|Exam Name||:||Board Certification in Business Valuation(R) (BCBA)|
|Questions and Answers||:||251 Q & A|
|Updated On||:||October 20, 2017|
|PDF Download Mirror||:||BCBA Brain Dump|
|Get Full Version||:||Pass4sure BCBA Full Version|
Which of the following is NOT a common category of intangible assets?
is a specialized classification of intangible and its categories are creative
(e.g. copyrights) and innovative (e.g. patents).
Both A & B
The cost approach provides a systematic framework for estimating the value of an intangible asset based on the economic principle of:
An intangible’s deficiencies are considered curable when the prospective economic
benefit of enhancing or modifying it exceeds the current cost (in terms of material, labor,
and time) to change it. An intangible’s deficiencies are considered incurable when:
A. The current costs of enhancing or modifying it (in terms of material, labor and time) can not exceed the expected future economic benefits of improving it
B .The current costs of enhancing or modifying it (in terms of material, labor and time)
exceed the expected future economic benefits of improving it
Cost encompasses all of the deficiencies
Reproduction cost exceeds the actual production cost
Analysts should consider each of the following measure when estimating the remaining
useful life of intangible asset EXCEPT:
Remaining legal (or legal protection) life (e.g., remaining term of trademark protection)
Remaining contractual life (e.g., remaining term on a lease)
Remaining copyrighted life (e.g., time period for which copyrights are sold)
Remaining technological life (e.g., period until the current technology becomes
obsolete, for patents, proprietary processes, etc.)
Because of the advanced features (protected by the several patents), Seller management
Seller sells more widgets than it otherwise would
Seller has a greater market share than it otherwise would
Seller’s average selling price per unit is higher than its competitors’ prices
Seller has short-term supply contract supply contract with the key supplier
The analyst used
to quantify the value of intangible assets. The analyst
estimated the current cost required for the company to recreate its current level of
customer awareness, brand recognition and consumer loyalty.
Asset accumulation method
Recreation cost method
Valuing intangibles method
This is sometimes considered the accumulation of all other elements of economic value of business enterprise not specifically with (or allocated to) individual tangible and intangible assts. Its analysis and qualification is an important component in the application of asset accumulation method to a company like Seller. What is this?
Asset accumulation method can quickly quantify the effects on business value of many
common seller structural considerations, such as:
What if the seller retains the company’s cash on hand or accounts receivables?
What if seller does not retain (or leases back to the company) the operating real estate
What if seller sells the title of the patents or to some other intangible asset owned by
What if seller does not legally retain any or all of the debt instruments?
Which of the following is the primary disadvantage of the asset accumulation method?
If taken to an extreme, it can be very expensive and time consuming
It may necessitate the involvement o appraisal specialists in several asset valuation
The valuation requires the valuation of all the company assets
The value of all assets, properties, or business interests depends on their economic income-generating capacity
A general category of taxable events relates to the amount of recognition of income (if any) associated with economic benefits received by a business. Examples of this category of taxable events include all of the following EXCEPT:
The valuation of property received, such as rents
The valuation (or the solvency/insolvency test) related to the recognition (or non-
C.A valuation that is needed when a business (whether the business is a proprietorship,
corporation or partnership)
D. A valuation when a tax payer claims a deduction
There are some allowable methods for determining the basis of property received in exchange for other property. Which of the following is/are out those methods?
Income basis of tax on the property
If a taxpayer receives property for services, then the original basis of the property
when it is received is its original price
The basis is the fair market value of the property exchanged for it, increased by any
payments made or decreased by any payments received, when the two properties are of unequal value
The basis is the fair market value of the property when its is received
Various transactional and taxation events may occur that change the taxpayer’s original
basis in the property. These events usually the original basis.
Increase or decrease
No deduction is allowed for any charitable contribution of or more unless the taxpayer substantiates the contribution by a contemporaneous written acknowledge from the donee organization of the contribution.
A. $300 B. $400 C. $350 D. $250
The IRC limits an individual taxpayer’s charitable deduction each year to a percentage of adjusted gross income, depending on:
The value of gift
The type of gift
The fair market price of gift
Tuesday, November 22, 2016July 2016 California Bar exam Carnage
The California State Bar has released the effects from the July 2016 bar examination. The average flow fee become forty three%, the lowest in 32 years. For California ABA-authorized legislation schools, the circulate price fell 6.2 percent points from 2015, to 62%, down 21 percentage aspects from 2008.
