亨格瑞管理会计英文第15版练习答案05解析.

合集下载

亨格瑞管理会计英文第15版 答案 10-12章

亨格瑞管理会计英文第15版 答案 10-12章

CHAPTER 11Capital Budgeting11-A1 (15-25 min.) Answers are printed in the text at the end of the assignment material.11-29 (10-15 min.)1. The present value is $480,000 and the annual payments are an annuity, requiringuse of Table 2:(a)$480,000 = annual payment × 11.2578annual payment = $480,000 ÷ 11.2578 = $42,637(b)$480,000 = annual payment × 9.4269annual payment = $480,000 ÷ 9.4269 = $50,918(c)$480,000 = annual payment × 8.0552annual payment = $480,000 ÷ 8.0552 =$59,5892. (a)$480,000 = annual payment × 8.5595annual payment = $480,000 ÷ 8.5595 = $56,078(b)$480,000 = annual payment × 7.6061annual payment = $480,000 ÷ 7.6061 = $63,107(c)$480,000 = annual payment × 6.8109annual payment = $480,000 ÷ 6.8109 =$70,4753. (a) Total payments= 30 × $50,918 = $1,527,540Total interest paid= $1,527,540- $480,000 = $1,047,540(b) Total payments= 15 × $63,107= $946,605Total interest paid = $946,605 - $480,000 = $466,60511-36 (10 min.)Buy. The net present value is positive.Initial outlay * $(21,000)Present value of cash operating savings, from12-year, 12% column of Table 2, 6.1944 × $5,000 30,972Net present value $ 9,972* The trade-in allowance really consists of a $5,000 adjustment of the sellingprice and a bona fide $10,000 cash allowance for the old equipment. Therelevant amount is the incremental cash outlay, $21,000. The book value isirrelevant.11-39 (10-15 min.)Copyright ©2011 Pearson Education 1Copyright ©2011 Pearson Education21. NPV @ 10% = 10,000 × 3.7908 = $37,908 - $36,048 = $1,860 NPV @ 12% = 10,000 × 3.6048 = $36,048 - $36,048 = $0NPV @ 14% = 10,000 × 3.4331 = $34,331 - $36,048 = $(1,717)2.The IRR is the interest rate at which NPV = $0; therefore, from requirement 1 we know that IRR = 12%.3.The NPV at the company’s cost of capital, 10%, is positive, so the project should be accepted.4.The IRR (12%) is greater than the company’s cost of capital (10%), so the project should be accepted. Note that the IRR and NPV models give the same decision.11-46 (10-15 min.)Annual addition to profit = 40% × $25,000 = $10,000.1.Payback period is $36,000 ÷ $10,000 = 3.6 years. It is not a good measure of profitability because it ignores returns beyond the payback period and it does not account for the time value of money.2. NPV = $5,114. Accept the proposal because NPV is positive. Computation: NPV = ($10,000 × 4.1114) - $36,000= $41,114 - $36,000 = $ 5,1143. ARR = (Increase in average cash flow – Increase in depreciation) ÷ Initialinvestment= ($10,000 - $6,000) ÷ $36,000 = 11.1%11-51 (30-35 min.)1.Annual Operating Cash FlowsXeroxCannon Difference Salaries $49,920(a) $41,600(b) $ 8,320 Overtime 1,728(c) -- 1,728 Repairs and maintenance 1,800 1,050 750Toner, supplies, etc. 3,6003,300 300 Total annual cash outflows $57,048 $45,950 $11,098(a) ($ 8 × 40 hrs.) × 52 weeks × 3 employees = $320 × 52 × 3 = $49,920 (b) ($10 × 40 hrs.) × 52 weeks × 2 employees = $400 × 52 × 2 = $41,600 (c) ($12 × 4 hrs.) × 12 months × 3 machines = $ 48 × 12 × 3 = $ 1,728Initial Cash FlowsXeroxCannon Difference Purchase of Cannon machines $ -- $50,000 $50,000Sale of Xerox machines -- -3,000 -3,000 Training and remodeling -- 4,000 4,000 Total $ -- $51,000 $51,000Copyright ©2011 Pearson Education 3EXHIBIT 11-50All numbers are expressed in Mexican pesos.2. 18% Total Sketch of Relevant Cash Flows(inthousands)PresentPVFactor Value 0 1 2 3 4 5Cash operating savings:* .8475 83,902 99,000108,90078,212.718272,904119,790.608667,966 131,769 .5158.4371 63,356 144,946Total366,340Income tax savings fromdepreciation not changedby inflation, see 1 3.1272 105,074 33,600 33,600 33,600 33,600 33,600471,414TotalRequired outlay at time zero 1.0000 (420,000) (420,000)Net present value 51,414*Amounts are computed by multiplying (150,000 × .6) = 90,000 by 1.10, 1.10 2, 1.10 3, etc.Copyright ©2011 Pearson Education 461PV PresentofValue$1.00ofCashFlows Annual Cash FlowsDiscountedat 12% 0 1 2 3 4 5T OTAL P ROJECT A PPROACH:Cannon:Init. cash outflow 1.0000 $ (51,000)Oper. cash flows 3.6048 (165,641) (45,950) (45,950) (45,950) (45,950) (45,950)Total $(216,641)Xerox:Oper. cash flows 3.6048 $(205,647) (57,048) (57,048) (57,048) (57,048) (57,048)Difference in favor ofretaining Xerox $ (10,994)I NCREMENTAL A PPROACH:Initial investment 1.0000 $(51,000)Annual operatingcash savings 3.6048 40,006 11,098 11,098 11,098 11,098 11,098Net present valueof purchase $(10,994)2. The Xerox machines should not be replaced by the Cannon equipment.Net savings = (Present value of expenditures to retain Xerox machines) less (Present value of expenditures toconvert to Cannon machines)= $205,647 - $216,641 = $(10,994)3. a. How flexible is the new machinery? Will it be useful only for the presently intended functions, or can it be easilyadapted for other tasks that may arise over the next 5 years?b. What psychological effects will it have on various interested parties?Copyright ©2011 Pearson Education 46211-71 (60-90 min.)This is a complex problem because it requires comparing three alternatives. It reviews Chapter 6 as well as covering several of the topics of Chapter 11. The following answer uses the total project approach. The total net future cash outflows are shown for each alternative.1. Alternative A: Continue to manufacture the parts with the current tools.Annual cash outlaysVariable cost, $92 × 8,000 $(736,000)Fixed cost, 1/3 × $45 × 8,000 × .6 (72,000)Tax savings, .4 × ($736,000 + $72,000) 323,200After-tax annual cost $(484,800)Present value, 3.6048 × $484,800 $(1,747,607)PV of remaining tax savings on MACRS:11.52% × $2,000,000 × .4 × .8929 82,2905.76% × $2,000,000 × .4 × .7972 36,735Total present value of costs, Alternative A $(1,628,582)Alternative B: Purchase from outside supplierAnnual cash outlaysPurchase cost, $110 × 8,000 $(880,000)Tax savings, $880,000 × .4 352,000After-tax annual cost $(528,000)Copyright ©2011 Pearson Education 463Present value, $528,000 × 3.6048 $(1,903,334)Sale of old equipment:Sales price $ 400,000Book value [(11.52% + 5.76%) × $2,000,000] 345,600Gain $ 54,400Taxes @ 40% (21,760)Total after-tax effect ($400,000 - $21,760) 378,240Total present value of costs, Alternative B $(1,525,094)Copyright ©2011 Pearson Education 464Alternative C: Purchase new toolsInvestment $(1,800,000) Annual cash outlaysVariable cost, $73 × 8,000 $(584,000)Fixed cost (same as A) (72,000)Tax savings, .4 × ($584,000 + $72,000) 262,400After-tax annual cost $(393,600)Present value, $393,600 × 3.6048 (1,418,849)Tax savings on new equipment* 579,217Effect of disposal of new equipmentSales price $ 500,000Book value 0Gain $500,000Taxes @ 40% 200,000Total after-tax effect $ 300,000Present value, $300,000 × .5674 170,220Effect of disposal of old equipment (see Alternative B) 378,240Total present value of costs, Alternative C $(2,091,172)* Using the MACRS schedule for tax depreciation, the depreciation rate for each year of a 3-year asset's life is shown inExhibit 11-6:Depreciation Tax PV PresentYear Rate Savings Factor Value1 33.33% .3333 × $1,800,000 × .40 = $239,976 .8929 $214,2752 44.45% .4445 × 1,800,000 × .40 = 320,040 .7972 255,1363 14.81% .1481 × 1,800,000 × .40 = 106,632 .7118 75,9014 7.41% .0741 × 1,800,000 × .40 = 53,352 .6355 33,905Total present value of tax savings $579,217Using Exhibit 11-7, we get .8044 × $1,800,000 × .4 = $579,168, which differs from $579,217 by a $49 rounding error.The alternative with the lowest present value of cost is Alternative B, purchasing from the outside supplier.Copyright ©2011 Pearson Education 4652. Among the major factors are (1) the range of expected volume (both large increases and decreases in volume make thepurchase of the parts relatively less desirable), (2) the reliability of the outside supplier, (3) possible changes inmaterial, labor, and overhead prices, (4) the possibility that the outside supplier can raise prices before the end of five years, (5) obsolescence of the products and equipment, and (6) alternate uses of available capacity (alternative uses make Alternative B relatively more desirable).Copyright ©2011 Pearson Education 466Copyright ©2011 Pearson Education467CHAPTER 12 Cost Allocation12-30 (10-15 min.) 1. Rate = [$2,500 + ($.05 × 100,000)] ÷ 100,000 = $.075 per copy Cost allocated to City Planning in August = $.075 × 42,000 = $3,150. 