Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

Abstrak :
Laporan magang ini berisi tentang analisis perlakuan akuntansi transaksi sewa guna usaha terhadap perusahaan pembiayaan bernama PT XYZ. Kegiatan sewa guna usaha merupakan salah satu kegiatan utama Perseroan. Tujuan utama dari laporan ini adalah mengetahui apakah PT XYZ sudah menerapkan PSAK 30 (Revisi 2011) dalam kegiatan sewa guna usaha. Dalam laporan ini, pembahasan diawali dengan proses awal kegiatan sewa guna usaha yang beroperasi di PT XYZ. Kemudian pembahasan berlanjut pada pencatatan transaksi sewa guna usaha yang dilakukan PT XYZ dan akan dibandingkan dengan PSAK 30 (Revisi 2011). Kesimpulan dari laporan magang ini menunjukkan bahwa kegiatan sewa guna usaha PT XYZ sudah diterapkan sesuai PSAK 30 (Revisi 2011). ...... This internship report discusses about accounting treatment analysis of lease transaction in PT XYZ, financing company. Leasing is one of the main businesses of the company. The main purpose of this report was to know whether PT XYZ has implemented PSAK 30 (Revisi 2011) in the activities of the lease. In this report, the discussion begins with the initial process of lease in PT XYZ. The reports also discuss the recording of lease transaction in PT XYZ and will be compared with PSAK 30 (Revisi 2011). In conclusion, the company follows PSAK 30 (Revisi 2011).

Abstrak :
I. Problem Identification Tarzan Ltd is currently looking forward to expand its cash reserves. The company has recently received a sales and leaseback proposal from East Finance Ltd as a means to achieve this particular objective. With a current debt ratio of 74% and a requirement from its major lender that said debt ratio should not reach 75%, it is important for Tarzan Ltd to determine whether or not the proposal will result in its debt ratio exceeding its current amount before accepting the proposal, and whether or not the proposal will result in a gain in cash reserves. II. Analysis Following the requirements of AASB 117, there are some rules that the proposal will have to comply with. As required by the AASB, both leases-building and land leases-will be classified separately (AASB 117:15A) as operating and finance leases. According to the standards set in AASB 117, the land lease would be classified as an operating lease due to a lack of transfer of ownership at the end of lease term (AASB 117:8). In addition to that, it would also be classified as an operating lease because of its indefinite economic life and a lack of bargain purchase option (AASB 117:8). Due to the fact that there will be a substantial transfer of ownership and risks at the end of the building lease to the lessee, the lease should be classified as a finance lease (AASB 117:8). In addition to that, the present value of the minimum lease payments is said to cover a substantial major amount of the leased building at 91%. Furthermore, seeing as the classification of lease depends on the substance of the lease rather than the contract, it is also considered that the building lease is classified as a finance lease due to the term being for the major part of the asset`s economic life (10 years) and the lessee`s option to purchase the asset at the end of the lease term (AASB 117:10). Due to the different classification of the two leases, the accounting treatment for both leases would differ according to AASB 117. Profit and loss resulting from the land lease as an operating lease would have to be recognised immediately (AASB 117:61), while any profit or loss resulting from the building lease as a financial lease would have to be amortised over the term. In conclusion, while the land lease can be classified as an operating lease, the building lease cannot be classified as an operating lease. The lease will have to be classified as a finance lease according to the requirements of AASB 117 and shall have different accounting treatments.

Abstrak :
Laporan magang ini menganalisis prosedur audit AAA Indonesia dan penerapan PSAK 30 revisi 2011 atas sewa pembiayaan PT. SHB, suatu perusahaan jasa kesehatan. Pengadaaan sebagian besar aset medis PT. SHB dilakukan dengan menggunakan skema sewa pembiayaan. Masalah yang muncul pada sewa pembiayaan ini berkaitan dengan pembatalan perjanjian sewa, prosedur audit AAA Indonesia yang meliputi prosedur konfirmasi pihak ekternal dan prosedur penilaian going concern entitas, dan jawaban konfirmasi yang dibuat oleh pihak perusahaan pembiayaan. Hasil analisis menyimpulkan perlunya penyesuaian yang dilakukan oleh PT. SHB terkait pembatalan perjanjian dan perbaikan prosedur audit AAA Indonesia serta pembenahan dalam pembuatan jadwal pembayaran oleh pihak ketiga. ......This report analyzes the lease audit procedures done by AAA Indonesia and the implementation of PSAK 30 revised 2011 in PT. SHB, a health care company. In order to acquire its medical equipment, PT. SHB uses financing lease as an option to provide most of its medical equipment. The main problems arising on these financing lease agreements are related to the cancellation of the lease agreement, the audit procedures held by AAA Indonesia that include the external confirmation procedure and going concern entity assessment, and confirmation responses made by third parties. The analysis results conclude the need for adjustments made by PT. SHB related to the cancellation of agreements, improvement of AAA Indonesia audit procedure, and enhancement in the preparation of leasing schedules by third parties.

