Cyber Monday 2024! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions

AICPA Exam CPA-Financial Topic 1 Question 91 Discussion

Actual exam question for AICPA's CPA-Financial exam
Question #: 91
Topic #: 1
[All CPA-Financial Questions]

On January 2, 1993, Quo, Inc. hired Reed to be its controller. During the year, Reed, working closely with Quo's president and outside accountants, made changes in accounting policies, corrected several errors dating from 1992 and before, and instituted new accounting policies.

Quo's 1993 financial statements will be presented in comparative form with its 1992 financial statements.

This question represents one of Quo's transactions. List A represents possible clarifications of these transactions as: a change in accounting principle, a change in accounting estimate, a correction of an error in previously presented financial statements, or neither an accounting change nor an accounting error.

During 1993, Quo increased its investment in Worth, Inc. from a 10% interest, purchased in 1992, to 30%, and acquired a seat on Worth's board of directors. As a result of its increased investment, Quo changed its method of accounting for investment in Worth, Inc. from the cost method to the equity method.

List A

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: D

Choice 'd' is correct. A change from the cost method (less than 20% ownership) to the equity method (20% or more ownership or a Board seat or other significant influence) of accounting for investment in an investee is neither an accounting change nor an accounting error. If it is not an accounting change, it cannot be a change in accounting principle or a change in accounting estimate since those two types of changes are both accounting changes.

There is a considerable amount of controversy on this particular answer. Some people think that this change is a change in accounting principle (something certainly changed, but was it the accounting principle?), and others think it is a change in accounting entity (which is not one of the available answers; anyway, did the accounting entity actually change or is it the same entity accounted for differently?). Under SFAS No. 154, a change in accounting principle is treated retrospectively and a change in accounting entity is treated retrospectively.

This kind of change (cost to equity) has never been specifically identified in any accounting literature as either a change in accounting principle or a change in accounting entity. The words 'cost method' were never mentioned in APB 20 (other than the full cost method for oil & gas companies, which is an entirely different subject), nor was it mentioned in SFAS No. 154. It was, however, discussed in APB 18 (the pronouncement for the equity method) in Paragraph 19m (bold added): 'An investment in common stock of an investee that was previously accounted for on other than the equity method may become qualified for use of the equity method by an increase in the level of ownership described in paragraph 17 (i.e., acquisition of additional voting stock by the investor, acquisition or retirement of voting stock by the investee, or other transactions). When an investment qualifies for use of the equity method, the investor should adopt the equity method of accounting. The investment, results of operations (current and prior

periods presented), and retained earnings of the investor should be adjusted retroactively in a manner consistent with the accounting for a step-by-step acquisition of a subsidiary.'

What does all this mean? It means that, when there is a change in the percentage of ownership that changes accounting from the cost method to the equity method, the change is treated retroactively (just like changes in accounting entity used to be treated, although they are now treated retrospectively). It does not say that the change is a change in accounting principle or anything else. Nothing in SFAS No.154 changed this treatment. So all this still makes Choice 'd' correct. This whole issue might easily be considered to be splitting hairs, at the very least. Some questions on the CPA exam are just that way. Most are not.


Contribute your Thoughts:

Lyda
4 months ago
I'll go with option A. Changing the investment accounting method is a big deal, not just a little tweak or fixing a mistake. Gotta keep those principles in check!
upvoted 0 times
...
Belen
4 months ago
Accounting changes? More like accounting rearranges, am I right? Just kidding, but seriously, option A is the way to go here.
upvoted 0 times
Thaddeus
3 months ago
B) Change in accounting estimate.
upvoted 0 times
...
Laurel
3 months ago
Definitely, changing the method of accounting for the investment is a big deal.
upvoted 0 times
...
Dortha
4 months ago
A) Change in accounting principle.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Arthur
4 months ago
Option A all the way! Changing the accounting method is definitely a change in principle, not just an estimate or error correction. This is the kind of question I'll be ready for on the exam.
upvoted 0 times
Alonzo
3 months ago
Yes, knowing the difference between accounting principles, estimates, and errors is key for the exam.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lashawna
4 months ago
I think option A is the correct choice in this scenario.
upvoted 0 times
...
Alaine
4 months ago
It's important to understand the different types of accounting changes for the exam.
upvoted 0 times
...
Sue
4 months ago
I agree, changing the accounting method is definitely a change in principle.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Royal
5 months ago
I agree with Eliz. The change from cost to equity method is a change in accounting principle, as it reflects a fundamental shift in how the investment is reported.
upvoted 0 times
Emiko
3 months ago
Yes, it's important to accurately reflect the increased investment in Worth, Inc.
upvoted 0 times
...
Hubert
3 months ago
I agree, it definitely seems like a significant shift in reporting.
upvoted 0 times
...
Roosevelt
3 months ago
I think it's a change in accounting principle.
upvoted 0 times
...
Katheryn
4 months ago
It's important to accurately reflect the increased investment in Worth, Inc.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ashley
4 months ago
Yes, it definitely seems like a significant shift in reporting.
upvoted 0 times
...
Garry
4 months ago
I think the change in accounting principle makes sense in this case.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Jules
5 months ago
I don't think so, as the change in accounting method seems intentional and not a correction of an error.
upvoted 0 times
...
Cristina
5 months ago
But could it also be considered a correction of an error in previously presented financial statements?
upvoted 0 times
...
Daniela
5 months ago
I agree with Huey, because Quo changed its method of accounting for investment in Worth, Inc.
upvoted 0 times
...
Eliz
5 months ago
This seems like a clear-cut case of a change in accounting principle. Quo's switch from the cost method to the equity method for its investment in Worth, Inc. is a change in how the investment is accounted for.
upvoted 0 times
Katy
4 months ago
That's right. It's important to recognize these accounting changes in financial statements.
upvoted 0 times
...
Kenneth
4 months ago
So, the correct answer would be A) Change in accounting principle.
upvoted 0 times
...
Scarlet
4 months ago
Yes, I agree. Quo's switch to the equity method is definitely a change in principle.
upvoted 0 times
...
Pearly
4 months ago
I think it's a change in accounting principle.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Huey
6 months ago
I think the transaction represents a change in accounting principle.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel
az-700  pass4success  az-104  200-301  200-201  cissp  350-401  350-201  350-501  350-601  350-801  350-901  az-720  az-305  pl-300  

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /pass.php:70) in /pass.php on line 77