2. Fixed cost pool allocated as a lump sum depending on predicted usage:To City Planning: (36,000 ÷ 100,000) × $2,500 = $900 per monthVariable cost pool allocated on the basis of actual usage: $.05 × number of copies Cost allocated to City Planning in August: $900 + ($.05 × 42,000) = $3,000. 3. The second method, the one that allocated fixed- and variable-cost pools separately, is preferable. It better recognizesthe causes of the costs. The fixed cost depends on the size of the photocopy machine, which is based on predicted usage and is independent of actual usage. Variable costs, in contrast are caused by actual usage.Exhibit 12-34Customer Type 1Customer Type 2 Customer Type 3 Sales Gross price profit per margin Gross Gross Gross Product unit per unit Units Revenue profit Units Revenue profit Units Revenue profitA $11.031$ 4.14 200 $ 2,206 $ 828 2,200 $ 24,266 $ 9,108 500 $ 5,515 $ 2,070 B 20.47 4.09 100 2,047 409 1,200 24,564 4,908 3,000 61,410 12,270 C 51.38 10.28 50 2,569 514 400 20,552 4,112 5,000 256,900 51,400D 90.00 39.38 400 36,000 15,752 800 72,000 31,504 400 36,000 15,752Total 750 $42,822 17,5034,600 $141,382 49,632 8,900 $359,825 81,492 Cost to serve 7,36845,193 87,439 Operating income $10,135 $4,439 ($5,947) Customer gross margin percentage 40.9% 35.1% 22.6% Cost to serve percentage 17.2% 32.0% 24.3%Customer operating income percentage 23.7%3.1% (1.7%)1$32,000 ÷ 2,900 units; etc. The rounded numbers from the first two columns are used in subsequent calculations.5. The chart below shows customer profitability for the three customer types and suggested strategies for profit improvement.Grow business with this customer type byfocused sales efforts and quantity discounts.Work with customers to lowerthe cost to serve. Seek internalprocess improvements to lowerthose elements of the cost toserve controllable by thecompany.Copyright ©2011 Pearson Education 46912-35 (15-20 min.)of1. AllocationCostsGallons Weighting Joint$300,000 $180,000×A 9,000 9/15SolventSolvent B 6,000 6/15 × $300,000 120,00015,000 $300,0002. Relative Sales Allocation ofCostsValue at Split-off* Weighting JointSolvent A $270,000 27/54 × $300,000 $150,000Solvent B 270,000 27/54 × $300,000 150,000$540,000 $300,000 * $30 × 9,000 and $45 × 6,00012-42 (25-30 min.)There a several ways to organize an analysis that provides product costs. We like to focus first on determining total activity-cost pools and activity cost per driver unit. Then, an analysis similar to the one shown in Exhibit 12-8 can be used.Schedule a: Activity center cost poolsResources Supporting the Allocated Setup/Maintenance Activity Center Allocation Calculation Cost Assembly supervisors $90,000 × 2% $ 1,800 Assembly machines $247,000 × (400 ÷ 1,900) 52,000 Facilities management $95,000 × (400 ÷ 1,900) 20,000 Power $54,000 × (10 ÷ 90) 6,000Total assigned cost $79,800Cost per driver unit (setup) $79,800 ÷ 40 $ 1,995 Resources Supporting the Allocated Setup/Maintenance Activity Center Allocation Calculation Cost Assembly supervisors $90,000 × 98% $ 88,200 Assembly machines $247,000 × (1,500 ÷ 1,900) 195,000 Facilities management $95,000 × (1,500 ÷ 1,900) 75,000 Power $54,000 × (80 ÷ 90) 48,000Total assigned cost $406,200Cost per driver unit (machine hour) $406,200 ÷ 1,500 $ 270.80Copyright ©2011 Pearson Education 470Exhibit 12-42 Contribution to cover other value-chain costs by productStandardDeluxe Custom Cost per Driver unit Driver Driver Driver Activity/Resource (Schedule a) Units Cost Units Cost Units Cost Setup/Maintenance $1,995 20 $ 39,900 12 $ 23,940 8 $ 15,960 Assembly $270.80 1,000 270,800 400 108,320 100 27,080 Parts 1,003,800 115,080 15,980Direct labor 298,00072,000 68,000 Total $1,612,500$319,340 $127,020 Units 100,000 10,000 1,000 Cost per display $16.125 $31.934 $127.02Selling price 20.00050.000 250.00 Unit gross profit $ 3.875$18.066 $122.98 Total gross profit $387,500$180,660 $122,980The total contribution of these products is $387,500 + $180,660 + $122,980 = $691,140.12-43 (25-30 min.) See solution to problem 12-42.12-55 (100 – 200 min.)1. Exhibits 12-55A and 12-55B show the calculation of customer gross margin percentage and customer cost-to-serve percentage for the 4 customer types. Exhibit 12-55C shows a plot of customer gross margin percentage versus customer cost-to-serve percentage for the 4 customer types.2. Suggested strategies for profit improvement for the 4 customer types follow.•Customer type 1 - Mega stores. These stores have the lowest cost-to-serve.Profitability can be improved by focusing on a better product mix. A quarter ofthe sales (cases) to these stores are from bulk and singles products – both ofwhich have a negative gross margin. A shift in mix towards more regular andfragile product types would improve profitability.•Customer type 2 – Local small stores. These stores have a product mix that contains a substantial amount (32%) of the negative gross margin products. Thesame change in sales focus that applies to mega stores can be applied to localsmall stores.But unlike mega stores, small stores are very costly to serve. From Exhibit 12-55 B, the largest single cost to serve local small stores is truck deliveries. Theaverage number of cases per order (the same as per truck delivery) is 6,000,000 ÷ 80,000 = 75. Compare this to mega stores that average 7,680,000 ÷ 32,000 = 240 cases per order (delivery). This is a significant factor causing the high cost-to-serve.For example, suppose that the average order size could be increased from 75,000 to 150,000 cases. If the total annual cases sold is unchanged (6,000,000), a totalof 40 orders, a 50% reduction, would be made. An estimate of the cost savingsand the impact on the cost-to-serve percentage can be made as follows:Cost per Driver Unit Reduction in Driver Cost Savings(Exhibit 12-55B) Units of 50% (000) Truck delivery $167.55 34,000 $5,696.70 Order processing 27.49 40,000 1,099.60 Regular scheduling 5.83 36,000 209.88 Expedited scheduling 19.44 4,000 77.76 Total cost savings (000) $7,083.94 Cost savings as a percent of revenue 24.9%New cost-to-serve as a percent of revenue 60.1%In addition to the above savings, other activities would also be impacted by thereduction in orders such as customer service. So while the total impact ofCopyright ©2011 Pearson Education 472focusing on increasing order size can only be estimated, it is reasonable to expect dramatic cost savings from the current 85% of revenue.Other factors that should be investigated include the high level of corporatesupport and customer service.•Customer type 3 – Local large stores. Local large stores generate $68,400 ÷ $136,230 = 50% of DSI’s total revenue and with a net margin of 58% - 47% = 11%. The key to local large store profitability is sales of a large percentage (80%) of regular product. The cost-to-serve percentage is 47%. This could be reduced as for customer type 2 by increasing the order size from the current level of14,400,000 ÷ 120,000 = 120 cases per order. But a dramatic improvementshould not be expected. In general, local large stores are sustaining DSI’sbusiness and their loyalty should be cultivated.