UNIT CODE: PRBA003
UNIT NAME: CORPORATE ACCOUNTING
Assignment Information Semester 2 2015
This assignment is to be submitted before 11.59pm Friday 9th October in Week 11
Assignments are to be submitted by one of the following means;
DO NOT LODGE BY FAX nor EMAIL nor at LECTURER'S OFFICE KEEP A COPY
• The assignment must be lodged on or before the due date indicated in the assignment details. Submit your Assignment using PDF file format . Only word docs and/or Excel converted to pdf will be acceptable. Handwritten answers will be rejected.
• The assignment must conform to the requirements set out in this assignment
• The assignment must be lodged online via the PRBA003 Learnline Assignment Lodgement link on the PRBA003 Learnline site. Ensure your file is named using a file naming convention that allows the lecturer to identify to whom it belongs. Failure to use an acceptable file naming convention may result in your assignment lodgement being rejected.
• DO NOT LODGE VIA EMAILor FAX - assignments lodged by email or fax will not be accepted.
• KEEP A COPY - Ensure you have a copy of the assignment lodged. If you have submitted assessment work electronically please make sure you have a backup copy.
• Assignment lodgements will be acknowledged automatically on the Learnline site, on submission.
• DO NOT submit an assignment front sheet.
As a general rule resubmission of assessment items is NOT possible, however the Lecturer may ask for resubmission if it is deemed appropriate. Details for such resubmission will be made available by the Lecturer if and when the situation occurs.
University Plagiarism policy
Plagiarism is the unacknowledged use of material written or produced by others or a rework of your own material. All sources of information and ideas used in assignments must be referenced. This applies whether the information is from a book, journal article, the internet, or a previous essay you wrote or the assignment of a friend. Plagiarism policy is available at:
Student Breach of Academic Integrity Procedures http://www.cdu.edu.au/governance/procedures/pro-092.pdf
EXTENSIONS AND LATE LODGEMENTS
LATE ASSIGNMENTS WILL GENERALLY NOT BE ACCEPTED UNLESS AN EXTENSION TO THE DUE DATE HAS BEEN GRANTED BY THE HEAD OF SCHOOL.
Exceptions will only be made where assignments are late due to special circumstances that are supported by documentary evidence, and may be subject to a penalty of 5% of assignment marks per day. Partially completed assignments will be accepted with appropriate loss of marks for the incomplete portion.
Should students foresee potential difficulties with submission of assessment items, they should contact the lecturer immediately the difficulties come to notice, to discuss suitable arrangements etc. for the submission of those assessment times. An Application for Assignment Extension or Special Consideration should be completed and provided to the Head of School, School of Law and Business.
This application form, explanation and instructions is available on the CMA202 CDU Learnline course site or direct from
Please note that it is now Faculty policy that all extension requests must be approved by the Head of School. The lecturer is no longer able to personally approve extension requests.
Leaving a request for an extension, special assessment or special consideration until the last moment, based on grounds that students could have reasonably been able to foresee, may result in the application being rejected.
This Assignment is worth 30% of the total assessment for this unit. This assignment will be marked out of 200 and scaled down to being out of 30. The assignment has two parts. Part A contains 10 questions worth 120 marks and Part B contains 2 questions worth 80 marks.
Q1. Jolly Boat Limited commences operations on 1 July 2014 and presents its first statement of comprehensive income and first statement of financial position on 30 June 2015. The statements are prepared before considering taxation. The following information is available:
Statement of comprehensive income for the year ended 30 June 2015
Gross profit $730 000
Administration expenses $80 000
Salaries 200 000
Long-service leave 20 000
Warranty expenses 30 000
Depreciation expense-plant 80 000
Insurance 20 000 430 000
Accounting profit before tax $300 000
Assets and-liabilities as disclosed in th e statement of financial position as at 30 Jun e 2015
Cash $20 000
Inventory 100 000
Accounts receivable 100 000
Prepaid insurance 10 000
Plant-cost 400 000
less Accumulated depreciation 80 000 320 000
Total assets $550 000
Accounts payable $80 000
Provision for warranty expenses 20 000
Loan payable 200 000
Provision for long-service leave expenses 20 000
Total liabilities $320 000
Net assets $230 000
• AlI administration and salaries expenses incurred have been paid as at year end.
• None of the long-service leave expense has actually been paid. It is not deductible until it is actually paid.
• Warranty expenses were accrued and, at year end, actual payments of $10 000 had been made (leaving an accrued balance of $20 000).
