Try Magic Notes and save time.Try it free
Try Magic Notes and save timeCrush your year with the magic of personalized studying.Try it free

Related questions with answers

Facts: A county government and a legally separate organization—the Sports Stadium Authority—entered into an agreement under which the authority issued revenue bonds to construct a new stadium. Although the intent is for the authority to make debt service payments on the bonds from a surcharge on ticket sales, the county agreed to annually advance the Sports Stadium Authority the required amounts to make up any debt service shortfalls and has done so for several years. Accordingly, the county has recorded a receivable from the authority and the authority has recorded a liability to the county for all advances made under the agreement.

Ticket surcharge revenues that exceed $1,500,000 are to be paid to the county and to be applied first toward interest and then toward principal repayment of advances. Both parties acknowledge, however, that annual ticket surcharge revenues may never exceed$1,500,000 because reaching that level would require an annual paid attendance of 3,000,000. Considering that season ticket holders and luxury suite renters are not included in the attendance count, it is quite uncertain if the required trigger level will ever be reached.

The authority has twice proposed to raise the ticket surcharge amount, but the county in both cases vetoed the proposal. Thus, the lender in this transaction (the county) has imposed limits that appear to make it infeasible for the borrower (the authority) to repay the advances. Consequently, the authority’s legal counsel has taken the position that the authority is essentially a pass-through agency with respect to the advances in that the authority merely receives the advances and passes them on to a fiscal agent for debt service payments. Moreover, they note that the bonds could never have been issued without the county’s irrevocable guarantee of repayment because all parties knew from the beginning that the authority likely would not have the resources to make full debt service payments.

Based on the foregoing considerations, the authority’s legal counsel has rendered an opinion that the liability for the advances can be removed from the authority’s accounts. The county tacitly agrees that the loans (advances) are worthless because it records an allowance for doubtful loans equal to the total amount of the advances. Still, the county board of commissioners refuses to remove the receivable from its accounts because of its ongoing rights under the original agreement for repayment.

Required

Assume you are the independent auditor for the authority, and provide a written analysis of the facts of this case, indicating whether or not you concur with the authority’s decision to no longer report the liability to the county for debt service advances.

A citizens’ group in your state has placed an amendment on an upcoming election ballot. The measure would prohibit new debt issuances by state or local governments, which would presumably reduce taxes as a result of less tax-supported debt. Supporters of the amendment claim the proposed measure will force government to operate more efficiently and cut bloated spending, while opponents fear that public services and the quality of life in the state will be severely affected if the amendment passes.

Required

Consider each of the following statements regarding the amendment. Select at least one of the statements (numbered 1–4) to indicate your position on the proposed amendment. Incorporating the statement(s) selected, draft a memo supporting your position on the proposed amendment.

  1. The state has enough money to spend. Government officials can spend more wisely or even cut their spending.
  2. Voters’ frustration with government spending is understandable; however, borrowing restrictions will require that the state and local governments raise fees, reduce construction, or reduce programs and services.
  3. Because there are so many creative ways of public financing, taxpayers are spending millions on long-term debt interest that they never got the opportunity to approve.
  4. This measure is a direct reaction to taxpayer dissatisfaction with government; however, this reaction is so far overreaching that it will impact state jobs and diminish local governments’ ability to provide police and fire protection and to educate our children.
Question

Facts: A county government and a legally separate organization—the Sports Stadium Authority—entered into an agreement under which the authority issued revenue bonds to construct a new stadium. Although the intent is for the authority to make debt service payments on the bonds from a surcharge on ticket sales, the county agreed to annually advance the Sports Stadium Authority the required amounts to make up any debt service shortfalls and has done so for several years. Accordingly, the county has recorded a receivable from the authority and the authority has recorded a liability to the county for all advances made under the agreement.

Ticket surcharge revenues that exceed $1,500,000 are to be paid to the county and to be applied first toward interest and then toward principal repayment of advances. Both parties acknowledge, however, that annual ticket surcharge revenues may never exceed$1,500,000 because reaching that level would require an annual paid attendance of 3,000,000. Considering that season ticket holders and luxury suite renters are not included in the attendance count, it is quite uncertain if the required trigger level will ever be reached.

The authority has twice proposed to raise the ticket surcharge amount, but the county in both cases vetoed the proposal. Thus, the lender in this transaction (the county) has imposed limits that appear to make it infeasible for the borrower (the authority) to repay the advances. Consequently, the authority’s legal counsel has taken the position that the authority is essentially a pass-through agency with respect to the advances in that the authority merely receives the advances and passes them on to a fiscal agent for debt service payments. Moreover, they note that the bonds could never have been issued without the county’s irrevocable guarantee of repayment because all parties knew from the beginning that the authority likely would not have the resources to make full debt service payments.

Based on the foregoing considerations, the authority’s legal counsel has rendered an opinion that the liability for the advances can be removed from the authority’s accounts. The county tacitly agrees that the loans (advances) are worthless because it records an allowance for doubtful loans equal to the total amount of the advances. Still, the county board of commissioners refuses to remove the receivable from its accounts because of its ongoing rights under the original agreement for repayment.

Required

Alternatively, assume you are the independent auditor for the county and, based on the same analysis you conducted for the previous requirement, indicate whether or not you concur with the county continuing to report a receivable for debt service advances on its General Fund balance sheet and government-wide statement of net position.

Solution

Verified
Answered 1 year ago
Answered 1 year ago
Step 1
1 of 5

This problem will measure the student's understanding on the concept of accounting for general long‐term liabilities and debt service as this problem requires the student to complete a requirement regarding the case of the vanishing debt.

Create an account to view solutions

Create an account to view solutions

Recommended textbook solutions

Financial Accounting 4th Edition by Don Herrmann, J. David Spiceland, Wayne Thomas

Financial Accounting

4th EditionISBN: 9781259730948Don Herrmann, J. David Spiceland, Wayne Thomas
1,097 solutions
Accounting for Governmental and Nonprofit Entities 19th Edition by Daniel Neely, Jacqueline Reck, Suzanne Lowensohn

Accounting for Governmental and Nonprofit Entities

19th EditionISBN: 9781260809954 (1 more)Daniel Neely, Jacqueline Reck, Suzanne Lowensohn
297 solutions
Fundamentals of Financial Management 14th Edition by Eugene F. Brigham, Joel F Houston

Fundamentals of Financial Management

14th EditionISBN: 9781285867977 (1 more)Eugene F. Brigham, Joel F Houston
845 solutions
Century 21 Accounting: General Journal 11th Edition by Claudia Bienias Gilbertson, Debra Gentene, Mark W Lehman

Century 21 Accounting: General Journal

11th EditionISBN: 9781337623124Claudia Bienias Gilbertson, Debra Gentene, Mark W Lehman
1,012 solutions

More related questions

1/4

1/7