Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To ask any accountant types about Fixed Assets

8 replies

DarkRosaleen · 29/03/2018 16:03

If you have some assets whose accumulated depreciation is equal to the cost i.e they have nil NBV, shouldn’t you still show them in the accounts as such if you still possess and use them?

The accountant has shown them as “disposals”. I thought an asset was disposed if it was sold or had no use/ broken?

I don’t want to challenge them if this is correct because I don’t want to look a prat.

OP posts:
Schoolchoicesucks · 29/03/2018 16:07

I think you're technically correct. But that practically lots of people do as your accountant suggests.
There's no difference in treatments in the balance sheet statement, but if you have to present notes to the accounts your way would be more correct.
It's a bit of a lazy short cut if assets aren't being properly tracked...

BlueSapp · 29/03/2018 16:08

There's no right or wrong here, It also depends on which sort of Assets you have.
I would show them in the totals personally if they are still owned by the company there's no set rule saying they should or shouldn't be there

They should still be on your Fixed asset register, so if they are disposed of a proper disposal calculation can be prepared.

Seadragonusgiganticusmaximus · 29/03/2018 16:27

You are correct. You don’t show them as disposals because ... err ... you haven’t disposed of them.

You’re potentially hiding some (marginally) useful information to a reader of your acccounts. For example you would be understating the cost of the assets used in the business. You could also be hiding an indicator that assets are at or close to the end of their useful lives and capital expenditure might soon be required. As a PP mentioned, if they are written out of the fixed asset register they would be harder to keep track of.

The only benefit I can see of showing them as disposals is that it reduces the risk of erroneously continuing to charge deprecation on fully depreciated assets.

DarkRosaleen · 29/03/2018 16:42

Thanks everyone.

You are the best.

OP posts:
mikeyssister · 29/03/2018 17:08

Point your accountant to IAS 16: An asset should be removed from the statement of financial position on disposal or when it is withdrawn from use and no future economic benefits are expected from its disposal.

If neither condition apply the asset should be disclosed whether fully deprciated or not.

DarkRosaleen · 29/03/2018 17:28

IAS16?
Impressive!

OP posts:
Passthecake30 · 29/03/2018 21:47

They should sit on your balance sheet as ÂŁ0 value (as fully depreciated)

mikeyssister · 29/03/2018 22:04

@DarkRosaleen, not really, I'm an accountant and it's one of the "rules"

New posts on this thread. Refresh page