ITAA Tussentijdse Proeven common mistakes
ITAA Tussentijdse Proeven · Understand the traps and how to avoid them.
Treating VAT on invoices as a simple 21% calculation without checking whether the reduced rate, exemption, or reverse-charge mechanism applies to the specific supply.
Candidates practice with standard-rated goods and then carry the 21% reflex into mixed scenarios such as food, books, or intra-community services, because the rate table is memorised as a lookup rather than as a decision tree.
What to do instead
Before computing any VAT figure, write three lines on the answer sheet: nature of the supply, place of supply, and applicable rate or exemption. Only then calculate. Build a one-page decision checklist and run every practice invoice through it until the sequence is automatic.
Mixing up the taxable base for corporate income tax by deducting disallowed expenses (fines, excessive car costs, private use) directly from accounting profit without adding them back.
Candidates read the profit-and-loss account as if accounting profit equals taxable profit, since the two coincide in simple textbook examples and the add-back adjustments feel like an extra step rather than the core of the exercise.
What to do instead
Always reconstruct the taxable base explicitly: start from accounting profit, list every add-back and deduction with a one-line justification, and total the adjustments before applying the rate. Practise with at least ten small cases that each contain two or three disallowed items.
Filing the balance sheet without proving that it balances, or forcing a plug into a suspense account to make totals agree.
Time pressure in the practical simulation pushes candidates to move on once the trial balance is entered, and a small transposition or duplicated entry is easier to hide in a suspense line than to trace.
What to do instead
Reserve the final ten minutes for a balance check and treat any difference as a red flag rather than a rounding issue. If it does not balance, re-verify the trial balance extraction, the opening balances, and the result appropriation in that order before touching anything else.
Recording transactions on a cash basis or at the moment the invoice is paid instead of applying accrual accounting and cut-off principles.
Candidates with bookkeeping habits from small-practice software or personal finance default to payment dates, and the exam scenarios often mention payment dates prominently, which anchors attention on the wrong event.
What to do instead
For each transaction, state the accrual date and the matching principle in one sentence before posting. Drill cut-off entries at year end (accrued expenses, prepaid income, deferred charges) until the pattern of reversing entries becomes routine.
Ignoring the difference between the legal form and the economic substance of a transaction when classifying it, for example treating a lease as a simple rental expense regardless of its terms.
Candidates classify by the account name in the narrative rather than by analysing the contractual terms, because substance-over-form reasoning is slower and feels risky under exam time constraints.
What to do instead
Adopt a fixed routine: read the contract terms, identify who bears the risks and rewards, then choose the accounting treatment and justify it in two sentences. Practise on lease, sale-and-leaseback, and factoring cases where the label and the substance diverge.
Applying the wrong tax rate or forgetting the surcharges and local levies when computing a personal income tax or corporate tax liability.
Rate tables are memorised in isolation, and candidates under pressure grab the headline rate while overlooking crisis contributions, municipal surcharges, or the order in which reductions are applied.
What to do instead
Build a personal rate sheet that shows the full sequence from gross base to final liability, including every surcharge and the order of reliefs. Redo three full computations per study session using only that sheet, then reproduce the sheet from memory.
Presenting a numerical answer with no audit trail, so partial credit is lost when one intermediate figure is wrong.
Candidates believe only the final number is graded and therefore skip workings, which also removes their own ability to spot where a calculation went astray.
What to do instead
Write every calculation as a labelled vertical column with the source of each input noted in a few words. Even when the final figure is wrong, the marker can follow the method, and the candidate can retrace the error during the review pass.
Confusing the treatment of a private versus business element in a mixed-use expense and deducting the full amount.
The scenario mentions a business purpose, and candidates stop reading before the private-use sentence, or they assume the private portion is immaterial without checking any threshold.
What to do instead
Highlight every mention of private use, personal benefit, or mixed purpose in the question and split the expense explicitly into business and private components on the answer sheet. State the rule applied for the split, then deduct only the business share.
Answering the legal or procedural sub-question with general principles instead of citing the specific condition or deadline that the question asks for.
Candidates prepare conceptually and can explain the framework, but they have not committed the concrete thresholds, filing deadlines, and formal conditions to memory, so they write around the point.
What to do instead
Maintain a one-page fact sheet of deadlines, thresholds, and formal requirements per topic and test yourself on it weekly with cloze-style recall. In the exam, answer the specific element first in one sentence, then add context only if space allows.
Managing time poorly by spending disproportionate effort on the first computational case and leaving narrative or advisory questions unanswered.
Computational questions feel productive and give a sense of progress, so candidates keep polishing them, while open advisory questions feel vague and get postponed until there is no time left.
What to do instead
Before starting, allocate minutes per question based on marks and write the allocation at the top of the paper. Enforce a hard stop per question, leave a short bullet outline for any unfinished advisory answer, and return only after every question has at least an outline.