Video summary

Pembahasan Modul 8 PT Sugus Pendapatan dan Beban

Main summary

Key takeaways

Educational

Main ideas / concepts covered

  • The video explains Module 8: audit of income and expenses for PT Sugus, using an audit worksheet format.
  • It focuses on:
    • Identifying misclassification/recording errors
    • Making journal correction entries to align the company’s accounting with audit findings.
  • A substantial portion covers income tax withholding (PPh) issues, especially:
    • PPh Article 21 (withheld income tax on employee salary)
    • PPh Article 23 (withholding on professional services)
    • PPh Article 25 (corporate income tax installment / payable—timing and classification effects)

Audit findings and required corrections (journal-style instructions)

A) Salary / PPh Article 21 misclassification

  • Finding: PPh Article 21 related to salary was recorded by the company as “other expenses” rather than as part of salary expense (or related salary tax treatment).
    • Amount mentioned: 19,891,033 (based on the company’s records).
  • Audit conclusion: PPh Article 21 should be included/correctly treated as part of the salary-related tax expense.
  • Correction method (1):
    • Debit: Salary expenses
    • Credit: Other expenses
    • (To reverse/adjust the misstatement)

B) Sales commission expense recorded in wrong account (2018)

  • Finding: There is a sales commission expense for 2018 of 60,000,000 paid to an individual (not an employee).
  • Current incorrect recording: recorded under travel and accommodation account.
  • Correction method (2):
    • Debit: Entertainment and representation
    • Credit: Official travel and accommodation
    • Amount: 60,000,000

C) Mobile phone gift to business relations recorded as equipment (2018)

  • Finding: A mobile phone given to business relations was recorded as equipment (improper classification).
  • Correction approach (3):
    • Since it relates to other parties, it should go to entertainment and representation rather than equipment.
  • Correction method:
    • Transfer from equipment (credit) to entertainment and representation (debit)
    • (Exact amount not clearly captured in the subtitles.)

D) Sale of used cardboard incorrectly treated as an expense (around 2018-09-14)

  • Finding: Sale of used cardboard worth 20,381,597 was treated as an expense (or misclassified as “banquet/representation” type expense in the worksheet).
  • Audit conclusion: Because it is a sale, it should be recorded as other income, not as an expense.
  • Correction method:
    • Debit: Entertainment and representation (to remove the incorrect expense)
    • Credit: Other income / income account (to recognize the sale income)
    • Amount: 20,381,597

E) Hospital payment for employee welfare recorded in wrong year (BPK order 2019, but expense is for 2018)

  • Finding: Payment of 1,000,000,00 to a hospital for treatment was recorded as an expense but relates to employee welfare for 2018, while the payment/event is in/for 2019.
  • Key audit concept: Accrual/timing adjustment—expense for 2018 must be recognized in 2018 even if paid later.
  • Correction method (adjusting journal):
    • Debit: Employee welfare (expense)
    • Credit: Accrued expenses
    • Basis: expense belongs to 2018, unpaid in 2018, paid later.

F) PPh Article 23 on professional services not paid (professional tax withholding issue)

  • Finding: The company has not paid PPh Article 23 related to professional services.
  • Correction method:
    • Debit: Professional services
    • Credit: PPh Article 23 payable (withholding payable)
    • Amount mentioned: 400,000
  • Additional concept: Article 23 withholding is generally calculated as a percentage of the professional fee (subtitles indicate 2% of the related base; base described around 20,805,349).

PPh Article 21 re-calculation (employee salary tax verification)

Audit checking steps and logic presented

  • Step 1: Compare company-recorded PPh Article 21 to audit re-calculation

    • Company-paid/recorded PPh Article 21: 19,891,033
    • Audit re-calculated “should be paid”: 19,960,222
    • The video indicates an underpayment/difference concept (subtitles include inconsistent/garbled numbers, but the logic is “should be” vs “paid”).

  • Step 2: Determine gross income

    • Gross income used is described as salary without THR (THR treated separately).

  • Step 3: Calculate allowable deductions from gross income

    • Labor office costs: 5%, max 6,000,000 per year
      • If 5% exceeds the cap, cap is applied.
    • BPJS pension & BPJS health contributions:
      • Calculated based on statutory percentages (exact rate details are partially unclear in subtitles).
    • Deduction amounts are supported by evidence/proofs (withholding proof, BPJS proof, etc.).

  • Step 4: Apply PTKP (taxable income threshold)

    • PTKP differs by marital status and number of children.
    • Example/logic mentioned:
      • Single: PTKP 54,000,000
      • Married (with/without children): different amounts (figures shown via additive approach).

  • Step 5: Compute PKP

    • PKP = Net income − PTKP
    • Only calculated if net income exceeds PTKP.

  • Step 6: Apply progressive income tax rates

    • Subtitles describe bracketed taxation:
      • Some portion taxed at 5% up to a threshold
      • Next portion at 15%
      • Further rules referenced but not fully detailed in the subtitles.
    • Presenter compares computed total tax to what was paid.

Correction when payment evidence/accounting is insufficient

  • Finding: There is evidence that PPh Article 21 was paid, but no evidence indicating which account the payment was charged to.
  • Correction approach described:
    • Reduce the salary burden for the excess PPh Article 21 recorded/charged incorrectly.
    • A reduction amount is mentioned (subtitles show 28,508,100 / 28,508,100 9 with garbling), but the method is clear: adjust expense/tax burden based on correct recalculation.

PPh Article 25 verification and classification effects

  • Finding: Corporate income tax payable is described as PPh Article 25 for December, based on a corporate income tax return (subtitles mention 45,000,000 as a reference).
  • Audit conclusion: PPh Article 25 payable was considered too big compared to audit comparison.
  • Correction concept:
    • Adjust the recognized PPh payable/tax burden amount because the company may not have proper timing/evidence of which account it was charged to.
  • Correction approach presented:
    • Include the correct tax burden amount to reduce income tax expense (or the tax burden calculation).
    • Subtitles include a computed adjustment value (partially garbled) involving subtraction from 45,000,000, resulting in a “PPh Article 25 only” figure.

How results are filled into the worksheet (process overview)

  • The presenter explains entering values into the worksheet by:
    • Placing PPh Article 21 on the relevant side (described as debit side)
    • Placing PPh Article 25 accordingly
  • Recording corrected account balances, including:
    • Salary expense
    • Other expenses
    • Entertainment and representation
    • Travel and accommodation
    • Employee welfare
    • Professional services
    • Other income (for the cardboard sale correction)
  • Finally, worksheet totals are derived by adding/subtracting in the debit-minus-credit manner to arrive at the final operational cost value.

Speakers / sources featured

  • Speaker: The main presenter (first-person narration) discussing “Module 8” audit practicum for PT Sugus.
  • Source/organization referenced:
    • PT Sugus (audited company)
    • BPK audit / audit reports (mentioned multiple times)
    • Book/module references, e.g., “page 125”, “page 127”, and the book used for journal/treatment references
    • Tax regulations (used for PTKP, deduction caps, withholding calculations)
    • SPT evidence / withholding and submission documents (used as evidence sources)

No other named individuals are clearly identifiable from the subtitles (names appear but are too inconsistent/garbled to reliably list).

Original video