•Customer type 4 – Specialty stores. Specialty stores have a low gross margin of 22% coupled with a very large cost-to-serve percent of 106%! Although thesestores do not account for a significant portion of DSI’s revenue the companyshould rationalize their business. Several actions could be suggested. One is to charge a premium for all high-security products. The vast majority of theseproducts are sold to specialty stores with only marginal sales to mega and local small stores. Another action is to adopt a customer loyalty program based onvolume of sales. The list price of $7.25 per case would apply to customers with sales volumes less than a specified level. Most of DSI’s customers would qualify for discounts (similar to those currently existing) so prices would not besignificantly different. For specialty stores, prices would increase dramatically.This may result in losing specialty-store business so DSI needs to decide is this isa direction they wish to consider.Copyright ©2011 Pearson Education 473Exhibit 12-55A (Units and dollars are in thousands.)C u s t o m e r T y p eProductRegular Short Fragile Bulk HighSecurity Singles Total Gross Profit PercentageProduct mix percentage 60% 5% 5% 20% 5% 5% 100% Cases sold 4,608 384 384 1,536 384 3847,680Total Revenue$ 21,888 $ 1,824$ 1,824$7,296$ 1,824 $ 1,824 $36,480Gross Profit per Case $ 3.28 $ 1.58 $ 2.74 $(1.44)$ 0.54 $ (5.30)1Total Gross Profit$ 15,114 $ 607 $ 1,052 $(2,212)$ 207 $(2,035)$12,733 35%Product mix percentage 50% 5% 5% 30% 8% 2% 100% Cases sold3,000 300 300 1,800 480 120 6,000 Total Revenue @ 4.75/case $ 14,250 $ 1,425 $ 1,425 $ 8,550 $ 2,280 $ 570 $28,500 Gross Profit per Case $ 3.28 $ 1.58 $ 2.74 $ (1.44) $ 0.54 $ (5.30)2Total Gross Profit$ 9,840 $ 474 $ 822 $(2,592) $ 259 $ (636)$ 8,167 29%Product mix percentage 80% 0% 10% 10% 0% 0% 100%Cases sold 11,520 -1,4401,440--14,400Total Revenue @ 4.75/case $ 54,720 $ - $ 6,840 $ 6,840 $ - $ - $68,400Gross Profit per Case $ 3.28 $ 1.58 $ 2.74 $ (1.44) $ 0.54 $ (5.30)3Total Gross Profit$ 37,786 $ - $ 3,946 $(2,074) $ - $ - $39,658 58%Product mix percentage 10% 20% 0% 0% 70% 0% 100% Cases sold 60 120 - - 420-600Total Revenue @ 4.75/case $ 285 $ 570 $ - $ - $ 1,995 $ - $ 2,850 Gross Profit per Case $ 3.28 $ 1.58 $ 2.74 $ (1.44)$ 0.54 $ (5.30)4Total Gross Profit $ 197$ 190$ -$ -$ 227$ - $ 61322%Exhibit 12-55B (Units and dollars are in thousands.)ActivityO r d e r P r o c e s s i n gC u s t o m e r S e r v i c eO r d e r C h a n g e sC o r p o r a t e S u p p o r tR e g u l a r S c h e d u l i n gE x p e d i t e d S c h e d u l i n gS h i p p i n gT r u c k D e l i v e r yP a r c e l D e l i v e r y Cost DriverO r d e r sL a b o r H o u r sN u m b e r o f C h a n g e sL a b o r H o u r sO r d e r sO r d e r sP a l l e t sD e l i v e r i e sD e l i v e r i e sC u s t o m e r T y p eCost/DriverUnit $27.49 $43.34$32.63$51.66$5.83 $19.44 $6.60 $167.55 $23.89Total Driver Units3218.73.2 - 29 3 41625.6 1.6 Cost to Serve $879.68 $810.46$104.42-$169.07$58.32$2,745.6$4,289.28$38.22$9,095.05Revenue (See Exhibit 12-55A) $36,480.001 Cost-to-Serve Percentage24.9%Driver Units 80 100 8 20 72 8 640 68 8Cost to Serve $2,199.2 $4,334$261.04$1,033.2 $419.76$155.52$4,224$11,393.4$191.12$24,211.24Revenue (See Exhibit 12-55A) $28,500.02Cost-to-Serve Percentage85.0%Exhibit 12-55B (continued)ActivityO r d e r P r o c e s s i n gC u s t o m e r S e r v i c eO r d e r C h a n g e sC o r p o r a t e S u p p o r tR e g u l a r S c h e d u l i n gE x p e d i t e d S c h e d u l i n gS h i p p i n gT r u c k D e l i v e r y P a r c e l D e l i v e r y Cost DriverO r d e r sL a b o r H o u r sN u m b e r o f C h a n g e sL a b o r H o u r sO r d e r sO r d e r sP a l l e t sD e l i v e r i e sD e l i v e r i e sC u s t o m e r T y p eCost/DriverUnit $27.49 $43.34$32.63$51.66$5.83 $19.44 $6.60 $167.55 $23.89TotalDriver Units 120 70 2.4 80 108 12 840 90 6Cost to Serve$3,298.8 $3,033.8 $78.31$4,132.8 $629.64 $233.28 $5,544$15,079.5$143.34$32,173.47Revenue (See Exhibit 12-55A) $68,400.03 Cost-to-Serve Percentage47.0%Driver Units 12 30 1.2 0 10 2 60 4.8 2.4Cost to Serve $329.88$1,300.2 $39.16- $58.3 $38.88 $396 $804.24 $57.34$3,023.99Revenue (See Exhibit 12-55A) $2,850.004 Cost-to-Serve Percentage106.1%CUSTOMER PROFITABILITYCT3, 47%, 58%0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%110%120%COST-TO-SERVE PERCENTAGEG R O S S P R O F I T P E R C E N T A G EExhibit 12-55CCopyright ©2011 Pearson Education 478。

亨格瑞管理会计英文第15版练习答案01

亨格瑞管理会计英文第15版练习答案01

亨格瑞管理会计英文第15版练习答案01CHAPTER 1COVERAGE OF LEARNING OBJECTIVESLEARNING OBJECTIVE LO1: Describe the major users and uses of accounting information. LO2: Describe the cost-benefit and behavioral issues involved in designing an accounting system. LO3: Explain the role of budgets and performance reports in planning and control. LO4: Discuss the role accountants play in the company’s value chain functions. LO5: Explain why accounting is important in a variety of career paths. LO6: Identify current trends in management accounting. LO7: Explain why ethics and standards of ethical conduct are important to accountants. FUNDA- CRITICAL CASES, MENTAL THINKING EXCEL, ASSIGN-EXERCISES COLLAB., & MENT AND INTERNET MATERIAL EXERCISES PROBLEMS EXERCISES A1, B1 28, 29, 33 39, 40, 42 55 41, 43 A2, B2 32 45 53A1, B1 30, 31, 34, 35, 39, 42, 44 36 30, 31 52, 55 A3, B3 37, 38 47, 48, 49 54 51, 52, 55 1 Copyright ?2021 Pearson Education, Inc., Publishing as Prentice Hall.CHAPTER 1Managerial Accounting, the Business Organization, and Professional Ethics1-A1 (10-15 min.)Information is often useful for more than one function, so the following classifications for each activity are not definitive but serve as a starting point for discussion: 1. Scorekeeping. A depreciation schedule is used in preparing financial statementsto report the results of activities. 2. Problem solving. Helps a manager assess the impact of a purchase decision. 3. Scorekeeping. Reports on the results of an operation. Could also be attentiondirecting if scrap is an area that might require management attention. 4. Attention directing. Focuses attention on areas that need attention. 5. Attention directing. Helps managers learn about the information contained in aperformance report. 6. Scorekeeping. The statement reports what has happened. Could also be attentiondirecting if the report highlights a problem or issue. 7. Problem solving. Assuming the cost comparison is to help the manager decidebetween two alternatives, this is problem solving. 8. Attention directing. Variances point out areas where results differ fromexpectations. Interpreting them directs attention to possible causes of the differences. 9. Problem solving. Aids a decision about where to make parts. 10. Attention directing and problem solving. Budgeting involves making decisionsabout planned activities -- hence, aiding problem solving. Budgets also direct attention to areas of opportunity or concern --hence, directing attention. Reporting against the budget also has a scorekeeping dimension.2 Copyright ?2021 Pearson Education, Inc., Publishing as Prentice Hall.1-A2 1. 2.(15-20 min.)Room rental FoodEntertainment Decorations TotalBudgeted Amounts $ 140 700 600 220 $1,660 Actual Amounts $ 140865 600 260 $1,865 Deviations or Variances $ 0 165U 0 40U $205U Because of the management by exception rule, room rental and entertainment require no explanation. The actual expenditure for food exceeded the budgetby $165. Of this $165, $150 is explained by attendance of 15 persons morethan budgeted (at a budget of $10 per person for food) and $15 is explained by expenditures above $10 per person.Actual expenditures for decorations were $40 more than the budget. The decorations committee should be asked for an explanation of the excess expenditures.1-A3 (10 min.)All of the situations raise possibilities for violation of the integrity standard. In addition, the manager in each situation must address an additional ethical standard: 1. The General Mills manager must respect the confidentiality standard. He or sheshould not disclose any information about the new cereal. 