Yes, please.
And I don't know how to answer this question too: if an owner contribute his vehicle to his business, should we record the vehicle at its cost price or agreed value? and why? Thanks
why the vehicle contributed by the owner was valued at its agreed value? :(this is more of a 5 mark discuss type answer)
Usually businesses value assets at their historical cost, the cost of the asset to the business as verified by source documents. However this is not the case when the owner contributes assets to the business, this is due to the fact that due to the entity principle, the owner and business are considered two separate entities, with accounting records and reports made on that basis, thus as the owner and business are separate any transfer of control of assets between the owner and the business must be reported as a transaction, as an exchange of goods and/or services occurred due to a capital contribution. However, although the entity principle forces a transaction to be recorded, in practice the owner and business are the one in the same, thus no receipt or other source document would exist to verify the cost of the asset to the business, thus an agreed value must be used, which is an estimate of the value of an asset at the time it is contributed to the business by the owner. The agreed value also improves relevance of accounting reports as by including an estimate of the value of the contributed asset to the business this is likely to be more representative of the potential future economic benefit to the business from the asset, then the price the owner purchased the asset at (as the owner would have likely already consumed some of the asset's value before the contribution).
if an owner contribute his vehicle to his business, should we record the vehicle at its cost price or agreed value? and why? (made this a 2-3 mark-ish answer)
The vehicle should be valued at it's agreed value, an estimation of the value of the vehicle at time of contribution by the owner. This figure is preferable compared to the price the owner paid for the vehicle originally, the cost price, as the agreed value is more relevant to the business as the agreed value represents a figure likely to be closer to the value of future economic benefit the vehicle would provide to the business then the cost price, as it is likely the owner used a portion of the vehicles economic benefit for themselves before contribution, thus meaning the cost price would likely overstate the true value of the asset if it was used. Thus an agreed value increases relevance by including a figure which is more useful for decision making (the true value of economic benefit to the business) as opposed to a less useful figure, cost price (as the owner likely used some of the economic benefit).