Abstrak :
Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis perlakuan akuntasi atas modifikasi kontrak sewa pesawat pasca Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang (PKPU), menganalisis insentif manajemen dan peranan auditor dalam pemilihan kebijakan akuntansi dari perspektif Teori Akuntansi Positif (PAT) dan Teori Keagenan. Penelitian ini menggunakan pendekatan studi kasus dengan PT IB sebagai objek penelitian. Sumber data penelitian mencakup data primer melalui wawancara dan reviu kontrak, serta data sekunder berupa laporan keuangan, PSAK 71, PSAK 73, dan publikasi IFRIC. Studi kasus ini menunjukkan bahwa perlakuan akuntansi atas pengampunan sebagian liabilitas sewa jatuh tempo berdasarkan ketentuan modifikasi sewa PSAK 73 sudah tepat. Pengampunan tidak dapat diakui sebagai keuntungan menurut PSAK 71 karena pengampunan tidak bersifat sukarela dan merupakan hasil putusan pengadilan yang bersifat memaksa dan wajib dipatuhi semua pihak. Tidak terdapat perbedaan perlakuan akuntansi atas modifikasi kontrak sewa go-forward yang diturunkan tarif sewa tetapnya, baik yang diperpanjang maupun tidak diperpanjang. Kebijakan akuntansi oleh PT IB atas pembayaran sewa dengan mekanisme power-by-hour (PBH) selama periode grace period adalah tidak tepat karena tidak memenuhi defenisi pembayaran sewa tetap secara substansi sesuai dengan ketentuan PSAK 73. Berdasarkan observasi selama proses penentuan perlakuan akuntansi atas modifikasi kontrak sewa, dapat disimpulkan bahwa terdapat insentif manajemen untuk memilih perlakuan akuntansi untuk menjaga kinerja laba rugi tahun berjalan sesuai hipotesis bonus. Auditor telah melakukan fungsinya untuk memverifikasi perlakuan akuntansi atas modifikasi kontrak sewa sehingga informasi yang disajikan oleh Manajemen dalam laporan keuangan auditan sudah wajar dan sesuai sesuai dengan standar akuntansi yang berlaku. ......This research aims to analyze the accounting treatment of aircraft lease contracts modifications post Suspension of Payment (PKPU) and analyze management’s incentive and the role of auditor during accounting policy selection from the perspective of Positive Accounting Theory (PAT) and Agency Theory. This research uses a case study approach with PT IB as the research object. Sources of research data include primary data through interviews and review of contract, as well as secondary data such as financial statements, PSAK 71, PSAK 73, and IFRIC publications. This case study shows that accounting treatment for the partial forgiveness of overdue lease liabilities based on lease modification provision under PSAK 73 is appropriate. The partially forgiven overdue lease liabilities cannot be recognized as gain under PSAK 71 since it is not a voluntary forgivess, instead a result of court ruling, making it legally binding and obligatory for all parties involved. There is no difference in accounting policy for go-forward lease with reduction of fixed lease payment, both for extended and not extended contracts. Accounting treatment made by PT IB for for lease payment under PBH mechanism is inappropriate since it does not meet the defenition of in-substance fixed payment based on PSAK 73 provision. Based on observation during the accounting policy selection for lease contract modification, it is concluded that there management has incentive to select certain accounting treatment that improve the current year profit which is in line with the bonus hypotesis. Auditors have carried out their function to verify the accounting treatement for lease contract modification so the financial informations prepared by the management in the audited financial statement have been fair and in accordance with the applicable accounting standards.

Abstrak :
ABSTRAK
Laporan ini bertujuan untuk membahas mengenai hasil dari analisis atas perlakuan akuntansi dari power purchase agreement ldquo;PPA rdquo; pada PLN dengan PT BEN sebagai independent power producer ldquo;IPP rdquo; . Berlakunya ISAK 8 dan ISAK 16 di Indonesia menjadikan adanya perbedaan perlakuan akuntansi yang diterapkan oleh PLN maupun IPP. IPP sebagai pihak swasta dan operator menerapkan ISAK 16 atas transaksi dari PPA yang merupakan perjanjian konsesi jasa, sedangkan PLN sebagai pemberi konsesi tidak dapat menerapkan ISAK 16 yang hanya mengatur perlakuan akuntansi kepada operator. Oleh karena itu, PLN menerapkan ISAK 8 dikarenakan PPA merupakan perjanjian yang mengandung unsur sewa. Perbedaan perlakuan akuntansi bagi IPP tidaklah signifikan karena PPA menurut ISAK 8 dan PSAK 30 diklasifikasikan sebagai sewa pembiayaan, dan dari sudut pandang IPP sebagai lessor, maka pencatatan yang dilakukan tidak jauh berbeda jika IPP menggunakan ISAK 16 maupun ISAK 8. Sejak tahun 2016, PLN memperlakukan PPA sebagai transaksi jual beli biasa dan tidak menggunakan ISAK 8, sehingga dalam perjanjian tersebut tidak ada pihak yang mencatat infrastruktur pembangkit listrik sebagai aset tetap.

---

ABSTRACT
This report aims to explain about the result of accounting treatment analysis of the power purchase agreement ldquo;PPA rdquo; in PLN and PT BEN as an independent power producer ldquo;IPP rdquo; . The issuance of ISAK 8 and ISAK 16 in Indonesia served differences in accounting treatment implemented by PLN and IPP. IPP as private sector and operator applies ISAK 16 for transactions from PPA which can be categorized as service concession arrangement, while PLN as grantor can rsquo;t apply ISAK 16 because the standard only gives guidance on the accounting for operator. As such, PLN applies ISAK 8 for PPA because the arrangement contains a lease. The differences in accounting treatment for IPP are not significant because PPA is classified as finance lease in accordance with ISAK 8 and PSAK 30, and from IPP rsquo;s perspective as a lessor, the record won rsquo;t have much differences whether IPP uses ISAK 16 or ISAK 8. Since 2016, PLN treated PPA as a regular sale and purchase transaction and not applying ISAK 8, so neither parties record the power plant infrastructure as fixed asset for the agreement.