Wang Corporation purchased $180,000 of Hales Inc. 7% bonds at par with the intent and ability to hold the bonds until they matured in 2022, so Wang classifies its investment as held to maturity. Unfortunately, a combination of problems at Hales and in the debt market caused the fair value of the Hales investment to decline to $143,000 during 2018. Wang views this decline as an other-than-temporary (OTT) impairment. Wang calculates that, of the $37,000 drop in fair value, $15,000 of it relates to credit losses and $22,000 relates to non-credit losses. If Wang accounts for the Hales bonds under IAS No. 39, before-tax net income for 2018 will be reduced by :
A.$22,000
B.$0
C.$37,000
D.$15,000
Solution
A. Current Investments – Current Investments are investments which by their nature are readily realizable and are intended to be held for less than a year from the date when such investment is done.
B. Long-Term
Investments – Long-term investments are
investments other than the current investments, even though they
might be freely marketable.
Long-term investments must always be carried in financial
statements at their cost. But, when there’s a decline, apart from
temporary, in value the long-term investment, carrying amount is
reduced for recognizing such decline.
In view of the above provision, there is a objective evidence that
a combination of problems at Hales and in the debt market caused
the fair value of the Hales investment to decline to $143,000
during 2018 and Wang views this decline as an other-than-temporary
(OTT) impairment. Hence the decline is permanent and investment
will be treated as long term.
In the given case,
Wang calculates that, of the $37,000 drop in fair value, $15,000 of
it relates to credit losses and $22,000 relates to non-credit
losses. If Wang accounts for the Hales bonds under IAS No. 39,
before-tax net income for 2018 will be reduced by $37,000 and
investment will carried at $143,000.
Wang Corporation purchased $180,000 of Hales Inc. 7% bonds at par with the intent and ability...
Wang Corporation purchased $220,000 of Hales Inc. 8% bonds at par in 2020 with the intent and ability to hold the bonds until the bonds mature in 2025, so Wang classifies its investment as held-to-maturity. Unfortunately, a combination of problems at Hales and in the debt market caused the fair value of the Hales investment to decline to $180,000 during 2021. Wang applies the CECL model to account for its investment and calculates that, of the $40,000 drop in fair...
Exercise 12-3 Bloom Corporation purchased $1,900,000 of Taylor Company 5% bonds at par and classifies their investment as AFS, Unfortunately, a combination of problems at Taylor Company and in the debt market caused the fair value of the Taylor investment to decline to $1,320,000 during 2018. Consider each of the following as independent situation. 1. Bloom now believes it is more likely than not that it will have to sell the Taylor bonds before the bonds have a chance to...
Bloom Corporation purchased $1,750,000 of Taylor Company 5% bonds, at their face amount, with the intent and ability to hold the bonds until they matured in 2025, so Bloom classifies its investment as AFS. Unfortunately, a combination of problems at Taylor Company and in the debt securities market caused the fair value of the Taylor investment to decline to $1,200,000 during 2021. The following are the two alternative scenarios that should be analyzed independent of each other. 1. Bloom now...
Bloom Corporation purchased $1,750,000 of Taylor Company 5% bonds, at their face amount, with the intent and ability to hold the bonds until they matured in 2025, so Bloom classifies its investment as AFS. Unfortunately, a combination of problems at Taylor Company and in the debt securities market caused the fair value of the Taylor investment to decline to $1,200,000 during 2021. The following are the two alternative scenarios that should be analyzed independent of each other. Bloom now believes...
Exercise 12-30 Held-to-maturity securities; impairments (Appendix 128) [LO12-2, 12-8] Bloom Corporation purchased $1.200,000 of Taylor Company 5% bonds at par with the intent and ability to hold the bonds until they matured in 2025, so Bloom Classifies their investment as HTM. Unfortunately, a combination of problems at Taylor Company and in the debt market caused the fair value of the Taylor investment to decline to $760,000 during 2018. Consider each of the following as an Independent situation 1. Bloom now...
2 Part 2 Homework i Seved Bloom Corporation purchased $1,000,000 of Taylor Company 5% bonds at their face amount, with the intent and ability to hold the bonds until they matured in 2025, so Bloom classifies its investment as HTM. Unfortunately, a combination of problems at Taylor Company and in the debt securities market caused the fair value of the Taylor investment to decline to $600,000 during 2021 The following are the two alternative scenarios that should be analyzed independent...
Stewart Enterprises has the following investments, all purchased prior to 2018: Bee Company 5% bonds, purchased at face value, with an amortized cost of $4,000,000, and classified as held to maturity. At December 31, 2018, the Bee investment had a fair value of $3,500,000, and Stewart calculated that $240,000 of the fair value decline is a credit loss and $260,000 is a noncredit loss. At December 31, 2019. the Bee investment had a fair value of $3,700,000, and Stewart calculated...
2 Part 2 Homework i Bloom Corporation purchased $1,000,000 of Taylor Company 5% bonds at their face amount, with the intent and ability to hold the bonds until they matured in 2025, so Bloom classifies its investment as AFS. Unfortunately, a combination of problems at Taylor Company and in the debt securities market caused the fair value of the Taylor investment to decline to $600,000 during 2021 The following are the two alternative scenarios that should be analyzed independent of...
10:08 AM Thu Feb 20 437% a Aas 1. Bee Company 5% bonds, purchased at face value, with an amortized cost of $4,000,000, and classified as held to maturity. At December 31, 2018, the Bee investment had a fair value of $3,500,000, and Stewart calculated that S240,000 of the fair value decline is a credit loss and $260,000 is a noncredit loss. At December 31, 2019, the Bee investment had a fair value of $3,700,000, and Stewart calculated that $140,000...
LED Corporation owns $1,750,000 of Branch Pharmaceuticals bonds and classifies its investment as securities available-for-sale. The market price of Branch’s bonds fell by $1,200,000, due to concerns about one of the company’s principal drugs. The concerns were justified when the FDA banned the drug. $100,000 of that decline in value already had been included in OCI as a temporary unrealized loss in a prior period. LED views $800,000 of the $1,200,000 loss as related to credit losses, and the other...