2. Felix must address his level of competence for the assignment. If his supervisorknows his level of expertise and wants an analysis from a “layperson” point of view, he should do it. However, if the supervisor expects an expert analysis, Felix must disclose his lack of competence. 3. The credibility standard should cause Mary Sue to decline to omit the informationfrom the budget. It is relevant information, and its omission may mislead readers of the budget.3 Copyright ?2021 Pearson Education, Inc., Publishing as Prentice Hall.1-B1 (15-20 min.)Information is often useful for more than one function, so the following classifications for each activity are not definitive but serve as a starting point for discussion: 1. Problem solving. Provides information for deciding between two alternativecourses of action. 2. Scorekeeping. Recording what has happened. If amounts are compared withexpectations, this could also serve an attention-directing function. 3. Problem solving. Helps a manager decide among alternatives. 4. Attention directing. Directs attention to the use of overtime labor. Alsoscorekeeping. 5. Problem solving. Provides information to managers for deciding whether to movecorporate headquarters. 6. Attention directing. Directs attention to why nursing costs increased. 7. Attention directing. Directs attention to areas where actual results differed fromthe budget. 8. Problem solving. Helps the vice-president decide which course of action is best. 9. Problem solving. Produces information to help the marketing department make adecision about a marketing campaign. 10. Scorekeeping. Records actual overtime costs. If results are compared withexpectations, also attention directing. 11. Attention directing. Directs attention to stores with either high or low ratios ofadvertising expenses to sales. 12. Attention directing. Directs attentionto causes of returns of the drug. 13. Attention directing or problem solving, depending on the use of the schedule. If itis to identify areas of high fuel usage it is attention directing. If itis to plan for purchases of fuel, it is problem solving. 14. Scorekeeping. Records items needed for financial statements.4 Copyright ?2021 Pearson Education, Inc., Publishing as Prentice Hall.1-B2 (10-15 min.)1 & 2. Budget Actual Variance Sales $75,000 $74,600 $ 400U Costs: Fireworks $36,000 $35,500 $500F Labor 15,000 18,000 3,000U Other 8,000 7,910 90F Total cost 59,000 61,410 2,410U Profit $16,000 $13,190 $2,810U 3. The cost of fireworks was $500 ÷ $36,000 = 1.4%under budget while sales wasjust 400 ÷ $75,000 = .5% under budget. Did fireworks suppliers lowertheir prices? Were selling prices set higher than expected? There should be some explanation for the lower cost of fireworks. The labor cost was $3,000÷ $15,000 =20% over budget. Sales and other costswere close to budget in percentage terms. Why was labor cost much higherthan expected?1-B3 (15 - 20 min.) 1. A code of conduct is a document specifying theethical standards of anorganization. 2. Different companies include different elements intheir codes of conduct. Some ofthe items included in companies’ codes of condu ct include maintaining adress code, avoiding illegal drugs, following instructions of superiors, being reliable and prompt, maintaining confidentiality, not accepting personal gifts fromstakeholders as a result of company role, avoiding racial or sexual discrimination, avoiding conflict of interest, complying with laws and regulations, not using organization’s property for personal use, andreporting illegal or questionable activity. Some companies have a simple code with little detail, and others have long lists of rules and regulations regarding appropriate conduct. The key is that the code of conduct must fit with the corporate culture. 3. Simply having a code of conduct does not guarantee ethical behavior byemployees. Most important is top management’s ethical example and its support of the code of conduct. A company’s performance evaluation and reward system must be consistent with its code of conduct. If unethical actions are rewarded, they will be encouraged even if they violate the code of conduct.5 Copyright ?2021 Pearson Education, Inc., Publishing as Prentice Hall.感谢您的阅读,祝您生活愉快。

《管理会计》英文版课后习题答案

《管理会计》英文版课后习题答案

第二章产品成本计算Exercises2–1(指教材上的第2章练习第1题,下同)1. Part #72A Part #172CSteel* $ 12.00 $ 18.00Setup cost** 6.00 6.00Total $ 18.00 $ 24.00*($1.00 ? 12; $1.00 ? 18)**($60,000/10,000)Steel cost is assigned by calculating a cost per ounce and then multiplying this by the ounces used by each part:Cost per ounce= $3,000,000/3,000,000 ounces= $1.00 per ounceSetup cost is assigned by calculating the cost per setup and then dividing this by the number of units in each batch (there are 20 setups per year):Cost per setup = $1,200,000/20= $60,0002. The cost of steel is assigned through the driver tracing using the number of ounces of steel, and the cost of the setups is assigned through driver tracing also using number of setups as the driver.3. The assumption underlying number of setups as the driver is that each part uses an equal amount of setup time. Since Part #72A uses double the setup time of Part #172C, it makes sense to assign setup costs based on setup time instead of number of setups. This illustrates the importance of identifying drivers that reflect the true underlying consumption pattern. Using setup hours [(40 ?10) + (20 ? 10)], we get the following rate per hour:Cost per setup hour = $1,200,000/600= $2,000 per hourThe cost per unit is obtained by dividing each part’s total setup costs by the number of units:Part #72A = ($2,000 ? 400)/100,000 = $8.00Part #172C = ($2,000 ? 200)/100,000 = $4.00Thus, Part #72A has its unit cost increased by $2.00, while Part #172C has its unit cost decreased by $2.00.problems2–51. Nursing hours required per year: 4 ? 24 hours ? 364 days* = 34,944*Note: 364 days = 7 days ? 52 weeksNumber of nurses = 34,944 hrs./2,000 hrs. per nurse = 17.472Annual nursing cost = (17 ? $45,000) + $22,500= $787,500Cost per patient day = $787,500/10,000 days= $78.75 per day (for either type of patient)2. Nursing hours act as the driver. If intensive care uses half of the hours and normal care the other half, then 50 percent of the cost is assigned to each patient category. Thus, the cost per patient day by patient category is as follows:Intensive care = $393,750*/2,000 days= $196.88 per dayNormal care = $393,750/8,000 days= $49.22 per day*$525,000/2 = $262,500The cost assignment reflects the actual usage of the nursing resource and, thus, should be more accurate. Patient days would be accurate only if intensive care patients used the same nursing hours per day as normal care patients.3. The salary of the nurse assigned only to intensive care is a directly traceable cost. To assign the other nursing costs, the hours of additional usage would need to be measured. Thus, both direct tracing and driver tracing would be used to assign nursing costs for this new setting.2–61. Bella Obra CompanyStatement of Cost of Services SoldFor the Year Ended June 30, 2006Direct materials:Beginning inventory $ 300,000Add: Purchases 600,000Materials available $ 900,000Less: Ending inventory 450,000*Direct