• Deductions are available only when the amounts are paid and not as they are accrued.
• Insurance was initially prepaid to the amount of $30 000. At year end, the unused component of the prepaid insurance amounted to $10 000. Actual amounts paid are allowed as a tax deduction.
• Amounts received from sales, including those on credit terms, are taxed at the time the sale is made.
• The plant is depreciated over five years for accounting purposes, but over four years for taxation purposes.
• The tax rate is 30 per cent.
Provide the journal entries to account for tax in accordance with AASB 112. (18 marks)
Dumpster Limited acquired an item of plant on 1 July 2012 for $3 660 000. When the plant was acquired, it was initially assessed as having a life of 10 000 hours. During the reporting period ending 30 June 2013 the plant was operated for 3 000 hours.
At 1 July 2013 the plant had a remaining useful life of 7 000 hours. On 1 July 2013 the plant underwent a major upgrade costing $234 600. Management believes that this upgrade will add a further 2 000 hours of operating time to the plant's life. During the reporting period ended 30 June 2014 the plant was operated for 4 000 hours.
On 1 July 2014 the plant underwent a further major upgrade, the cost of which amounted to $344900, and this added a further 3100 hours' operating time to its life. During the reporting period ending 30 June 2015 the plant was operated for 3800 hours.
Prepare all the journal entries that Dumpster Limited would prepare for the years ending 30 June 2013,
30 June 2014 and 30 June 2015 to account for the acquisition, subsequent expenditure and
depreciation on the asset. (8 marks)
Top End Delivery Solutions leased a truck from a truck dealer, Truck n’ Go Ltd. Truck n’ Go Ltd acquired the truck at a cost of $180 000. The truck will be painted with Top End Delivery Solutions’ logo and advertising and the cost of repainting the truck to make it suitable for another owner four years later is estimated to be $400 000. Top End Delivery Solutions plans to keep the truck after the lease but has not made any commitment to the lessor to purchase it. The terms of the lease are as follows:
• Date of entering lease: 1 July 2015.
• Duration of lease: four years.
• Life of leased asset: five years, after which it will have no residual value.
• Lease payments: $100 000 at the end of each year.
• Interest rate implicit in the lease: 10 per cent.
• Unguaranteed residual: $50 000.
• Fair value of truck at inception of the lease: $351 140.
(a) Demonstrate that the interest rate implicit in the lease is 10 per cent.
(b) Prepare the journal entries to account for the lease transaction in the books of the lessor, Truck n’ Go Ltd, at 1 July 2015 and 30 June 2016.
(c) Prepare the journal entries to account for the lease transaction in the books of the lessee, Top End Delivery Solutions, at 1 July 2015 and 30 June 2016.
(d) On 30 June 2019 Top End Delivery Solutions pays the residual of $50 000 and purchases the truck. Prepare alI journal entries in the books of Top End Delivery Solutions for 30 June 2019 in relation to the termination of the lease and the purchase of the truck. (20 marks)
Q4. Crock Limited acquired Buffalo Limited on 1 July 2014 for cash of $7 000 000. At that date, Buffalo Limited's net identifiable assets had a fair value of $5 800 000. The fair value of the net identifiable assets of Buffalo Limited are determined as follows:
Customer List $50
Machinery 1 450
Buildings 1 500
Land 3 000
Less: Bank Loan 200
Net assets $5 800
Share capital 350 000
Retained earnings 100 000
At the end of the reporting period of 30 June 2015, the management of Crock Limited determines that the recoverable amount of the cash generating unit, which is considered to be Buffalo Limited, totals $6 200 000. The carrying amount of the net identifiable assets of Buffalo Limited, which excludes goodwill, has not changed since acquisition and is $5 800 000.
(a) Prepare the journal entry to account for any impairment of goodwill.
(b) Assume instead that at the end of the reporting period the management of Crock Limited determines that the recoverable amount of the cash generating unit, which is considered to be Crock Limited, totals $4 800 000. Prepare the journal entry to account for the impairment.
Diving Ltd acquires a four-wheel-drive bus on 1 July 2011 for $300 000. The bus is expected, to have a useful life to Diving Ltd of seven years, after which time it will be towed out to sea and sunk to make an artificial reef for marine life (after an oils and solvents have been removed). The straight-line method of depreciation is used.
On 1 July 2013 the bus revalued to $250 000 and its useful life is reassessed: it is expected, at that date, to have a remaining useful life of six years.
On 1 July 2014 it is unexpectedly sold for $220 000.
