Answer: See attachment and explanation.
Explanation:
a. Determine the components of pension expense that the company would recognize in 2017.
Service cost = $52,000
Add: Interest on projected benefit obligation = $380,000 × 10% = $38,000
Less: Actual return on plan asset = ($11000)
Less: Unexpected loss = 200,000 × 10% - 11,000 = ($9000)
Ammortization of prior service cost = $15000
Pension expense = $85,000
b. The journal entry to record the pension expense and the company’s funding of the pension plan in 2017 has been attached.
c. The amount of the 2017 increase/decrease in gains or losses and the amount to be amortized in 2017 and 2018 has been attached.
d. The pension amounts reported in the financial statement as of December 31, 2017 will be $85,000.
Answer:
$400,000
Explanation:
Since at December 31, Year 5, Tedd's tax advisor believed that an unfavorable outcome was <u>probable</u>. And a <u>reasonable estimate </u>of additional taxes was $400,000 but could be as much as $600,000.
Although after the Year 5 financial statements were issued, Tedd received and accepted an IRS settlement offer of $450,000.
Tedd should have included an amount of $400,000 as accrued liability in its December 31, Year 5 balance sheet
The reason is that according to the International Financial Reporting Standards, a PROVISION must be made as long as the conditions below were obtainable at year end.
- Existing Condition (which in this case is the tax dispute with the IRS)
- Probable Cash Outflow (which Tedd's Tax adviser confirmed)
- Reliable Estimate of Outflow ( which the scenario stated ''A reasonable estimate of additional taxes was $400,000'')
Hence, such 'reasonable estimate is the appropriate amount for inclusion in the financial statements.
I think that the stament given above is true, as this principle <span>lets business survive or fail without much interaction from the government.</span>
