Allocation and Depreciation of Differences Between Implied and Book Values (Online)
Allocation and Depreciation of Differences Between Implied and Book Values (Online)
Allocation and Depreciation of Differences Between Implied and Book Values (Online)
Those who oppose push down accounting believe that, under the historical cost
concept, a change in ownership of an entity does not justify a new accounting basis in
its financial statements. Because the subsidiary did not purchase assets or assume lia-
bilities as a result of the transaction, the recognition of a new accounting basis based
on a change in ownership, rather than on a transaction on the part of the subsidiary,
represents a breach in the historical cost concept in accounting. They argue further that
implementation problems might arise. For example, noncontrolling stockholders may
not have meaningful comparative financial statements. In addition, restatement of the
financial statements may create problems in determining or maintaining compliance
with various financial restrictions under debt agreements.
Push down accounting is an issue only if the subsidiary is required to issue separate
financial statements for any reason, for example, because of the existence of noncontrol-
ling interests or financial arrangements with nonaffiliates. Three important factors that
should be considered in determining the appropriateness of push down accounting are:
Public holders of the acquired company’s debt need comparative data to assess the
value and risk of their investments. These public holders generally have some expressed
(or implied) rights in the subsidiary that may be adversely affected by a new basis of
accounting. Similarly, holders of preferred stock, particularly if the stock includes a par-
ticipation feature, may have their rights altered significantly by a new basis of accounting.
Views on the percentage level of ownership change needed to apply a new basis
of accounting vary. Some believe that the purchase of substantially all the voting
stock (90% or more) should be the threshold level; others believe that the percentage
level of ownership change should be that needed for control; for example, more than
50%. A related problem involves the amounts to be allocated to the individual assets
and liabilities, noncontrolling interest, and goodwill in the separate statements of the
subsidiary. Some believe that values should be allocated on the basis of the fair value
of the subsidiary as a whole imputed from the transaction. Thus, if 80% of the voting
stock is acquired for $32 million, the fair value of the net assets would be imputed to
be $40 million ($32 million / .80), and values would be allocated on that basis. This
approach will result in the assignment of the same values to assets and liabilities on
the books of the subsidiary as that previously illustrated in the workpaper entry to
allocate the difference between implied and book value in the consolidated statements
workpaper. Others believe that values should be allocated on the basis of the propor-
tional interest acquired. They believe that new values should be reflected on the books
of the subsidiary only to the extent of the price paid in the transaction. Thus, if 80% of
a company is acquired for $32 million, the basis of the subsidiary’s net assets would be
adjusted by the difference between the price paid and the book value of an 80% interest.
push down accounting should be mandatory. The Task Force decided that pushdown
accounting would be required for a public business entity if a change-in-control event
causes the entity to become substantially wholly owned by the acquirer. The Task Force
also tentatively decided that both public business entities and nonpublic entities would
have the option to apply push down accounting in their separate financial statements upon
occurrence of a change-in-control event.
As a general rule, the SEC requires push down accounting when the ownership
change is greater than 95% and objects to push down accounting when the owner-
ship change is less than 80%. In addition, the SEC staff expresses the view that the
existence of outstanding public debt, preferred stock, or a significant noncontrolling
interest in a subsidiary might impact the parent company’s ability to control the form
of ownership. In these circumstances, push down accounting, though not required, is
an acceptable accounting method.
In this example, we assume that values are allocated on the basis of the fair value
of the subsidiary as a whole, imputed from the transaction.
3. In 2020, S Company reported net income of $45,000.
Note that the net income of S Company ($45,000) is $80,000 less than the
amount of income reported in Illustration 5-9 because the effect of the deprecia-
tion of the difference between implied and book value is recorded on the books of
S Company under push down accounting. This difference of $80,000 consists of:
Increase in cost of goods sold $50,000
Increase in depreciation expense ($300,000/10 years) 30,000
$80,000
ILLUSTRATION 5-25
Implied (100%)
Cost Basis Push Down Base
Inventory (FIFO basis) $ 40,000 $ 50,000
Equipment (10-year life) 240,000 300,000
Land 120,000 150,000
Goodwill 200,000 250,000
Total $600,000 $750,000
Assume the following: (1) all beginning inventory was sold during the year; and
(2) equipment has a remaining useful life of 10 years from 1/1/2020. Given these
assumptions, the $50,000 excess cost allocated to beginning inventory would be
included in cost of goods sold when the goods were sold. Similarly, depreciation
expense recorded on S Company’s books would be $30,000 greater if the increase in
equipment value had not been recorded.
