortization of $1,800 for the six
months ended December 31, 2005.

For this held-to-maturity investsment, Pell should report 2005 revenue of

A. $16,800

B. $18,200

C. $20,000

D. $21,800

The journal entry to record interest revenue on December

31, 2005 is:
 Cash .08(1/2 year)$500,000 20,000
Investment in bonds 1,800
Interest revenue 21,800

The total interest earned on this investment is the sum of

the cash interest payments and the excess of the maturity
value ($500,000) and the amount paid for the investment
($420,000).

Pell will receive at maturity $80,000 more than it paid. This

$80,000 is included in interest revenue gradually and is an
amount over and above the cash interest payments. The
gradual increase in the book value over time is added to the
cash interest received in determining periodic interest
revenue.

Question #18 (AICPA.901123FAR-

TH-FA)
Jersey, Inc. is a retailer of home appliances and offers a service contract on each appliance
sold. Jersey sells appliances on installment contracts, but all service contracts must be paid
in full at the time of sale.

Collections received for service contracts should be recorded as an increase in a

A. Deferred revenue account.

The firm has no revenue until the service period begins. At

receipt, the firm has an obligation to honor the customer's
request for service, measured in the amount of the cash
collected. Until the service period begins, there is no earned
revenue.
The firm records the receipt in a deferred revenue account
(liability), and gradually recognizes revenue over the
contract period.
B. Sales contracts receivable valuation account.

C. Stockholders' valuation account.

D. Service revenue account.

Question #19 (AICPA.911141FAR-

P1-FA)

On January 1, 2005, Mega Corp. acquired 10% of the outstanding voting stock of Penny,
Inc.
On January 2, 2006, Mega gained the ability to exercise significant influence over financial
and operating control of Penny by acquiring an additional 20% of Penny's outstanding
stock. The two purchases were made at prices proportionate to the value assigned to
Penny's net assets, which equaled their carrying amounts.
For the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2006, Penny reported the following:

2005 2006
Dividends paid $200,000 $300,000
Net income 600,000 650,000

In 2006, what amounts should Mega report as current year investment income and as an
adjustment, before income taxes, to 2005 investment income?

2006
investment Adjustment to 2005 investment income
income
$195,000 $160,000

$195,000 $100,000

$195,000 $40,000

The second investment purchase brings Mega significant influence over Penny. This
requires a retroactive change to 2005 (the adjustment referred to in the question).
The adjustment amount is based on the 10% ownership during 2005 and equals the
amount of revenue that would have been recognized under the equity method less the
amount of dividends recognized as revenue in 2005 (the equity method was not used
in 2005).

Under the equity method, the amount of investment income recognized is Mega's
share of Penny's income for the year. The dividends reduce the investment account
and are not recognized in Mega's income under the equity method.

2006 investment income = .30($650,000) = $195,000

2005 adjustment = .10($600,000) - .10($200,000) = $40,000

In the 2005 adjustment computation, the .10($200,000) factor represents the

dividends received in 2005. These dividends were accounted for as revenue in 2005
because the equity method was not used in that year. Thus, the retroactive adjustment
increases the total income to be recognized to the amount that would have been
recognized had the equity method been used. This adjustment is to the beginning
balance of retained earnings for 2006 -- a retroactive change.

$105,000 $40,000

Question #20 (AICPA.901132FAR

-P1-FA)
In November and December 2005, Dorr Co., a newly organized magazine publisher,
received $72,000 for 1,000 three-year subscriptions at $24 per year, starting with the
January 2006 issue. Dorr elected to include the entire $72,000 in its 2005 income tax
return.

What amount should Dorr report in its 2005 income statement for subscriptions revenue?

A. $0

No revenue is recognized for accounting purposes because no magazines have been

published and distributed as of the end of 2005. The entire amount received is
deferred revenue. The treatment for tax purposes does not change the reporting for
financial statement purchases. Revenue is earned when magazines are sent to
subscribers.
B. $4,000

C. $24,000

D. $72,000