|
|
|
 Topic: Urgent help! D.R.D--defer tax ( Topic Closed)
|
 
|
| Author |
|
2010rockcpa
Contributor
Joined: 10 Mar 2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 77
|
| Posted: 04 Jul 2010 at 16:42 | IP Logged
|
|
|
Taft Corp. uses the equity method to account for its 25% investment in Flame, Inc. During 1992, Taft received dividends of $30,000 from Flame and recorded $180,000 as its equity in the earnings of Flame. Additional information follows:
• All the undistributed earnings of Flame will be distributed as dividends in future periods
The dividends received from Flame are eligible for the 80% dividends received deduction. There are no other temporary differences. Enacted income tax rates are 30% for 1992 and thereafter.
Taft elected early application of FASB Statement No. 109, Accounting for Income Taxes. In its December 31, 1992, balance sheet, what amount should Taft report for deferred income tax liability?
a. $9,000 b. $10,800 c. $45,000 d. $54,000
Correct A.
I know for tax purposes TI is 30,000-24000=6000
The answer calculate F/S TI as 180,000-144,000=36,000.
I don't understand why 144,000 is subtracted? 180K is equity in earnings under equity method, NOT DIVIDEND. why it has something to do with F/S TI. ??
Cant get my mind straight. Thanks!!
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Louky
Newbie
Joined: 09 Mar 2010
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 32
|
| Posted: 04 Jul 2010 at 17:54 | IP Logged
|
|
|
OK, I'm not really sure about this, but here's what I think:
Taft's share of earnings for 1992 was $180,00, of which $30,000 was
distributed in the form of a cash dividend and is taxable now.
So that leaves $150,000 for later.
After the 80% DRD, ($150,000 - $120,000) = $30,000 will be taxed in the
future at 30% (as far as we know right now).
$30,000 * 30% = $9,000 deferred tax liability.
__________________
BEC-4/2/10 (87)
AUD-5/25/10 (81)
FAR-7/28/10 (74), 11/29/10 (82)
REG-8/26/10 (88)
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
bobthecpa
Regular
Joined: 27 Mar 2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 152
|
| Posted: 05 Jul 2010 at 11:11 | IP Logged
|
|
|
I think this question has been discussed before. If you search you might find a better explanation than mine.
180,000 x .8 = 144,000 = 80% Dividends Received Deduction of which is non-taxable
__________________
FAR (5/26) 79 Passed - Yaeger/CPAexcel
BEC (5/21) 80 Passed - CPAexcel
AUD - 8/31
REG - 10/15
^^ My Blog
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
bobthecpa
Regular
Joined: 27 Mar 2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 152
|
| Posted: 05 Jul 2010 at 16:41 | IP Logged
|
|
|
The 180,000 equity in earnings gets the 80% Dividends Rec'd Deduction because the parent company doesn't actually receive that amount for the period. The equity in earnings is simply a percentage of the parent's ownership in the subsidiary multiplied by the subsidiaries net income. It qualifies for the Div Rec'd Deduction because the parent will eventually receive the 180,000 in the form of dividend payments in the future (assuming the sub. pays out).
__________________
FAR (5/26) 79 Passed - Yaeger/CPAexcel
BEC (5/21) 80 Passed - CPAexcel
AUD - 8/31
REG - 10/15
^^ My Blog
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
|
|
Sorry, you can NOT post a reply.
This topic is closed.
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
 Copyright ©2001-2010 Web Wiz Guide
This page was generated in 0.1133 seconds.
|
Active Topics 
Memberlist 
Search 
Help
Register 
Login
