1. Read the coversheet of the “moonbeam tax research goodpaper.docx” file. This is a student writeup of an original research assignment for ACCT 4400 a few years ago. Then read the rest of this file....

TECHNICAL WRITING ASSIGNMENT
    Serial Number
    Contents
    Page Number
    1.
    Introduction
    1
    2.
    Review of good paper
    2
    3.
    Review of Poor paper
    3-4
    4.
    Passive voice to Active voice
    5
    5.
    Grammatical Error
    6
    6.
    Issues and Resolution
    7
    7.
    Conclusion
    8
INTRODUCTION
Technical writing is a report writing area wherein an accounting professional is required to give his opinion or detailed explanation on a particular report or topic. The skill of technical writing needs to be developed as it requires an explanation of ideas and rules clearly and concisely so that the people who do not belong in the same field are also able to understand the same. Technical writing is very different from creative writing as in technical writing nothing new is not needed to be created. Only the explanation of previously issued ideas and rules is to be done. Technical writing also develops the reviewing skills of a professional by providing criticism that is constructive and will be helpful in the development of the juniors of the same field.
In this particular assignment, a review of two reports of two different students is to be conducted who have prepared a report or assignment solution on the same case study. The following report contains a critical analysis of both the reports and point out the areas where the report could be prepared in a better and professional manner.
REVIEW OF GOOD PAPER
The student who prepared the ‘good-paper' did an excellent job in explaining the case study of Jason regarding section 351. After the study of the entire paper there were only a few suggestions that can be made which improve that write-up. Some sentences are complex to understand and long sentences sometimes lost the meaning it carried. Instead of using long sentences, the student has kept the language of the paper simple. The paper had repeated names after every sentence. The student could have avoided using the name as mentioned in the case study that is Jason and used “his” or “him”.
There was also a calculation error wherein the correct amount calculated was $21,000 ($4,200 * 5) but the student calculated $21,500. Although the amount of Gain that is $18,500 ($21,000-$2,500) was correctly calculated. This was a technical error that could be avoided. The calculation of federal tax which was at 28% was also calculated incorrectly. The federal tax rate should have been $5,180 (@28% of $18,500) but the calculation shown by the student was $2,775 (@15% of $18,500). This student had properly explained every aspect of the case study with the correct reference point but there was inconsistency in the calculation by the student.
REVIEW OF POOR PAPER
After the review of the ‘poor-paper', there are many suggestions that can be easily pointed out. The quality of the paper does not match the requirements for an accounting professional closely. The student seemed to have rushed with the project and did not explain any of the matter clearly. Following are a few suggestions that can be made when the 'poor-paper’ is compared with the ‘good-paper’ and also the general feedback for the paper:
1. In the facts section of the paper the student does not mention the transaction the details of ownership of Moonbeam Buggy rides which is helped by Glen and Sandy Ryan jointly and the ownership percentage. It also does not mention that the corporation Moonbeam Buggy rides needs to double the number of horses so that the company can...