materials used $ 450,000Direct labor 12,000,000Overhead 1,500,000Total service costs added $ 13,950,000Add: Beginning work in process 900,000Total production costs $ 14,850,000Less: Ending work in process 1,500,000Cost of services sold $ 13,350,000*Materials available less materials used2. The dominant cost is direct labor (presumably the salaries of the 100 professionals). Although labor is the major cost of providing many services, it is not always the case. For example, the dominant cost for some medical services may be overhead (e.g., CAT scans). In some services, the dominant cost may be materials (e.g., funeral services).3. Bella Obra CompanyIncome StatementFor the Year Ended June 30, 2006Sales $ 21,000,000Cost of services sold 13,350,000Gross margin $ 7,650,000Less operating expenses:Selling expenses $ 900,000Administrative expenses 750,000 1,650,000Income before income taxes $ 6,000,0004. Services have four attributes that are not possessed by tangible products: (1) intangibility, (2) perishability, (3) inseparability, and (4) heterogeneity. Intangibility means that the buyers of services cannot see, feel, hear, or taste a service before it is bought. Perishability means that services cannot be stored. This property affects the computation in Requirement 1. Inability to store services means that there will never be any finished goods inventories, thus making the cost of services produced equivalent to cost of services sold. Inseparability simply means that providers and buyers of services must be in direct contact for an exchange to take place. Heterogeneity refers to the greater chance for variation in the performance of services than in the production of tangible products.2–71. Direct materials:Magazine (5,000 ? $0.40) $ 2,000Brochure (10,000 ? $0.08) 800 $ 2,800Direct labor:Magazine [(5,000/20) ? $10] $ 2,500Brochure [(10,000/100) ? $10] 1,000 3,500Manufacturing overhead:Rent $ 1,400Depreciation [($40,000/20,000) ? 350*] 700Setups 600Insurance 140Power 350 3,190Cost of goods manufactured $ 9,490*Production is 20 units per printing hour for magazines and 100 units per printing hour for brochures, yielding monthly machine hours of 350 [(5,000/20) + (10,000/100)]. This is also monthly labor hours, as machine labor only operates the presses.2. Direct materials $ 2,800Direct labor 3,500Total prime costs $ 6,300Magazine:Direct materials $ 2,000Direct labor 2,500Total prime costs $ 4,500Brochure:Direct materials $ 800Direct labor 1,000Total prime costs $ 1,800Direct tracing was used to assign prime costs to the two products.3. Total monthly conversion cost:Direct labor $ 3,500Overhead 3,190Total $ 6,690Magazine:Direct labor $ 2,500Overhead:Power ($1 ? 250) $ 250Depreciation ($2 ? 250) 500Setups (2/3 ? $600) 400Rent and insurance ($4.40 ? 250 DLH)* 1,100 2,250Total $ 4,750Brochure:Direct labor $ 1,000Overhead:Power ($1 ? 100) $ 100Depreciation ($2 ? 100) 200Setups (1/3 ? $600) 200Rent and insurance ($4.40 ? 100 DLH)* 440 940Total $ 1,940*Rent and insurance cannot be traced to each product so the costs are assigned using direct labor hours: $1,540/350 DLH = $4.40 per direct labor hour. The other overhead costs are traced according to their usage. Depreciation and power are assigned by using machine hours (250 for magazines and 100 for brochures): $350/350 = $1.00 per machine hour for power and $40,000/20,000 = $2.00 per machine hour for depreciation. Setups are assigned according to the time required. Since magazines use twice as much time, they receive twice the cost: Letting X = the pro?portion of setup time used for brochures, 2X + X = 1 implies a cost assignment ratio of 2/3 for magazines and 1/3 for brochures.Exercises3–11. Resource Total Cost Unit CostPlastic1 $ 10,800 $0.027Direct labor andvariable overhead2 8,000 0.020Mold sets3 20,000 0.050Other facility costs4 10,000 0.025Total $ 48,800 $0.12210.90 ? $0.03 ? 400,000 = $10,800; $10,800/400,000 = $0.0272$0.02 ? 400,000 = $8,000; $8,000/400,000 = $0.023$5,000 ? 4 quarters = $20,000; $20,000/400,000 = $0.054$10,000; $10,000/400,000 = $0.0252. Plastic, direct labor, and variable overhead are flexible resources; molds and other facility costs are committed resources. The cost of plastic, direct labor, and variable overhead are strictly variable. The cost of the molds is fixed for the particular action figure being produced; it is a step cost for the production of action figures in general. Other facility costs are strictly fixed.3–3High (1,400, $7,950); Low (700, $5,150)V = ($7,950 – $5,150)/(1,400 – 700)= $2,800/700 = $4 per oil changeF = $5,150 – $4(700)= $5,150 – $2,800 = $2,350Cost = $2,350 + $4 (oil changes)Predicted cost for January = $2,350 + $4(1,000) = $6,350problems3–61. High (1,700, $21,000); Low (700, $15,000)V = (Y2 – Y1)/(X2 – X1)= ($21,000 – $15,000)/(1,700 – 700) = $6 per receiving orderF = Y2 – VX2= $21,000 – ($6)(1,700) = $10,800Y = $10,800 + $6X2. Output of spreadsheet regression routine with number of receiving orders as the independent variable:Constant 4512.98701298698Std. Err. of Y Est. 3456.24317476605R Squared 0.633710482694768No. of Observations 10Degrees of Freedom 8X Coefficient(s) 13.3766233766234Std. Err. of Coef. 3.59557461331427V = $13.38 per receiving order (rounded)F = $4,513 (rounded)Y = $4,513 + $13.38XR2 = 0.634, or 63.4%Receiving orders explain about 63.4 percent of the variability in receiving cost, providing evidence that Tracy’s choice o f a cost driver is reasonable. However, other drivers may need to be considered because 63.4 percent may not be strong enough to justify the use of only receiving orders.3. Regression with pounds of material as the independent variable:Constant 5632.28109733183Std. Err. of Y Est. 2390.10628259277R Squared 0.824833789433823No. of Observations 10Degrees of Freedom 8X Coefficient(s) 0.0449642991356633Std. Err. of Coef. 0.0073259640055344V = $0.045 per pound of material delivered (rounded)F = $5,632 (rounded)Y = $5,632 + $0.045XR2 = 0.825, or 82.5%Pounds of material delivered explains about 82.5 percent of the variability in receiving cost. This is a better result than that of the receiving orders and should convince Tracy to try multiple regression.4. Regression routine with pounds of material and number of receiving orders as the independent variables:Constant 752.104072925631Std. Err. of Y Est. 1350.46286973443R Squared 0.951068418023306No. of Observations 10Degrees of Freedom 7X Coefficient(s) 0.0333883151096915 7.14702865269395Std. Err. of Coef. 0.00495524841198368 1.68182916088492V1 = $0.033 per pound of material delivered (rounded)V2 = $7.147 per receiving order (rounded)F = $752 (rounded)Y = $752 + $0.033a + $7.147bR2 = 0.95, or 95%Multiple regression with both variables explains 95 percent of the variability in receiving cost. This is the best result.5–21. Job #57 Job #58 Job #59Balance, 7/1 $ 22,450 $ 0 $ 0Direct materials 12,900 9,900 35,350Direct labor 20,000 6,500 13,000Applied overhead:Power 750 600 3,600Material handling 1,500 300 6,000Purchasing 250 1,000 250Total cost $ 57,850 $ 18,300 $ 58,2002. Ending balance in Work in Process = Job #58 = $18,3003. Ending balance in Finished Goods = Job #59 = $58,2004. Cost of Goods Sold = Job #57 = $57,850problems5–31. Overhead rate = $180/$900 = 0.20 or 20% of direct labor dollars.