Provide the journal entries to record the revaluation on 1 July 2013 and the subsequent sale on 1 July
2014. (6 marks)
The management of one of your clients has told you that they intend not to consolidate the financial statements of one of their subsidiaries because it is involved in mining, whereas all the other organisations in the group are involved in service industries. How would you respond to this position?
New Start Ltd acquired 90 per cent of the share capital of Old Timer Ltd on 1 July2014 for a cost of $500 000. As at the date of acquisition assets of Old Timer Ltd were fairly valued, other than land that had a carrying amount $50 000 less than its fair value. The recorded balances of equity in Old Timer Ltd as at 1 July 2014 were:
• The management of New Start Ltd values any non-controlling interest at the proportionate share of Old Timer Ltd's identifiable net assets.
• Old Timer Ltd had a profit after tax of $70 000 for the year ended 30 June 2015.
• During the financial year to 30 June 2015 Old Timer Ltd sold inventory to New Start Ltd for a price of $50 000. The inventory cost Old Timer Ltd $30 000 to produce, and 25 per cent of this inventory was still on hand with New Start Ltd as at 30 June 2015.
• During the year Old Timer Ltd paid $10 000 in management fees to New Start Ltd.
• On 1 July 2014 Old Timer Ltd sold an item of plant to New Start Ltd for $40 000 when it had a carrying amount of $30 000 (cost of $50 000, accumulated depreciation of $20 000). At the date of sale it was expected that the plant had a remaining useful life of four years, and no residual value.
• The tax rate is 30 per cent.
Prepare the consolidation adjustments for the year ended 30 June 2015 and, based on the information provided above, calculate the non-controlling interest in the 2015 profits. (10 marks)
Q8. Wayne’s Pools Ltd is involved in manufacturing swimming pools. Wayne’s Pools Ltd's statement of financial positions for the years ended 30 June 2015 and 30 June 2016 are presented below.
Cash 96 ---
Accounts receivable 36 60
Allowance for doubtful debts (12) (8)
Property, plant and equipment 156 120
Accumulated depreciation-property, plant and equipment (36) (20)
Inventory 92 52
Total assets 332 204
Bank overdraft --- 40
Accounts payable 60 60
Accrued wages 20 16
Provision for annual leave 8 12
Loans 60 ---
Total liabilities 148 128
Net assets 184 76
Share capital (ordinary shares) 140 20
Revaluation surplus 28 8
Retained earnings 16 48
Total shareholders' funds 184 76
The statement of comprehensive income (e xtract) of Wayne’s Pools Ltd for the year ended 30 Jun e 2016 is:
Interest (no interest receivable at year end) 4
Profit on sale of property (which had a carrying amount of $20 000) 8
Cost of goods sold (40)
Doubtful debts (8)
Employee entitlements (16)
Loss for the year (32)
Prepare a statement of cash flows for Wayne’s Pools Ltd for the year ended 30 June 2016.
Comparatives are not required. Ignore tax effects. (18 marks)
Q9. The Big Company Ltd acquires 100 per cent of the shares of The Little Company Ltd on 1 July 2014 for a consideration of $1.25 million. The share capital and reserves of The Little Company Ltd at the date of acquisition are:
Share capital $750 000
Retained earnings $375 000
Revaluation surplus $ 375 000
$1 500 000
There are no transactions between the entities and all assets are fairly valued at the date of acquisition. No land or plant is acquired or sold by The Little Company Ltd in the year to 30 June 2015. The financial statements of The Big Company Ltd and The Little Company Ltd at 30 June 2015 (one year after acquisition) are:
Company Ltd ($000) The Little
Company Ltd ($000)
Reconciliation of opening and closing retained earnings
Profit before tax 750 375
Tax (250) (125)
Profit after tax 500 250
Retained earnings at 30 June 2014 1 000 375
Retained earnings at 30 June 2015 1 500 625
Company Ltd ($000 The Little
Company Ltd ($000)
Statements of financial position
Retained earnings 1 500 625
Share capital 3 000 750
Revaluation surplus 750 500
Accounts payable 250 250
Loans 1 500 625
7 000 2 750
Cash 250 200
Accounts receivable 875 300
Land 1 750 750
Plant 2 875 1 500
Investment in The Little Company Ltd 1 250 ---
7 000 2 750
Prepare the consolidated accounts for The Big Company Ltd and The Little Company Ltd as at 30 June
2015. (12 marks)
Q10. The following financial statements of Billy Ltd and its subsidiary Michael Ltd have been extracted from their financial records at 30 June 2015.
