Alimentation Couche-Tard Inc., Loblaw Companies Limited, and Empire Company Limited are three companies in the same industry. Because all three are in the same industry, the expectation is that their operations and financial positions are also similar.
Instructions
Go to SEDAR (www.sedar.com)
or the company websites and, using Alimentation Couche-Tard’s financial
statements for the year ended April 26, 2009, Loblaw’s financial statements for
the year ended January 2, 2010, and Empire’s financial statements for the year
ended May 2, 2009, answer the following questions.
(a) Identify what industry
all three companies are in.
(b) Identify all the areas
where intraperiod tax allocation was used by the three companies. This requires
a careful reading of some of the notes to the financial statements as well as
the main statements themselves. Prepare a schedule of the total income tax
provision (expense) or recovery (benefit) for each company, and identify where
the provision or recovery was reported.
(c) Compare the three
companies’ future income tax assets and/or future income tax liabilities, and
identify, as much as possible, what temporary differences are responsible for
these accounts. Would you expect companies in the same industry to have similar
types of temporary differences? Do they?
(d) Would you expect the
three companies to be subject to similar income tax legislation and tax rates?
Are their statutory rates the same? Explain. Compare the companies’ statutory
and effective rates and explain why there are differences, if there are
any.
(a)
All three companies
operate in the retail food industry. Loblaw and Empire operate grocery stores
in Canada and Alimentation operates convenience stores in North America.
(b)
A schedule of the total
income tax provision for each company for 2009 is presented below.
(2009 in millions of $) |
Alimentation |
Loblaw |
Empire |
|
|
|
|
Total income tax
provision |
US$114.7 |
CDN$ 269 |
CDN$116.1 |
A schedule of the total income tax provision
for each company for 2009 is presented below. All three companies
included income tax provisions in current net earnings and other comprehensive
income items. Loblaw also had a prior period adjustment which included an
income tax adjustment.
(For
2009
in millions of
$) |
Alimentation
US$ |
Loblaw
CAD$ |
Empire
CAD$ |
|
|
|
|
Total tax
provision shown in statement of earnings |
114.7 |
269.0 |
116.1 |
Tax provision in
other comprehensive income * |
40.5 |
-18.0 |
-13.2 |
Prior period
adjustment – in retained earnings |
_ |
1.0 |
_ |
Total income tax
provision |
155.2 |
252.0 |
102.9 |
·
Note –
this was totaled from each of the OCI items found either in the notes or on the
statement of comprehensive income.
(c)
A schedule of the
companies’ future income tax assets and liabilities as at the most recent
balance sheet date, along with the underlying temporary differences, is
presented below. One would expect companies in the same industry to have
similar temporary differences and these three companies do have some temporary
differences in common. Although the companies use different wording to describe
the underlying temporary differences and report in varying degrees of detail,
there are some similarities especially with property, plant and equipment and
goodwill and intangibles.
(For 2009 in
millions of $) |
Alimentation
Couche-Tard
US$ |
Loblaw
CAD$ |
Empire
CAD$ |
|
|
|
|
Property, plant,
and equipment |
-110.8 |
-281 |
-119.4 |
Investments |
|
|
-6.5 |
Future employee
benefits obligations |
|
|
33.3 |
Restructuring |
|
|
7.6 |
Pension
contributions |
|
|
-14.4 |
Deferred
costs |
|
|
4.9 |
Deferred
credits |
19.1 |
|
-37.4 |
Goodwill and
intangibles |
-69.5 |
|
-34.0 |
Asset retirement
obligation |
12.7 |
|
|
Other |
12.6 |
-6 |
33.7 |
Accounts payable
and accrued liabilities |
|
35 |
|
Other
liabilities |
|
158 |
|
Other
assets |
|
-103 |
|
Loss carry
forwards |
16.4 |
92 |
|
Revenues taxable
next year |
-6.5 |
|
|
Expenses
deductible in next year |
31.0 |
|
|
Unrealized
exchange gain |
-0.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net future tax
asset (liability) |
-95.8
|
-105 |
-132.2 |
(d) Yes, one would expect the three companies
to be subject to similar income tax legislation and tax rates, particularly with
respect to federal legislation and rates, since all three are Canadian
companies. On review of the schedule below, there are very small differences
between the companies’ statutory rates and their effective tax rates.
|
Alimentation
Couche-Tard |
Loblaw |
Empire |
|
|
|
|
Statutory
rate |
30.9% |
30.7% |
29.9% |
Effective
rate |
31.12% |
28.7% |
29.9% |
No comments:
Post a Comment