(This rate was calculated using information from the Ladan job; however, the Myron and Coe jobs would give the same answer.)2. Ladan Myron Coe Walker WillisBeginning WIP $ 1,730 $1,180 $2,500 $ 0 $ 0Direct materials 400 150 260 800 760Direct labor 800 900 650 350 900Applied overhead 160 180 130 70 180Total $ 3,090 $2,410 $3,540 $ 1,220 $ 1,840Note: This is just one way of setting up the job-order cost sheets. You might prefer to keep the detail on the materials, labor, and overhead in beginning inventory costs.3. Since the Ladan and Myron jobs were completed, the others must still be in process. Therefore, the ending balance in Work in Process is the sum of the costs of the Coe, Walker, and Willis jobs.Coe $3,540Walker 1,220Willis 1,840Ending Work in Process $6,600Cost of Goods Sold = Ladan job + Myron job = $3,090 + $2,410 = $5,5004. Naman CompanyIncome StatementFor the Month Ended June 30, 20XXSales (1.5 ? $5,500) $8,250Cost of goods sold 5,500Gross margin $2,750Marketing and administrative expenses 1,200Operating income $1,5505–201. Overhead rate = $470,000/50,000 = $9.40 per MHr2. Department A: $250,000/40,000 = $6.25 per MHrDepartment B: $220,000/10,000 = $22.00 per MHr3. Job #73 Job #74Plantwide:70 ? $9.40 = $658 70 ? $9.40 = $658Departmental:20 ? $6.25 $ 125.00 50 ? $6.25 $ 312.5050 ? $22 1,100.00 20 ? $22 440.00$ 1,225.00 $ 752.50Department B appears to be more overhead intensive, so jobs spending more time in Department B ought to receive more overhead. Thus, departmental rates provide more accuracy.4. Plantwide rate: $250,000/40,000 = $6.25Department B: $62,500/10,000 = $6.25Job #73 Job #74Plantwide:70 ? $6.25 = $437.50 70 ? $6.25 = $437.50Departmental:20 ? $6.25 $ 125.00 50 ? $6.25 $ 312.5050 ? $6.25 312.50 20 ? $6.25 125.00$ 437.50 $ 437.50Assuming that machine hours is a good cost driver, the departmental rates reveal that overhead consumption is the same in each department. In this case, there is no need for departmental rates, and a plantwide rate is sufficient.5–41. Overhead rate = $470,000/50,000 = $9.40 per MHr2. Department A: $250,000/40,000 = $6.25 per MHrDepartment B: $220,000/10,000 = $22.00 per MHr3. Job #73 Job #74Plantwide:70 ? $9.40 = $658 70 ? $9.40 = $658Departmental:20 ? $6.25 $ 125.00 50 ? $6.25 $ 312.5050 ? $22 1,100.00 20 ? $22 440.00$ 1,225.00 $ 752.50Department B appears to be more overhead intensive, so jobs spending more time in Department B ought to receive more overhead. Thus, departmental rates provide more accuracy.4. Plantwide rate: $250,000/40,000 = $6.25Department B: $62,500/10,000 = $6.25Job #73 Job #74Plantwide:70 ? $6.25 = $437.50 70 ? $6.25 = $437.50Departmental:20 ? $6.25 $ 125.00 50 ? $6.25 $ 312.5050 ? $6.25 312.50 20 ? $6.25 125.00$ 437.50 $ 437.50Assuming that machine hours is a good cost driver, the departmental rates reveal that overhead consumption is the same in each department. In this case, there is no need for departmental rates, and a plantwide rate is sufficient.5–51. Last year’s unit-based overhead rate = $50,000/10,000 = $5This year’s unit-based overhead rate = $100,000/10,000 = $10Last Year This YearBike cost:2 ? $20 $ 40 $ 403 ? $12 36 36Overhead:5 ? $5 255 ? $10 50Total $101 $126Price last year = $101 ? 1.40 = $141.40/dayPrice this year = $126 ? 1.40 = $176.40/dayThis is a $35 increase over last year, nearly a 25 percent increase. No doubt the Carsons arenot pleased and would consider looking around for other recreational possibilities.2. Purchasing rate = $30,000/10,000 = $3 per purchase orderPower rate = $20,000/50,000 = $0.40 per kilowatt hourMaintenance rate = $6,000/600 = $10 per maintenance hourOther rate = $44,000/22,000 = $2 per DLHBike Rental Picnic CateringPurchasing$3 ? 7,000 $21,000$3 ? 3,000 $ 9,000Power$0.40 ? 5,000 2,000$0.40 ? 45,000 18,000Maintenance$10 ? 500 5,000$10 ? 100 1,000Other$2 ? 11,000 22,000 22,000Total overhead $50,000 $50,0003. This year’s bike rental overhead rate = $50,000/10,000 = $5Carson rental cost = (2 ? $20) + (3 ? $12) + (5 ? $5) = $101Price = 1.4 ? $101 = $141.40/day4. Catering rate = $50,000/11,000 = $4.55* per DLHCost of Estes job:Bike rental rate (2 ? $7.50) $15.00Bike conversion cost (2 ? $5.00) 10.00Catering materials 12.00Catering conversion (1 ? $4.55) 4.55Total cost $41.55*Rounded5. The use of ABC gives Mountain View Rentals a better idea of the types and costs of activities that are used in their business. Adding Level 4 bikes will increase the use of the most expensive activities, meaning that the rental rate will no longer be an average of $5 per rental day. Mountain View Rentals might need to set a Level 4 price based on the increased cost of both the bike and conversion cost.分步成本法6–11. Cutting Sewing PackagingDepartment Department DepartmentDirect materials $5,400 $ 900 $ 225Direct labor 150 1,800 900Applied overhead 750 3,600 900Transferred-in cost:From cutting 6,300From sewing 12,600Total manufacturing cost $6,300 $12,600 $14,6252. a. Work in Process—Sewing 6,300Work in Process—Cutting 6,300b. Work in Process—Packaging 12,600Work in Process—Sewing 12,600c. Finished Goods 14,625Work in Process—Packaging 14,625 3. Unit cost = $14,625/600 = $24.38* per pair6–21. Units transferred out: 27,000 + 33,000 – 16,200 = 43,8002. Units started and completed: 43,800 – 27,000 = 16,8003. Physical flow schedule:Units in beginning work in process 27,000Units started during the period 33,000Total units to account for 60,000Units started and completed 16,800Units completed from beginning work in process 27,000Units in ending work in process 16,200Total units accounted for 60,0004. Equivalent units of production:Materials ConversionUnits completed 43,800 43,800Add: Units in ending work in process:(16,200 ? 100%) 16,200(16,200 ? 25%) 4,050 Equivalent units of output 60,000 47,8506–31. Physical flow schedule:Units to account for:Units in beginning work in process 80,000Units started during the period 160,000Total units to account for 240,000Units accounted for:Units completed and transferred out:Started and completed 120,000From beginning work in process 80,000 200,000 Units in ending work in process 40,000Total units accounted for 240,0002. Units completed 200,000Add: Units in ending WIP ? Fraction complete(40,000 ? 20%) 8,000Equivalent units of output 208,0003. Unit cost = ($374,400 + $1,258,400)/208,000 = $7.854. Cost transferred out = 200,000 ? $7.85 = $1,570,000Cost of ending WIP = 8,000 ? $7.85 = $62,8005. Costs to account for:Beginning work in process $ 374,400Incurred during June 1,258,400Total costs to account for $ 1,632,800Costs accounted for:Goods transferred out $ 1,570,000Goods in ending work in process 62,800Total costs accounted for $ 1,632,8006–31、Units t0 account for:Units in beginning work in process(25% completed) 10000Units started during the period 70000 Total units to account for 80000 Units accounted forUnits completed and transferred outStarted and completed 50000From beginning work in process 10000 60000 Units in ending work in process(60% completed) 20000 Total units accounted for 80000 2、60000+20000×60%=72000(units)3、Unit cost for materials:($/unit)Unit cost for convension:($/unit)Total unit cost:5+1.13=6.13($/unit)4、The cost of units of transferred out:60000×6.13=367800($)The cost of units of ending work in process:20000×5+20000×20%×1.13=113560($)作业成本法4–21. Predetermined rates:Drilling Department: Rate = $600,000/280,000 = $2.14* per MHrAssembly Department: Rate = $392,000/200,000= $1.96 per DLH*Rounded2. Applied overhead:Drilling Department: $2.14 ? 288,000 = $616,320Assembly Department: $1.96 ? 196,000 = $384,160Overhead variances:Drilling Assembly TotalActual overhead $602,000 $ 412,000 $ 1,014,000Applied overhead 616,320 384,160 1,000,480Overhead variance $ (14,320) over $ 27,840 under $ 13,5203. Unit overhead cost = [($2.14 ? 4,000) + ($1.96 ? 