ABA Journal, Some States See increase in State Bar pass costs, while Others Witness Declines:
because the July 2016 bar effects are launched, it seems that nationally, there’s a moderate uptick with rankings, says Erica Moeser, president of the country wide conference of Bar Examiners. “The huge photograph merchandise is that we've searched for scores to proceed to drop, and they didn’t,” she informed the ABA Journal.
ratings did drop in California from forty six.6 p.c in July 2015 to forty three % in July 2016. That’s caused by a passing percentage discount among first-time verify takers who graduated from California legislations faculties with ABA accreditation, Moeser says. “it truly is the largest neighborhood of verify-takers, and their efficiency dropped from 68 p.c on the July 2015 bar examination to sixty two percent this July,” she stated.
big apple, which like California has been accepted for having a tough bar exam, noticed a 4 percent pass price increase for July 2016. That’s likely as a result of manhattan adopting the Uniform Bar exam this year, say many legislation college professors. ...
Some thought that this year’s mild increase in the Multistate Bar examination’s country wide mean ranking—from 139.9 to one hundred forty.three—could bring greater bar passage rates for July 2016 test takers. For essentially the most half, that didn’t ensue, Derek Muller, a Pepperdine institution legislation professor who writes at extra of Democracy, mentioned in a Sept. 20 submit.
The Recorder, California Bar exam flow-price Reaches New Low:
Gayle Murphy, senior government for admissions on the state bar, via a bar spokeswoman attributed the losing cost to fluctuations rooted in "the expertise, knowledge and preparations of the candidates who take a specific administration."
Others, besides the fact that children, say the decrease flow costs in fresh years are possible as a result of appropriate-notch college graduates—many alread BCBAy saddled with significant student debt—selecting other profession paths in a relatively more suitable job market. "it really is the difficulty: legislations faculties are graduating students that are passing the bar at decrease fees," noted Derek Muller, an affiliate professor at Pepperdine institution college of legislation. That may additionally no longer exchange any time soon, Muller spoke of, considering the fact that growth in the number of college students taking the legislations college Admission check is protecting consistent.
by using Amy YarbroughStaff author
In what marked the bottom success rate for a related administration of the examine in more than 30 years, just 43 p.c of applicants handed the bar examination given in July.
In all, 3,332 of the 7,737 people who took the July examination passed, according to the State Bar’s Committee of Bar Examiners. That forty three p.c circulate cost is the bottom seeing that 1984, when forty one.8 p.c of look at various takers passed in what changed into then a fall exam.
pretty much sixty seven percent of those that took the bar exam have been first-time examine takers. Of those, the flow fee turned into fifty six percent usual. among the many rest – the 2,573 candidates who have been repeating the examination – the circulate price became 17 percent.
As expected, applicants from California legislations faculties permitted by using the American Bar association fared the choicest on the examination with a move expense of 62 percent for first-time test takers and 23 p.c for those repeating the check. The circulate quotes for out-of-state ABA approved schools were 60 percent and 20 p.c respectively. California accepted faculties’ fees had been tremendously lessen: 21 and 9 p.c.
Given twice a 12 months in February and July, the three-day bar examination consists of a distinct-option Multistate Bar Examination (MBE), six essay questions and two efficiency tests.
The three,322 candidates who passed the July exam will become individuals of the State Bar if they fulfill other requirements for training law including a history test and ethical personality examination. They might also take the lawyer’s Oath in my view or participate in admissions ceremonies, if you want to take area within the state during the month.
in addition to the bar examination effects, the Committee of Bar Examiners announced that 149 of 410 attorneys, 36.three p.c, who took the attorney’s Examination handed. The lawyer’s examination includes the essay and efficiency check portions of the bar exam and is open to out-of-state attorneys who have been admitted to the practice of legislations and in good standing for as a minimum four years.
summary: California has launched facts on the results of its July 2016 bar exam, and the stats aren’t good…
The bar passage fee in California is getting worse. This week, the State Bar of California’s Committee of Bar Examiners released facts on the July 2016 California Bar examination consequences; and it turns out, this year’s examinees fared worse than those that took the check in 2015. actually, the low was the bottom bar passage cost for the California July examine in 32 years.
Out of seven,737 California look at various takers, handiest forty three% of them passed the universal Bar Examination (GBX). For those three,332 successful candidates, the subsequent step for them is to fulfill other necessities for bar admission, and that comprises a personality assessment.
data display that out of the 7,737 applicants, sixty six.7% of them took the check for the first time. Out of those 5,164 first-time candidates, best fifty six% of them handed the GBX.
For the 2,573 repeat look at various takers, handiest 17% of them passed.
under is a breakdown of test-takers and their tutorial background. To no one’s shock, faculties with ABA accreditation had a stronger flow rate than schools devoid of it.
The GBX is a 3-day exam given in California twice a year, in February and July. The examination has three sections–a assorted option Multistate Bar Examination (MBE), six essays, and two performance exams designed to asses a candidates capability to apply felony capabilities to practical initiatives.