A workpaper for the preparation of consolidated financial statements on Decem-
ber 31, 2020, under push down accounting is presented in Illustration 5‑26. Workpaper
elimination entries in general journal form are:
A comparison of Illustration 5‑26 with Illustration 5-4 shows that consolidated net
income as well as the controlling interest in consolidated net income and consolidated
retained earnings are the same. Thus, when values are assigned on the basis of fair
values of the subsidiary as a whole imputed from the transaction, the use of push down
accounting has no effect on the consolidated balances.
Note also that no workpaper entries were necessary in Illustration 5‑26 to allocate
or depreciate the difference between implied and book value since these adjustments
have already been made on S Company’s books.
PROBLEMS
ILLUSTRATION 5-26
Cost Method
80% Owned Subsidiary &RQVROLGDWHG6WDWHPHQWV:RUNSDSHU
Push Down Basis 3&RPSDQ\DQG6XEVLGLDU\
IRU<HDU(QGHG'HFHPEHU
P S Eliminations Noncontrolling Consolidated
Income Statement Company Company Dr. Cr. Interest Balances
Sales 3,100,000 2,200,000 5,300,000
Dividend Income 16,000 (1) 16,000
Total Revenue 3,116,000 2,200,000 5,300,000
Cost of Goods Sold 1,700,000 1,410,000 3,110,000
Depreciation—Equipment 120,000 60,000 180,000
Other Expenses 998,000 685,000 1,683,000
Total Cost and Expense 2,818,000 2,155,000 4,973,000
Net/Consolidated Income 298,000 45,000 327,000
Noncontrolling Interest in Income 9,000* 9,000
Net Income to Retained Earnings 298,000 45,000 16,000 —0— 9,000 318,000
Retained Earnings Statement
1/1 Retained Earnings
P Company 1,650,000 1,650,000
S Company 500,000 (2) 500,000
Net Income from above 298,000 45,000 16,000 —0— 9,000 318,000
Dividends Declared
P Company (150,000) (150,000)
S Company (20,000) (1) 16,000 (4,000)
12/31 Retained Earnings to
Balance Sheet 1,798,000 525,000 516,000 16,000 5,000 1,818,000
Balance Sheet
Investment in S Company 2,200,000 (2) 2,200,000
Land 1,250,000 400,000 1,650,000
Equipment (net) 1,080,000 540,000 1,620,000
Other Assets (net) 2,402,000 1,885,000 4,287,000
Goodwill 250,000 250,000
Total 6,932,000 3,075,000 7,807,000
Liabilities 2,134,000 300,000 2,434,000
Capital Stock
P Company 3,000,000 3,000,000
S Company 1,500,000 (2) 1,500,000
Revaluation Capital 750,000 (2) 750,000
Retained Earnings from above 1,798,000 525,000 516,000 16,000 5,000 1,818,000
1/1 Noncontrolling Interest in
Net Assets (2) 550,000 550,000
12/31 Noncontrolling Interest in
Net Assets 555,000 555,000
Total 6,932,000 3,075,000 2,766,000 2,766,000 7,807,000
according to GAAP at fair value. Both companies have a December 31 year-end. December 31,
Year 1, trial balances for Pcost and Scost were:
Scost Company declared a $50,000 cash dividend on December 20, Year 1, payable on January
10, Year 2, to stockholders of record on December 31, Year 1. Pcost Company recognized the
dividend on its declaration date. Pcost includes dividend income receivable in the accounts receiv-
able account.
