Given the fundamental difference between the percentage of the acquisition method and the proportional performance method, as well as the effects of these other differences between the percentage of the acquisition method and the combination of the proportional performance method and the criteria of subject 13 of the SAB, it is very important to carefully consider whether a service contract falls within the scope of CSA 605-35. Otherwise, it could have significant accounting consequences. i) In general. The specific provisions of paragraph (d) (4) apply to a long-term contract, recorded for the use of the CCM with a dispute caused by a customer demanding a reduction in the price of the gross contract or the performance of ancillary work under the contract, or by a subject who requires an increase in the gross price of the contract, or both , the next day or day: to which a subject offered the purpose of the contract to the client. (A) accounting method. From the date of the transaction, the new taxpayer must align the long-term contract with the same accounting method used by the former subject prior to the transaction. For such a contract, the same accounting method should be used, whether the former subject method is the primary method used by the new subject pursuant to section 1.381(c) (4)-1) b) (3) or that the new taxpayer be allowed to apply the old tax method. Therefore, when the former taxpayer uses the MCP to settle the contract, the new taxpayer follows in the former payer`s footsteps with respect to its closing factor and percentage of clearing methods (such as the 10 per cent method), even if the new taxpayer has not chosen such methods for similarly classified contracts. If the former subject uses the CCM, the new taxpayer follows in the former tax payer`s footsteps with respect to the CCM, even if the new taxpayer is not authorized to use the CCM. However, the new taxpayer is not necessarily bound by the former subject`s method for similar classification contracts entered into by the new taxpayer after the merger and must apply general tax principles, including Section 381, to determine the appropriate method to take these subsequent contracts into account. To the extent that general tax principles allow the subject to account for contracts similarly classified using a different method from the former reporting method, the taxpayer is not required to obtain the Commissioner`s approval to begin with this alternative method.