home Accounting, auditing books Encyclopedia of accounting - Grachev RE Section II Part 1

Encyclopedia of accounting - Grachev RE Section II Part 1

Return exited participant's share in the authorized capital in the form of an object made by him (in the case of the preparation of this object to the operation carried out by the enterprise)

This example is considered in two ways:

First. In the event that a fair value contributed as capital investment object while bringing it up to operational status, the company was forced to make an additional investment; with their own investment companies were insignificant. Therefore, at the time of the return of the asset exited participant carrying value of an object does not become higher and even decreased by a small amount due to wear (see. Table 2.27).

Second. In the event that a fair value contributed as capital investment object while bringing it up to operational status, the company has incurred significant costs, and therefore, at the time of the return of the asset exited participant carrying value of the object was higher than with the assessment of its contribution, while even wear is not reduced by the same amount to at least equal the sum of the pre-party embedded (see. table 2.28).

I variant. The carrying value of the outgoing object below the cost initially estimated investment

member

Conditions

• Cost of the project at the time of application - 30,000 USD (which is the share of a participant in the charter capital).

• During the period of pre-operational training facility, the company has added to its value even 5000 USD investment.

• Thus, the initial value of the object at the time of his transfer to property and equipment amounted to 35,000 USD.

• At the time of transfer of the object exited carrying member (and therefore depreciated) value of the asset is 26,000 USD.

• Therefore, the amount of wear of the outgoing object is 9000 UAH.

In this case, it turns out that was eliminated from the list of participants takes an object valued at the book value of 26,000 USD (35000 - 9000), moreover, it is necessary to pay cash compensation 4,000 USD, and some of them - at the expense capitalized in other assets amortotchisleny ( but not all of these funds, because his contribution was estimated at the time not to UAH 35,000, but only 30,000 USD).

However, it is worth noting that the former member takes with him though to a certain extent worn asset, but the subject is in a completely suitable for further use condition. And such a party must understand that it is not he, and the company at the time was spent to bring the object to the proper working condition. (Under the terms of the example is bringing the company cost in 5000 USD). Consequently, the former member in this case also should its part to compensate these costs to the enterprise to the extent attributable to not yet worn-out value that the participant takes with it in the form it is suitable for the operation of the asset. (And therefore suitable that the asset has deteriorated is not one hundred percent). Perform counting amortotchisleny shares (In this case, you should not use terms such as resale value, amortized cost):

- Part attributable to the share of the enterprise

the original cost of the asset (14%) .............................. (9000: 35,000) x 5000 = 1286 USD;

- The part attributable to the retired participants (86%) ...... (9000: 35,000) x 30,000 = 7714 USD;

Total: ................................................ .................................................. ............................................ 9000 UAH.

Therefore, it appears that amortotchisleny amount in this case is sufficient to pay compensation to the former party for wear made by him of the object. (For the sake of this conclusion, and this was carried out purely for reference counting.) And put it to pay (in connection with the reduction of the authorized capital by UAH 30,000) another 4,000 UAH this compensation. Balance: 7714 - 4000 = 3714 USD - This party has already eliminated one way or another to get their share of profits earned by the enterprise. Well, if the company was losing money - let Sorry, we worked together, they did - and then earned.

Table 2.27

OPTION II. The carrying value of the outgoing object above the cost of the original investment valued member

Conditions

• Cost of the project at the time of application - 30,000 USD (which is the share of a participant in the charter capital).

• During the period of pre-operational training facility, the company has added to its value even 12,000 USD investment.

• Thus, the initial value of the object at the time of his transfer to property and equipment amounted to 42,000 USD.

• At the time of transfer of the object exited carrying member (and therefore depreciated) value of the asset is 37,000 USD.

• Therefore, the amount of wear of the outgoing object is 5000 UAH.

In this case, it turns out that was eliminated from the list of participants takes an object valued at book value of UAH 37,000 (42,000 - 5,000). This is 7000 UAH more than his contribution was appreciated. Of course, this object can not be broken into two parts, but the cost of these two parts can be expanded: 30,000 - this compensation fee, and 7000 - is for sale. According to the logic, but, unfortunately, not by law. (It should be recalled cited above paragraphs. 3.2.8 of the Law on VAT). Because according to the Law in sales volumes should enlist the entire cost of the returned object (37000), because he is returned otherwise than invested, as (made capital investments in fixed assets were transformed in the actual plant and equipment). Thus, based on the requirements of the Law, an accountant forced to charge VAT on the full amount of this sale: 37000 × 20% = 7400 UAH. (This despite the fact that the fair would be: 7000 x 20% = 1400 UAH). Consequently, the former member, taking with him his fee, must in this case pay the company 14,400 USD, including as many as 7,400 USD VAT. This means that the state treasury will go more funds (7,400 USD) than the enterprise - compensation for costs and expenses (7,000 USD). Such a tax in any case can not be considered fair, because it turns out that the eliminated participant pays tax on its own as a means (30,000 x 20% = 6000 UAH), and only a small portion of the VAT paid by them to account for the cost, which can be considered the added (7000 x 20% = 1400 UAH). It would seem, why in this case, the taxpayer can not "win" from the tax authorities for a fraction of these unjustly accrued USD 14,400 by redistributing the amount of accumulated amortotchisleny between now and the outgoing party? Something like that, as it was done in the first embodiment, since the ratio of the amounts invested in this facility and now a party, not 7000 against 30,000, and in fact 12,000 against 30,000 Therefore, it appears that the company owns 40% of the cost object rather than 23%.

Let's try to distribute amortotchisleniya:

- Part attributable to the share of the enterprise

the original cost of the asset (28%) ........................ (5000: 42,000) x 12,000 = 1429 USD;

- The part attributable to the retired participants (72%) ....... (5000: 42,000) x 30,000 = 3571 USD;

Total: ................................................ .................................................. ........................................ 5000 UAH.

Thus, according to the laws of justice, allegedly out that the company, for its part should give the exited participant amortotchisleny 3571 UAH, because wear out during use and the share of investments. However, these payments are carried out in the company have uncovered losses debit (from loan offices). Here "casket" and open: it should not do, because in this case, no one will "win", and as a result of such labor in vain accountant company only receive damages and eliminated participant - the share earned by the enterprise in the process of capital operations, reduced by exactly the share of the losses, which accounts for its participation in the capital. That's why in the II variant, these postings are not given. It should be emphasized: the cases described in I and II variants, despite certain similarities between the two are very different among themselves. In particular, in the I variant without compensation amortotchisleny not do, because the eliminated competitor shall receive a contribution of one hundred per cent of its assessment. In II variant as it is about getting them another amount exceeding it predschuschy fee, so in this case, the compensation for wear and tear to any positive results does not.

Table 2.28