On the acquisition date, the book values and fair values of Scost’s assets and liabilities were
equal with the following exceptions.
Any difference between book value and fair value for property and equipment is depreciated
over seven years. Depreciation expense is reported on the income statement in Selling, General,
and Administration expense. The entire amount of inventory acquired was sold in Year 1.
No payments were made for the earn-out at the end of year 1, and the adjustment to con-
tingent consideration included only interest adjustments (no change in fair value was expected
since the actual and target levels for revenue were equal at the end of year 1).
Both companies report depreciation expense as a component of Selling, General, and
Administration expense on the income statement. For the year ending December 31, Year 1,
Pcost and Scost reported depreciation expense of $96,000 and $72,000, respectively. Both
companies use straight-line and use the full-year option in computing depreciation expense
(i.e., they take a full year’s depreciation on any asset acquired during the year). The following
balance sheet is available for both companies at the beginning of the year of acquisition and the
acquisition date.
Required:
1. Prepare a consolidated workpaper at the end of year 1.
2. Prepare a consolidated statement of cash flows for year 1 (see Chapter 4 for a review of the
consolidated statement of cash flows).
3. Prepare the journal entry on the books of Pcost to account for the change in the contingent
consideration liability for year 1.
Sequity Company declared a $50,000 cash dividend on December 20, Year 1, payable on Janu-
ary 10, Year 2, to stockholders of record on December 31, Year 1. Pequity Company recog-
nized the dividend on its declaration date. Pequity includes dividend income receivable in the
accounts receivable account.
On the acquisition date, the book values and fair values of Sequity’s assets and liabilities were
equal with the following exceptions.
Any difference between book value and fair value for property and equipment is depreciated
over seven years. Depreciation expense is reported on the income statement in selling, general,
and administration expense. The entire amount of inventory acquired was sold in Year 1.
No payments were made for the earn-out at the end of year 1, and the adjustment to con-
tingent consideration included only interest adjustments (no change in fair value was expected
since the actual and target levels for revenue were equal at the end of year 1).
Both companies report depreciation expense as a component of Selling, General, and
Administration expense on the income statement. For the year ending December 31, Year 1,
Pequity and Sequity reported depreciation expense of $96,000 and $72,000, respectively. Both
companies use straight-line and use the full-year option in computing depreciation expense
(i.e., they take a full year’s depreciation on any asset acquired during the year). The following
balance sheet is available for both companies at the beginning of the year of acquisition and the
acquisition date.
Required:
1. Prepare a consolidated workpaper at the end of year 1.
2. Prepare a consolidated statement of cash flows for year 1 (see Chapter 4 for a review of the
consolidated statement of cash flows).
3. Prepare the journal entry on the books of Pequity to account for the change in the contingent
consideration liability for year 1.
ASC EXERCISES: or all ASC exercises indicate as part of your answer: the Codification topic, subtopic, sec-
F
tion, and/or paragraph upon which your answer is based (unless otherwise specified). All ASC
questions require access to the FASB Codification.
ASC5-1 Presentation You are writing a research paper on the accounting for treasury stock. You
wonder if it is possible to treat treasury stock as an asset. If not, you wonder if, over the his-
tory of GAAP, it has ever been acceptable for treasury stock to be classified as an asset (you
vaguely recall reading something in FASB Statement No. 135, paragraph 4).
ASC5-2 Presentation Management changed an accounting method. Several executives would have
qualified for additional bonuses totaling $50,000 in the prior year under the new method. Can
the firm restate the previous year’s income statement to include this expense?
ASC5-3 Objective What is the objective of the statement of cash flows?
ASC5-4 Cross-Reference FASB Statement No. 142 changed the guidance for goodwill and other intan-
gibles. List all the topics in the Codification where this information can be found (i.e., ASC
XXX). (Hint: There are two general topics.)
ASC5-5 Measurement What is a reverse acquisition? How should the consideration transferred in a
reverse acquisition be measured?
ASC5-6 Disclosure When does the SEC staff believe that push down accounting should be
applied? LO 10