Billy Ltd ($000) Michael Ltd ($000)
Reconciliation of opening and closing retained earnings
Sales revenue 671.4 540
Cost of goods sold (464) (238)
Gross profit 207.4 302
Dividends received from Michael Ltd 93 ---
Management fee revenue 26.5 ---
Gain on sale of plant 40 35
Administrative expenses (30.8) (38.7)
Depreciation (29.5) (56.8)
Management fee expense --- (26.5)
Other expenses (101.1) (72)
Profit before tax 205.5 143
Tax expense 61.5 42.2
Profit for the year 144 100.8
Retained earnings-30 June 2014 319.4 239.2
Dividends paid (137.4) (93)
Retained earnings-30 June 2015 326 247
Statements of financial position
Retained earnings 326 247
Share capital 350 200
Accounts payable 54.7 46.3
Tax payable 41.3 25
Loans 173.5 116
Accounts receivable 59.4 62.3
Inventory 92 29
Land and buildings 224 326
Plant -at cost 299.85 355.8
Accumulated depreciation (85.75) (138.8)
Investment in Michael Ltd 356 ---
• Billy Ltd acquired its 100 per cent interest in Michael Ltd on 1 July 2010, that is five years earlier. At that date the capital and reserves of Michael Ltd were:
Share capital $200 000
Retained earnings $180 000
At the date of acquisition all assets were considered to be fairly valued.
• During the year Billy Ltd made total sales to Michael Ltd of $60 000, while Michael Ltd sold $50 000 in inventory to Billy Ltd.
• The opening inventory in Billy Ltd as at 1 July 2014 included inventory acquired from Michael Ltd for $40 000 that cost Michael Ltd $30 000 to produce.
• The closing inventory in Billy Ltd includes inventory acquired from Michael Ltd at a cost of $33 000. This cost Michael Ltd $28 000 to produce
• The closing inventory of Michael Ltd includes inventory acquired from Billy Ltd at a cost of $12 000. This cost Billy Ltd $10 000 to produce.
• On 1 July 2014 Michael Ltd sold an item of plant to Billy Ltd for $116 000 when its carrying value in Michael Ltd's accounts was $81 000 (cost $135 000, accumulated depreciation $54 000). This plant is assessed as having a remaining useful life of six years.
• Michael Ltd paid $26 500 in management fees to Billy Ltd.
• The tax rate is 30 per cent.
Prepare a consolidated statement of financial position, and a consolidated statement of comprehensive income for Billy Ltd and Michael Ltd as at 30 June 2015. (12 marks)
Read the attached article, published by AccountingWeb, in Appendix A about Tesco plc, a UK supermarket chain with interests throughout Asia, and read Note 12 to the financial statements on Property, Plant and Equipment.
You have been approached by a client who has invested in Tesco plc and is concerned by the disclosures. Write a report to your client, using the relevant accounting standards, identifying and explaining the sections that apply to the disclosed accounting treatment and explain in detail how and why they apply.
Your client is confused by the term “kitchen sinking” which applies in the UK. You have been advised that in Australia it is known as “taking a big bath.” Conduct research to explain what these terms mean and place this explanation in the context of impairment testing and how this may have been employed in the case of Tesco plc.
In your answer pay strict attention to referencing with respect the accounting standards and the paragraphs contained therein that you have quoted and the websites visited quoting the website and the times of access.
Your report should be written as a business report with an executive summary, an introduction, the main findings, a conclusion and references. Marks will be awarded to reflect presentation, business English, content and referencing. (see CDU Report Format in Assessment Area) (50 marks)
Read the attached article, from the Sydney Morning Herald, in Appendix B on the theft of rare coins from the NSW State Library.
Would you consider these coins to be heritage assets? Give explanations for your conclusion.
How do these coins differ from the definition of an asset in the Conceptual Framework?
What problems can you identify when trying to recognise these coins as assets?
How do the coins fall within the definition of Property, Plant and Equipment as defined by AASB 116?
What use would be gained by placing a financial value on them?
Who would benefit by having a financial value placed upon them and why?
How would valuers identify a fair value if cost was not available?
What problems do you envisage that valuers would have when trying to ascertain fair value?
Who would be better at establishing a fair value, the Museum Director or an independent valuer? Give reasons for your answer and identify the disclosure requirements of such a valuation.
Suggest alternative methods of assessing the Museum Director’s performance. How could this be
contained within the annual report and financial statements? (30 marks)
standards, then spend a little time with Tesco’s preliminary 2014 results announcement.
