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 95 Discussion

Actual exam question for AICPA's CPA-Financial exam
Question #: 95
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 B represents the general accounting treatment required for these transactions. These treatments are:

* Cumulative effect approach - Include the cumulative effect of the adjustment resulting from the accounting change or error correction in the 1993 financial statements, and do not restate the 1992 financial statements.

* Retroactive or retrospective restatement approach - Restate the 1992 financial statements and adjust 1992 beginning retained earnings if the error or change affects a period prior to 1992.

* Prospective approach - Report 1993 and future financial statements on the new basis but do not restate 1992 financial statements.

Item to Be Answered

As a result of a production breakthrough, Quo determined that manufacturing equipment previously depreciated over 15 years should be depreciated over 20 years.

List B (Select one)

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: C

Choice 'C' is correct. This affects only the prospective (current and subsequent) periods - not prior periods, not retained earnings.


Contribute your Thoughts:

Corrinne
2 months ago
Prospective approach it is. Just like when I change the oil in my car - the new oil doesn't magically fix the old one, it just goes forward from there.
upvoted 0 times
...
Meaghan
2 months ago
Hmm, I was tempted to go with the cumulative effect approach, but Chun makes a good point. Gotta love these accounting details, am I right?
upvoted 0 times
Denna
2 months ago
Definitely, accounting details can be tricky but it's crucial to get them right for accurate financial reporting.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jamal
2 months ago
Yeah, I agree. It's important to accurately reflect the impact of the production breakthrough on the financial statements.
upvoted 0 times
...
Rodrigo
2 months ago
I think Chun is right, we should go with the retroactive or retrospective restatement approach.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Anna
3 months ago
I believe the answer is A) Cumulative effect approach, as we should include the adjustment in the 1993 financial statements.
upvoted 0 times
...
Anglea
3 months ago
I agree with Chun. The prospective approach makes the most sense here since it's a change in accounting estimate, not a correction of an error.
upvoted 0 times
Lorrie
3 months ago
Prospective approach.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Helene
3 months ago
I agree with Lucia, because the change affects a period prior to 1992.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lucia
3 months ago
I think the answer is B) Retroactive or retrospective restatement approach.
upvoted 0 times
...
Chun
3 months ago
The correct answer is C) Prospective approach. Changing the depreciation period of the manufacturing equipment should be treated as a change in estimate, which is applied prospectively.
upvoted 0 times
Kris
2 months ago
That makes sense, since it's a change in estimate that should be applied prospectively.
upvoted 0 times
...
Paola
3 months ago
I think the correct answer is C) Prospective approach.
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