Just to clarify…I know Fall2018 #19c does NOT include salvage and subrogation but Spring2016 #15c does list it as a BS item. So is there an error in one of the exam notes?
No, there is not an error. 2018.F.19c lists a number of GAAP differences, four of which can be selected as the answer. They did not list S&S as an option, but nevertheless, it is a GAAP difference.
I wanted to confirm that in Spring 2016, #15, the loss amounts are net of S&S in schedule P, correct? So for that specific question, S&S treatment wouldn't have been different between SAP and GAAP.
According to the S&S section of Odomirok Cpt. 22, Sch P reserves can be gross or net of anticipated S&S. If they are net of S&S, the anticipated S&S is also reported in its dedicated column.
In this question, a non-zero anticipated S&S figure is given, which means the reserves must be net of this S&S. So yes, S&S treatment was given in error in the answer key as a SAP/GAAP difference.
Comments
No, there is not an error. 2018.F.19c lists a number of GAAP differences, four of which can be selected as the answer. They did not list S&S as an option, but nevertheless, it is a GAAP difference.
I wanted to confirm that in Spring 2016, #15, the loss amounts are net of S&S in schedule P, correct? So for that specific question, S&S treatment wouldn't have been different between SAP and GAAP.
According to the S&S section of Odomirok Cpt. 22, Sch P reserves can be gross or net of anticipated S&S. If they are net of S&S, the anticipated S&S is also reported in its dedicated column.
In this question, a non-zero anticipated S&S figure is given, which means the reserves must be net of this S&S. So yes, S&S treatment was given in error in the answer key as a SAP/GAAP difference.