- This topic has 4 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 2 months ago by .
-
Topic
-
Northern Airline purchased airline gate rights at Newark International Airport for $,2,000,000 with a legal life of five years. However, Northern has the ability and right to extend the rights every ten years for an indefinite period of time. Over what period of time should Northern amortize the gate rights.
a. 5 years
b. 15 years
c. 40 years
d. The rights should not be amortized.
I picked (a) 5 years because although they had the “ability” and “right” to extend, it doesn’t say they have the “intent”. The answer it (d); explanation says “Since Northern has the ability and intent to renew the rights indefinitely, the intangible should not be amortized.” Is this an error, or are we suppose to assume they have an “intent”, because no where in the problem does it any intents. What’s the rule of thumb here?
On January 2, Year 1, Lava, Inc. purchased a patent for a new consumer product for $90,000. At the time of purchase, the patent was valid for 15 years; however, the patent’s useful life was estimated to be only 10 years due to the competitive nature of the product. On December 31, Year 4, the product was permanently withdrawn from sale under governmental order because of a potential health hazard in the product. What amount should Lava charge against income during Year 4, assuming amortization is recorded at the end of each year?
a.$9,000
b.$54,000
c.$63,000
d.$72,000
I picked (b) after amortizing it for 4 years. But the answer is (c); explanation says to amortize only 3 years. So why wasn’t the 4th year amortized? It’s already December 31st. What’s the rule of thumb here so I don’t get these types of questions wrong again?
FAR 85 June 2015
AUD 80 Nov 2015
REG 83 Nov 2015
BEC 79 Feb 2016
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.