Accounting Question: Does it make sense for

[Kiffin]

Accumulated Depreciation to be greater than Total Fixed Assets? I'm looking at a balance sheet that lists total value of Fixed Assets at $41,000. However, the Accumulated Depreciation is shown at $43,000, so the Total Fixed Assets is valued at -$2,000. How can this be? Is this an error? I mean, if all assets are listed on the balance sheet at it's original value with the Accumulated Depreciation as a contra account, it should not be higer than the total asset value, right?

[rookem123]

That doesn't make sense - something must be wrong. Check your depreciation calculations.

[BangkokBob]

The only explanation I can come up with is if they re valued the assets, in other words giving them a longer life.

[ktracy]

Overall this does not make sense. Possibilities: Sold or retired assets but Accum Depreciation was not adjusted. Is the depreciation being calculated manually or by a computer system ? If manually, review calculations.