There are a couple of explanations for the blanket coverage accorded to Tesco’s results announcement this morning. The opportunity to hail the UK’s biggest ever single year retail loss was too good to miss for most of the headline writers - the £6.4bn posted puts it in the all time top 10, but still way behind RBS’s £24.1bn loss in 2008.
Second, last September’s accounting scandal and corporate implosion around how the company was recognising suppliers’ promotional payments put everyone on alert about just how badly Tesco had been cooking its books.
When Tesco announced last September that it was appointing Deloitte to investigate irregularities around accelerated recognition of commercial income and delayed accrual of costs, it estimated the impact on the interim results at £250m.
The full year results pretty much confirm that figure, estimating that overstated profits at £53m for the year to 22 February 2014, and £153m in the previous years. A restatement of the prior years was not deemed necessary as the amounts were corrected in the year to 22 February 2015.
This approach - and the little matter of another £7bn in property impairment charges reported in the 2015 accounts, prompted suggestions that Tesco CEO Dave Lewis and his finance chiefs were indulging in what the corporate world calls “kitchen sinking” - announcing all the bad news at once to make any subsequent upturn look more impressive.
City Index analyst Ken Odeluga told The Independent. “[I] see fair evidence that Tesco’s freshened management team under CEO Dave Lewis sought to bundle several further impairments and write-offs into 2014 finals beyond the property write down, in order to clear the decks for their turnaround plan proper.”
The most spectacular impact on the year’s profits originated in a reasonably strict application of asset impairment rules. The results statement explains that Tesco reviews the carrying value of its stores every year. Each store is viewed as a cash-generating unit and the reviews are based on the higher of value in use or fair value less costs of disposal.
“Challenging industry conditions and the decline in profit over the last year have resulted in an impairment charge of £3.8bn against our trading stores. We have also written down the value of work-in-progress by £925m, primarily reflecting the decision we announced in January 2015 not to proceed with 49 sites in our property pipeline,” the company said. One or two more cynical observers suggested that while the impairment reviews are a sensible way to get damaged assets out of the picture, if trading recovers to the point that the carrying values go up again, the impairments can always be reversed to make the results look even rosier.
Lending some weight to the kitchen sink analysis, further impairments of goodwill and other assets added another £878m to the balance sheet revaluation, including £630m written down on the company’s investments in a China project and £198m on UK joint ventures. Throw in £570m in stock-related forward provisions, £168m in costs capitalised to inventories and some £360m in one-off restructuring costs and before you know it you’re looking at a £7.4bn money pit with just £961m in annual operating profits to offset it.
Did anyone mention a deficit on the pension scheme? The company’s actuaries estimate this at £2.8bn and it has agreed with trustees to boost its contribution to £270m a year meet the anticipated shortfall.
The increased disclosures around property valuations are part of Tesco’s commitment to “rebuilding trust and
transparency” according to a final note, which also mentioned new guidelines introduced to put less emphasis on the that pesky “commercial income” and simplify how it is reported.
The management team acknowledged that the fundamental changes it in place are likely to lead to an increased volatility in short-term performance, but said they should deliver “sustainable value” to shareholders.
NOTE 12 Property, plant and equipment
Impairment of property, plant and equipment
The Group has determined that for the purposes of impairment testing, each store is a cash-generating unit.
Cash-generating units are tested for impairment if there are indicators of impairment at the balance sheet date. Recoverable amounts for cash-generating units are based on the higher of value in use or fair value less costs of disposal. The Group engaged external independent qualified valuers, where appropriate, to determine the fair value of the Group's property.
Fair values are determined with regard to the market rent for the stores or for alternative uses with investment yields appropriate to reflect the physical characteristics of the property and location. In some cases, fair values include residual valuations where stores may be viable for redevelopment.
The pre-tax discount rates used to calculate value in use range from 8% to 19% (2014: 6% to 14%) depending on the specific conditions in which each store operates. On a post-tax basis, the discount rates range from 7% to 15% (2014: 6% to 12%). The forecast cash flows are extrapolated beyond five years based on estimated long-term growth rates of 2% to 5% (2014: 2% to 5%). 
