Search results

Part IV provides readers with the extant requirements for the application of materiality to recognition, measurement, presentation, and disclosure in the financial statements. This part also includes a detailed critical review of the recent Practice Statement on materiality, the FASB’s proposed ASU on the notes and the amendments to the Conceptual Framework proposed by the IASB and the FASB.

The part expands to issues that are typical of Management Commentary, including the SEC guidance on materiality in Management Discussion and Analysis.

It informs about the complexities and subtle differences between financial statements and bookkeeping and the different standards of reasonableness versus materiality.

A section moves from materiality to material misstatements and covers the application of materiality in auditing.

Another section goes in depth on internal control over financial reporting, showing the linkages between materiality and risk appetite and risk tolerance and the related application guidance.

Part V analyzes the details of how to assess materiality. It first tackles qualitative versus quantitative criteria and the role of professional judgment. It then analyzes the selection of quantitative threshold, to expand to the choice of benchmarks. It contrasts the whole financial statements with subaggregates, line items, and components.

Specific sections contrast IASB, FASB, SEC, and other guidance on materiality applied to comparative information, interim reporting, and segment reporting.

The section on estimates mingles complex guidance coming from accounting, auditing, and internal control over financial reporting to explain how the management can improve its assessment of materiality concerning estimates.

After explaining the techniques to move from individual to cumulative misstatements, the part tackles verification ex post, and finally summarizes the intricacies of whether immaterial misstatements are permissible and their consequences.

Whereas the Minister of Labour (hereafter in this Order referred to as “the Minister”) has received from the Boot and Shoe Repairing Wages Council (Great Britain) the wages regulation proposals set out in the Schedule hereto;

The purpose of this paper is to summarize record‐keeping requirements for Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)‐registered advisers of private investment companies, especially hedge funds.

Summarizes the important record‐keeping provisions of Rule 204‐2 under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (the Advisers Act) in categories including accounting records; records of orders to purchase and sell securities; written communications; documents supporting performance information; lists of discretionary accounts; powers of attorney; written contracts; codes of ethics; personal securities transactions; disclosure documents; client solicitation agreements; written policies and procedures; records for advisers with custody; investment supervisory or management services; proxy voting records; coded designation for certain clients; the time, place, and manner for retention of records; records for advisers exiting the business; duplicate records; records for nonresident advisers; records for advisers previously registered with a state; and hedge fund records.

Pursuant to new Rule 203(b)(3)‐2 under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (“Advisers Act”), most advisers of private investment companies, especially hedge funds, will be required to register with the SEC as investment advisers. Registered investment advisers must comply with the rules and regulations of the Advisers Act, including the recordkeeping requirements of Rule 204‐2 under the Advisers Act. Although the subject of recordkeeping is perhaps unexciting, recordkeeping is a key area of regulatory focus for the SEC and its examiners, particularly as they seek to gauge the adequacy of adviser compliance and internal controls.

A useful summary of record‐keeping requirements for hedge funds and other private investment companies.

The Secretary of State in exercise of powers conferred by sections 139(1) and 180(3) of the Factories Act 1961 and now vested in him and of all other powers enabling him in that behalf, hereby makes the following Order:—

An Act to amend the law relating to employers and workers and to organisations of employers and organisations of workers; to provide for the establishment of a National Industrial Relations Court and for extending the jurisdiction of industrial tribunals; to provide for the appointment of a Chief Registrar of Trade Unions and Employers' Associations, and of assistant registrars, and for establishing a Commission on Industrial Relations as a statutory body; and for purposes connected with those matters. [5th August 1971]

Despite the South African legislature’s intention to introduce capital gains tax (CGT) as a simple and clear tax, it is an extremely complex tax. Several provisions of both the Eighth Schedule to the Income Tax Act 58 of 1962 and the Act itself have to be taken into account in determining whether a taxable capital gain or an assessed capital loss has arisen during the year of assessment. The application of these principles is often surrounded by uncertainty. Hence, the purpose of this article is not only to provide an overview of some of the different provisions that have to be taken into account and the interaction between them, but also to highlight some of the problems arising from the application of the principles themselves.

In response to questions by Buxton and Meadows, there was an examination of the occurrence of title words in the abstracts, first paragraphs, last paragraphs and cited titles of research papers in chemistry, economics, history, mathematics and philosophy for the 1960 and 1970 eras. Title word occurrence in first paragraphs varied little among disciplines. Last paragraphs tended to have most frequent occurrence of title words in history and philosophy, and cited titles had most frequent occurrence in chemistry and mathematics. There was no significant difference between chemistry and mathematics of occurrence in abstracts; abstracts were not available for the other disciplines. Among disciplines taken as a whole, the best reflection of title word occurrence was the collection of abstracts, followed in order by first paragraphs, last paragraphs and cited titles. First and last paragraphs together provided 70% to 80% of the title words. For most disciplines, longer than average titles did demonstrate a higher frequency of title word occurrence in first and last paragraphs than did titles in general. The results implied that indexing based on extraction of title words could employ similar procedures from discipline to discipline. Nevertheless, sensitive information retrieval systems should be prepared for changes in the vocabulary of fields like history and philosophy to occur possibly more slowly than in fields like mathematics and chemistry.

An Act to establish public authorities concerned with arrangements for persons to obtain employment and with arrangements for training for employment and to make provision as to the functions of the authorities; to authorise the Secretary of State to provide temporary employment for unemployed persons; to amend the Industrial Training Act 1964 and the law relating to the provision by education authorities of services relating to employment; and for purposes connected with those matters. [25th July 1973]

Paragraphs 68 to 72 of the Eighth Schedule to the Income Tax Act No. 58 of 1962 (the Act’) were inserted to perform the same function as that of section 7, namely to attribute income in cases in which the taxpayer has disposed of that source of income by means of donation, settlement or other disposition. Paragraph 73 of the Eighth Schedule to the Act was inserted to limit the total amount that is attributed to the donor in a year in which both income (in terms of section 7) and a capital gain (in terms of the attribution paragraphs 68 to 72) are to be attributed. The unclear construction of the section and, it is submitted, the inaccurate interpretation of this paragraph by the South African Revenue Services (SARS’) has made it difficult to interpret this paragraph. This article attempts to evaluate prevailing legal precedent and to apply such precedent to the paragraphs on attribution in order to arrive at an appropriate interpretation of paragraph 73. The approach adopted by SARS is also examined in the light of the above interpretation and application of prevailing legal precedent. Lastly, amendments to the legislation are proposed to clarify the legislation and to provide a structured approach in the consideration of the intention of the legislature.