1,600)]/8,000= $11,696/8,000= $1.46**Rounded4–31. Yes. Since direct materials and direct labor are directly traceable to each product, their cost assignment should be accurate.2. Elegant: (1.75 ? $9,000)/3,000 = $5.25 per briefcaseFina: (1.75 ? $3,000)/3,000 = $1.75 per briefcaseNote: Overhead rate = $21,000/$12,000 = $1.75 per direct labor dollar (or 175 percent of direct labor cost).There are more machine and setup costs assigned to Elegant than Fina. This is clearly a distortion because the production of Fina is automated and uses the machine resources much more than the handcrafted Elegant. In fact, the consumption ratio for machining is 0.10 and 0.90 (using machine hours as the measure of usage). Thus, Fina uses nine times the machining resources as Elegant. Setup costs are similarly distorted. The products use an equal number of setups hours. Yet, if direct labor dollars are used, then the Elegant briefcase receives three times more machining costs than the Fina briefcase.3. Overhead rate = $21,000/5,000= $4.20 per MHrElegant: ($4.20 ? 500)/3,000 = $0.70 per briefcaseFina: ($4.20 ? 4,500)/3,000 = $6.30 per briefcaseThis cost assignment appears more reasonable given the relative demands each product places on machine resources. However, once a firm moves to a multiproduct setting, using only one activity driver to assign costs will likely produce product cost distortions. Products tend to make different demands on overhead activities, and this should be reflected in overhead cost assignments. Usually, this means the use of both unit- and nonunit-level activity drivers. In this example, there is a unit-level activity (machining) and a nonunit-level activity (setting up equipment). The consumption ratios for each (using machine hours and setup hours as the activity drivers) are as follows:Elegant FinaMachining 0.10 0.90 (500/5,000 and 4,500/5,000)Setups 0.50 0.50 (100/200 and 100/200)Setup costs are not assigned accurately. Two activity rates are needed—one based on machine hours and the other on setup hours:Machine rate: $18,000/5,000 = $3.60 per MHrSetup rate: $3,000/200 = $15 per setup hourCosts assigned to each product:Machining: Elegant Fina$3.60 ? 500 $ 1,800$3.60 ? 4,500 $ 16,200Setups:$15 ? 100 1,500 1,500Total $ 3,300 $ 17,700Units ÷3,000 ÷3,000Unit overhead cost $ 1.10 $ 5.904:Elegant Unit overhead cost:[9000+3000+18000*500/5000+3000/2]/3000=$5.1 Fina Unit overhead cost:[3000+3000+18000*4500/5000+3000/2]/3000=$7.94–51. Deluxe Percent Regular PercentPrice $900 100% $750 100%Cost 576 64 600 80Unit gross profit $324 36% $150 20%Total gross profit:($324 ? 100,000) $32,400,000($150 ? 800,000) $120,000,0002. Calculation of unit overhead costs:Deluxe gularUnit-level:Machining:$200 ? 100,000 $20,000,000$200 ? 300,000 $60,000,000Batch-level:Setups:$3,000 ? 300 900,000$3,000 ? 200 600,000Packing:$20 ? 100,000 2,000,000$20 ? 400,000 8,000,000Product-level:Engineering:$40 ? 50,000 2,000,000$40 ? 100,000 4,000,000Facility-level:Providing space:$1 ? 200,000 200,000$1 ? 800,000 800,000Total overhead $25,100,000 $73,400,000Units ÷100,000 ÷800,000Overhead per unit $251 $91.75Deluxe Percent Regular PercentPrice $900 100% $750.00 100%Cost 780* 87*** 574.50** 77***Unit gross profit $120 13%*** $175.50 23%***Total gross profit:($120 ? 100,000) $12,000,000($175.50 ? 800,000) $140,400,000*$529 + $251**$482.75 + $91.753. Using activity-based costing, a much different picture of the deluxe and regular products emerges. The regular model appears to be more profitable. Perhaps it should be emphasized.4–61. JIT Non-JITSalesa $12,500,000 $12,500,000Allocationb 750,000 750,000a$125 ? 100,000, where $125 = $100 + ($100 ? 0.25), and 100,000 is the average order size times the number of ordersb0.50 ? $1,500,0002. Activity rates:Ordering rate = $880,000/220 = $4,000 per sales orderSelling rate = $320,000/40 = $8,000 per sales callService rate = $300,000/150 = $2,000 per service callJIT Non-JITOrdering costs:$4,000 ? 200 $ 800,000$4,000 ? 20 $ 80,000Selling costs:$8,000 ? 20 160,000$8,000 ? 20 160,000Service costs:$2,000 ? 100 200,000$2,000 ? 50 100,000Total $1,160,000 $340,0 0For the non-JIT customers, the customer costs amount to $750,000/20 = $37,500 per order under the original allocation. Using activity assign?ments, this drops to $340,000/20 = $17,000 per order, a difference of $20,500 per order. For an order of 5,000 units, the order price can be decreased by $4.10 per unit without affecting customer profitability. Overall profitability will decrease, however, unless the price for orders is increased to JIT customers.3. It sounds like the JIT buyers are switching their inventory carrying costs to Emery without any significant benefit to Emery. Emery needs to increase prices to reflect the additional demands on customer-support activities. Furthermore, additional price increases may be needed to reflectthe increased number of setups, purchases, and so on, that are likely occurring inside the plant. Emery should also immediately initiate discussions with its JIT customers to begin negotiations for achieving some of the benefits that a JIT supplier should have, such as long-term contracts. The benefits of long-term contracting may offset most or all of the increased costs from the additional demands made on other activities.4–71. Supplier cost:First, calculate the activity rates for assigning costs to suppliers:Inspecting components: $240,000/2,000 = $120 per sampling hourReworking products: $760,500/1,500 = $507 per rework hourWarranty work: $4,800/8,000 = $600 per warranty hourNext, calculate the cost per component by supplier:Supplier cost:Vance FoyPurchase cost:$23.50 ? 400,000 $ 9,400,000$21.50 ? 1,600,000 $ 34,400,000Inspecting components:$120 ? 40 4,800$120 ? 1,960 235,200Reworking products:$507 ? 90 45,630$507 ? 1,410 714,870Warranty work:$600 ? 400 240,000$600 ? 7,600 4,560,000Total supplier cost $ 9,690,430 $ 39,910,070Units supplied ÷400,000 ÷1,600,000Unit cost $ 24.23* $ 24.94**RoundedThe difference is in favor of Vance; however, when the price concession is considered, the cost of Vance is $23.23, which is less than Foy’s component. Lumus should accept the contractual offer made by Vance.4–7 Concluded2. Warranty hours would act as the best driver of the three choices. Using this driver, the rate is $1,000,000/8,000 = $125 per warranty hour. The cost assigned to each component would be:Vance FoyLost sales:$125 ? 400 $ 50,000$125 ? 7,600 $ 950,000$ 50,000 $ 950,000Units supplied ÷400,000 ÷1,600,000Increase in unit cost $ 0.13* $ 0.59**Rounded$0.075 per unitCategory II: $45/1,000 = $0.045 per unitCategory III: $45/1,500 = $0.03 per unitCategory I, which has the smallest batches, is the most undercosted of the three categories. Furthermore, the unit ordering cost is quite high relative to Category I’s selling price (9 to 15 percent of the selling price). This suggests that something should be done to reduce the order-filling costs.3. With the pricing incentive feature, the average order size has been increased to 2,000 units for all three product families. The number of orders now processed can be calculated as follows:Orders = [(600 ? 50,000) + (1,000 ? 30,000) + (1,500 ? 20,000)]/2,000= 45,000Reduction in orders = 100,000 – 45,000 = 55,000Steps that can be reduced = 55,000/2,000 = 27 (rounding down to nearest whole number)There were initially 50 steps: 100,000/2,000Reduction in resource spending:Step-fixed costs: $50,000 ? 27 = $1,350,000Variable activity costs: $20 ? 55,000 = 1,100,000$2,450,000预算9-4Norton, Inc.Sales Budget For the Coming YearModel Units Price Total SalesLB-1 50,400 $29.00 $1,461,600LB-2 19,800 15.00 297,000WE-6 25,200 10.40 262,080 WE-7 17,820 10.00 178,200 WE-8 9,600 22.00 211,200 WE-9 4,000 26.00 104,000 Total $2,514,080二、1. Raylene’s Flowers and GiftsProduction Budget for Gift BasketsFor September, October, November, and DecemberSept. Oct. Nov. D ec.Sales 200 150 180 250Desired ending inventory 15 18 25 10Total needs 215 168 205 260Less: Beginning inventory 20 15 18 25 Units produced 195 153 187 2352. Raylene’s Flowers and GiftsDirect Materials Purchases BudgetFor September, October, and NovemberFruit: Sept. Oct. Nov.Production 195 153 187? Amount/basket (lbs.) ? 1 ? 1 ?1Needed for production 195 153 187Desired ending inventory 8 9 12Needed 203 162 200Less: Beginning inventory 10 8 9Purchases193 154 190Small gifts: Sept. Oct. Nov.Production 195 153 187 ? Amount/basket (items) ? 5 ? 5 ? 5Needed for production 975 765 935Desired ending inventory 383 468 588Needed 1,358 1,233 1,523Less: Beginning inventory 488 383 468Purchases 870 850 1,055Cellophane: Sept. Oct. Nov.Production 195 153 187。