An impairment charge of £4,292m (2014: £866m) has been recognised following a challenging economic climate and significant shifts in the retail industry structure, resulting in a revision of forecast cash flows and property fair values. This charge relates to properties in the UK of £3,052m (2014: £87m), Europe of £947m (2014: £740m) and Asia of £293m (2014: £39m). Of this charge, £3,291m (2014: £707m) related to trading stores has been classified as 'Impairment of PPE and onerous lease provisions included within cost of sales' and £874m (2014: £nil) related to construction in progress and closed stores has been classified as 'Impairment of PPE and onerous lease provisions included within (losses)/profits arising on property-related items' within non-GAAP measures in the Group Income Statement. The remaining £127m charge (2014: £159m) has not been treated as one-off within non-GAAP measures.
An impairment reversal of £176m (2014: £154m) was recognised relating to properties in the UK of £133m (2014: £136m), Europe of £28m (2014: £10m) and Asia of £15m (2014: £8m). Of this reversal, £25m (2014: £nil) has been classified as 'Impairment of PPE and onerous lease provisions included within cost of sales' and £97m (2014: £98m) has been classified as 'Impairment of PPE and onerous lease provisions included within (losses)/profits arising on property-related items'.
In addition, based on the factors set out above, the Group has recognised a net onerous contract provision charge in the year of £669m (2014: £18m charge) relating to contracts in the UK of £561m (2014: £(15)m release), Europe of £62m (2014: £27m charge) and Asia of £46m (2014: £6m charge). These provisions comprise obligations for future rents payable net of rents receivable on onerous leases including on vacant property and unprofitable stores and other onerous contracts relating to property. Of this charge, £536m (2014: £27m) has been classified as 'Impairment of PPE and onerous lease provisions included within cost of sales' and £120m (2014: £nil) has been classified as 'Impairment of PPE and onerous lease provisions included within (losses)/profits arising on property-related items' within non-GAAP measures in the Group Income Statement.
Furthermore, there has been a £21m impairment charge for investment property which has been classified as 'Impairment of PPE and onerous lease provisions included within (losses)/profits arising on property-related items'
Rare coins worth $1 million - including 'holey dollar' - stolen from State Library of NSW
August 8, 2014
The 1813 holey dollar which sold in Melbourne for $410,000 in August 2012. Photo: Jason South
Police are hunting for a thief who stole $1 million worth of rare coins - including one that sold for $410,000 two years ago - during a brazen robbery at the State Library of NSW.
Dr Alex Byrne, the State Librarian and the library's chief executive, said the thief broke into a coin case about 3.40pm on Wednesday and escaped with 12 coins, including examples of Australia's earliest currency that Dr Byrne said were -historically, extraordinarily important-.
The theft was captured on the Sydney library's CCTV system and footage has been handed to police. They have launched an investigation into the incident and believe it may be linked to a second theft from a hotel later on Wednesday.
The dump, cut from the centre of the -holey dollar-, was worth 15 pence when it was in circulation.
Dr Byrne said 15 coins, part of the library's collection, were on exhibition in a -secure locked case- in a gallery at the library.
-Late on Wednesday, somebody came in and, after hanging around for about an hour, broke into the case. It was really very difficult to break into. Eventually he, I presume it was a he, did get in and made off with 12 of the 15 coins on show,- Dr Byrne said.
He said the thief used some sort of tool or implement to break into the case before stealing the coins, the most notable of which was a -holey dollar-, an example of one of the first coins struck in Australia.
A -holey dollar- sold in Melbourne in August 2012 for $410,000.
Dr Byrne said that at the start of the 19th century, Governor Lachlan Macquarie recognised that there was no coinage in Australia so he bought 40,000 Spanish dollars. The dollars were large coins, and Governor Macquarie had a hole punched through the middle.
The central plug, known as a dump, was valued at 15 pence, and the outer ring was worth five shillings. The coins were re-stamped and went into circulation in 1814.
-Historically the holey dollar is extraordinarily important. It's about this country developing all the aspects of a civilised society,- Dr Byrne said.
-This theft is very disappointing and upsetting for all of the staff here.-
Dr Byrne said there were other holey dollars in collections in Australia, but he was unaware how many and said they were very valuable.
He said the library was open to the public at the time of the theft. The library is understood to be reviewing security in the wake of the theft.
Police said that a second theft took place about 5.20pm on Wednesday, when a man entered a hotel on George Street and approached a glass cabinet. The man removed four sets of diamond earrings, three diamond rings and a gold pendant from the display.
These items are believed to be valued about $75,000.
Police are investigating possible links between the two crimes.
18th August 2015
http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/rare-coins-worth-1-million--including-holey-dollar-- stolen-from-state-library-of-nsw -20140808-101xgi.html 18th August, 2015