One brilliant spot concerning the in any other case disappointing results, besides the fact that children, turned into that the MBE average ranking in California became better than the country wide standard. California’s MBE typical changed into 1421 and the country wide MBE normal was 1403.
The next California Bar examination is scheduled for February 21, 22, and 23 in 2017.
California’s Bar Passage fees 2006-2016
Gayle Murphy, senior government for admissions at the state bar, informed The Recorder that the losing expense in California become probably because of adjustments rooted in “the knowledge, skills and preparations of the candidates who take a selected administration.”
but whereas California may also have skilled a reduce, that changed into not the universal country wide trend, said Erica Moeser, president of the national conference of Bar Examiners.
Moeser advised the ABA Journal, “The big picture item is that we now have looked for scores to proceed to drop, and that they didn’t.”
source: The State Bar of California
What do you think of California’s abysmal bar passage cost? let us know in the comments under.
California—customarily the ultimate state to finish grading its summer time bar tests—lately introduced effects for the July 2016 check administration, and the information changed into not first rate. (One blogger used the observe “carnage” in his headline describing the bar’s press announcement.) whereas we are nonetheless looking ahead to specified facts (greater on that beneath), we do recognize that the pass fee within the Golden State for first-time takers who graduated from ABA-authorized faculties observed in California (which is doubtless the single ideal metric to use to examine 12 months-to-yr results) dropped from 68.2 percent in July of 2015 to around 62 % in 2016. (I say “round” because the sixty two-p.c determine changed into rounded off to the nearest total number.) This 12 months’s mixture California consequences are miserable; the primary-time California ABA school pass cost dropped round 6 features (or very nearly 10 %) from an alread BCBAy low sixty eight.2 mark. For some perspective, understand that the similar figure from 2012 was 76.9 p.c, and in 2008 was eighty three.2. That’s a 21 (or so) factor drop in barely eight years.
California’s pass cost for ABA-faculty-graduate first-time takers is, yr-in and yr-out, the lowest of the major states, and constantly by way of a wide margin. Many other large states (reminiscent of Illinois, Florida, Pennsylvania and Georgia) also noticed move charges this yr that were reduce than 2015’s; in Illinois, for instance, the flow expense amongst Illinois-based mostly ABA-accredited schools fell from eighty p.c in 2015 to seventy seven percent this yr. against this, ny and Texas—two different very large jurisdictions—saw small increases this year in their bar move cost. as an example, long island’s pass rate among graduates from ABA-authorized colleges in ny ticked up this 12 months to eighty two p.c, from 79 %. (manhattan is commonly regarded a “complicated” bar examination as a result of its normal first-time circulate expense—which comprises takers who didn’t graduate from ABA-accepted colleges and who, in part for that motive, are unlikely to flow—is regularly low compared to different states, but the numbers I offered above, which focal point on ABA-faculty graduates, illustrate that the California examination is much, an awful lot greater complicated to flow.)
ordinary, it appears—although I haven’t considered an excellent supply aggregating country wide statistics—that this yr greater states (or at the least more states of big dimension) noticed a flow-cost decline than loved an uptick, and additionally that the declines in trendy states were greater than the increases in different tremendous jurisdictions. Over the summer time, the countrywide conference of Bar Examiners—who design tremendous materials of the exams used within the states, including the so-referred to as Multistate Bar Examination (MBE) used in each state—mentioned that the usual (or suggest) MBE score inched up in July 2016 after a number of years of giant decline. but that doesn’t mean that the nation’s normal bar first-time flow rate (if one had been to be calculated by means of combining all the numerators and denominators in all the states) necessarily accelerated this yr (although it could have, on the grounds that long island and Texas have big denominators), for as a minimum two viable reasons. First, although the ordinary MBE rating went up, the percent of mediocre or low ratings may also have gone up (leading to lower passage fees) since the average could without problems had been pulled up by way of more suitable efficiency on the desirable; in different words, the true passers may also have passed through a much wider margin, lifting up the average, even if there have been a smaller percent of passers.
second, the MBE (which is a dissimilar-option verify) isn’t the simplest element of each state’s bar exam, and performance on the different components (which involve writing essays and other documents) might have slipped such that the average percentage of bar passers might have long gone down. (although the non-MBE accessories appear to be “scaled”—or calibrated—to MBE performance in most if now not all states, I haven’t seen sufficient tips on the scaling method to grasp no matter if bad writing potential might tremendously deliver down normal performance by the verify-taking pool in spite of the fact that the distinctive-option performance on the MBE crept up.)
when we movement from country wide and state-by means of-state outcomes to faculty-through-college results, issues get tougher to discern. Anecdotally, it looks that extra schools saw their pass expense (at least in the jurisdiction the place a plurality of graduates took the bar) drop than saw their flow fee raise. To provide one illustration, in Illinois, only two of the 9 ABA-accredited schools in the state saw a rise this yr, youngsters to be reasonable one other faculty, the tuition of Chicago, had such an incredibly respectable circulate fee in 2015 that there turned into nowhere to head however down. unfortunately, now not all states reveal particular faculty-by using-school information—and positively now not for out-of-state schools—so that a finished seem to be in school-by using-school tendencies will must wait unless schools put up their 2016 bar result information on their sites, which is not required under ABA accreditation requisites until December 2017, one year from now.
California traditionally has been one of the vital leaders in the country in disclosing essentially the most detailed college-with the aid of-college facts about a month after initial effects are suggested (which means sometime in late December or early January for the July bar administration.) however the California Bar seems now not to be giving out so plenty targeted suggestions anymore. For the February 2016 bar exam (whose consequences got here out this summer time), for the primary time for the reason that i will be able to consider (going lower back to the early Nineteen Nineties at least) the California bar did not put up any school-by means of-college statistics, even if in its first press free up asserting February effects it promised to do so. The may additionally 13, 2016, press liberate, possibly using stock language from prior years, represented that “more certain facts, together with passing fees via particular person legislation faculties with 11 or extra takers, could be made available in about four to six weeks and posted on the State Bar’s web page” (emphasis added). but when the more designated data came out, school-by way of-college statistics become now not included. particularly and disappointingly, the press unencumber two weeks ago for the July 2016 effects also refers to more designated information slated to come out in a month or so, however fails even to point out the inclusion of faculty-by way of-college statistics.
Why would the California bar be publishing (or possibly even compiling) much less school-through-school facts at the moment? It’s complicated to assert. final yr, the California lawmakers did circulate a statute, California business and Professions Code §6060.25, which sought to protect the privateness of americans who sit for the bar exam and practice for bar membership. The statutory provision—which itself looks to had been a legislative reaction to assistance requests from UCLA legislation professor Richard Sander and others to acquire records about bar examination takers that would assist reply how race, LSAT scores, college GPAs, and other factors predict bar exam performance—gives that “[n]otwithstanding any other legislations, any making a choice on information submitted by way of an applicant . . . together with, but now not limited to, bar examination rankings, legislation faculty grade point general (GPA), undergraduate GPA, legislations faculty Admission examine ratings, race or ethnicity, and any [other] assistance contained inside the State Bar Admissions database . . . that may additionally establish a person applicant, will probably be exclusive and shall now not be disclosed . . . ” (emphasis added). inserting aside no matter if liberate of race, LSAT and undergraduate GPA records, and many others. might enable particular person applicants and their bar efficiency to be identified (say, if the measurement of any particular phone—African-American men at Stanford taking the bar in 2012—have been so small that snoopy individuals could hazard plausible, if not at all times completely accurate, guesses about identity), it is hard for me to see how mixture school-by-school statistics (without any racial or other narrowing information) may well be used to establish particular person applicants, any further than the (much more) aggregate statistics alread BCBAy released—i.e., the 62 p.c pass expense among all first-time California ABA-faculty graduates—would. If this 62 p.c statistic wouldn’t meaningfully determine any individuals, I don’t see how the bar publishing the indisputable fact that (and i’m making up numbers here, for the reason that we don’t have and can not get any precise records for a while) 230 of UCLA’s 270 first-time takers in July 2016 passed would lead to any colossal prospect of particular person identification both.
in all probability the bar is appearing out of an abundance of warning given § 6060.25, however’s complicated to see how any considerations about this provision are even cost effective given the statute’s clear and slender center of attention on “information that might also determine an applicant.” And in an era when potential students need (and want) extra records that is latest and finely grained from each and every legislations school—and at a second when the ABA is on account that imposing extra stringent bar circulate requirements as situations for accreditation—the California bar’s apparent decision to supply much less, no longer extra, advice than they’ve been publishing for many years doesn't appear wise and even effortless to preserve. Let’s hope that the absence of faculty-certain facts for the February 2016 examination became an aberration, and that when the more precise data for July 2016 come out later this month or early subsequent, faculty-by means of-faculty records is supplied (at least for faculties with a huge enough variety of takers to be able to make any issues about picking particular person takers baseless.)
Following are some effective pieces of counsel (from Cooper, Heron, & Heward, 2007) related to size in habits evaluation.
Reference: Cooper J.O, Heron T.E, Heward W.L. (2007). utilized behavior evaluation (2nd ed.) upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
[image credit: denisismagilov via Fotalia]