亨格瑞管理会计英文第15版练习答案06

亨格瑞管理会计英文第15版练习答案06

CHAPTER 6 COVERAGE OF LEARNING OBJECTIVESwhether a jointproduct should beprocessed beyondthe split-off point.A4,B5 40 57,59LO6: Decidewhether to keep orreplace equipment.26,39,41 52,58,64 71LO7: Identifyirrelevant andmisspecified costs.LO8: Discuss howB6 43 60 performancemeasures canaffect decisionmaking.CHAPTER 6Relevant Information and Decision Making With a Focus on OperationalDecisions6-A1 (20 min)1. The key to this question is what will happen to the fixed overheadcosts if production of the boxes is discontinued. Assume that all$60,000 of fixed costs will continue. Then, Sunshine State willlose $20,000 by purchasing the boxes from Weyerhaeuser:Payment to Weyerhaeuser, 80,000 × $2.10 $168,000Costs saved, variable costs 148,000Additional costs $ 20,0002. Some subjective factors are:Might Weyerhaeuser raise prices if Sunshine State closed downits box-making facility?Will sub-contracting the box production affect the quality ofthe boxes?Is a timely supply of boxes assured, even if the number neededchanges?Does Sunshine State sacrifice proprietary information whendisclosing the box specifications to Weyerhaeuser?3. In this case the fixed costs are relevant. However, it is not thedepreciation on the old equipment that is relevant. It is the costof the new equipment. Annual cost savings by not producing theboxes now will be:Variable costs $148,000Investment avoided (annualized) 80,000Total saved $228,000 The payment to Weyerhaeuser is $228,000 - $168,000 = $60,000less than the savings, so Sunshine State would be $60,000 better off subcontracting the production of the boxes.6-A2 (10 min.)1. Contribution margins:Plain = $70 - $55 = $15Professional = $100 - $75 = $25Contribution margin ratios:Plain = $15 ÷ $70 = 21.4%Professional = $25 ÷ $100 = 25%2. PlainProfessionala. Units per hour 2 1b. Contribution margin per unit $15 $25Contribution margin per hour $30 $25 Total contribution for 20,000 hours $600,000 $500,000 3. The plain circular saws are the best use of the scarce machinehours. For a given capacity, the criterion for maximizing profits isto obtain the greatest possible contribution to profit for each unitof the limiting or scarce factor. Moreover, fixed costs areirrelevant unless their total is affected by the choice of products.6-A3 (15 min.) Table is in thousands of dollars.1,2. (a) (b) (a)-(b) (c) (a)-(b)-(c)SeparableSales Sales Costs IncrementalBeyond at Incremental Beyond Gain orSplit-Off Split-Off Sales Split-Off (Loss)A 230 54 176 190 (14)B 330 32 298 300 (2)C 175 54 121 100 21 Increase in overall operating income from further processing of A, B, andC 5The incremental analysis indicates that Product C should be processed further, but Products A and B should be sold at split-off. The overall operating income would be $44,000, as follows:Sales: $54,000 + $32,000 + $175,000 $261,000 Joint cost of goods sold $117,000Separable cost of goods sold 100,000 217,000 Operating income $ 44,000 Compare this with the present operating income of $28,000. That is, $230,000 + $330,000 + $175,000 - ($190,000 + $300,000 + $100,000 + $117,000) = $28,000. The extra $16,000 of operating income comes from eliminating the $16,000 loss resulting from processing Products A and B beyond the split-off point.6-A4 (30-40 min.)Problem 6-60 is an extension of this problem. The two problems make a good combination.1. Operating inflows for each year, old machine:$910,000 - ($810,000 + $60,000) $40,000Operating inflows for each year, new machine:$910,000 - ($810,000 + $22,000*) $78,000* $60,000 - $38,000Cash flow statements (in thousands of dollars):Keep ReplaceThree ThreeYear Years Years Year Years Years1 2 & 3 Together 1 2 & 3 Together Receipts, inflows from operations40 40 120 78 78 234 Disbursements:Purchase of "old" equipment (90)* -- (90) (90) -- (90) Purchase of "new" equipment:Total costs less proceedsfrom disposal of "old"equipment ($99,000-$15,000) -- -- -- (84)-- (84)Net cash inflow (outflow) (50) 40 30 (96) 78 60* A ssumes that the outlay of $90,000 took place on January 2, 2010, or sometime during 2010. Some students will ignore this item, assuming correctly that it is irrelevant to the decision. However, note that a statement for the entire year was requested.The difference for three years taken together is $60,000 - $30,000 = $30,000. Note particularly that the $90,000 book value can be omitted from the comparison. Merely cross out the entire line; although the column totals will be affected, the net difference will still be $30,000.2. Income statements (in thousands of dollars):Keep ReplaceThree ThreeYears Years Year Years Years1, 2 & 3 Together 1 2 & 3TogetherSales 910 2,730 910 910 2,730 Expenses:Other expenses 810 2,430 810 810 2,430 Operating of machine 60 180 22 22 66 Depreciation 30 90* 33 33 99 Total expenses 900 2,700 865 865 2,595 Loss on disposal:Proceeds ("revenue") -- -- (15) -- (15) Book value ("expense") -- -- 90 -- 90* Loss -- -- 75 -- 75 Total charges 900 2,700 940 865 2,670 Net income 10 30 (30) 45 60* As in part (1), the $90,000 book value can be omitted from the comparison without changing the $30,000 difference. This would mean dropping the depreciation item of $30,000 per year (a cumulative effect of $90,000) under the "keep" alternative, and dropping the book value item of $90,000 in the loss on disposal computation under the "buy" alternative.Difference for three years together, $60,000 - $30,000 = $30,000.Note the motivational factors here. A manager may be reluctantto replace simply because the large loss on disposal will severelyharm the profit performance in Year 1.3. The net difference for the three years taken together would beunaffected because the item is a past cost. You can substituteany number for the original $90,000 figure without changing this answer.For example, examine how the results would change in part (1) by inserting $1 million where the $90,000 now appears (inthousands of dollars):Keep: Replace:Three Years Three YearsTogether TogetherDifferenceReceipts, inflows from operations 120 234 114 Disbursements:Purchase of old equipment (1,000) (1,000) 0 Purchase of new equipment:Gross price (99)Disposal proceeds of "old" 15 -- ( 84) (84) Net cash outflow ( 880) ( 850) 30 In sum, this may be a horrible situation. The manager reallyblundered. But keeping the old equipment will compound theblunder to the cumulative tune of $30,000 over the next threeyears.4. Diplomatically, Lee should try to convey the following. All of ustend to indulge in the erroneous idea that we can soothe thewounded pride of a bad purchase decision by using the iteminstead of replacing it. The fallacy is believing that a current orfuture action can influence the long-run impact of a past outlay.All past costs are down the drain. Nothing can change what hasalready happened. The $90,000 has been spent. Subsequentaccounting for the item is irrelevant. The schedules in parts (1)and (2) clearly show that we may completely ignore the $90,000original outlay and still have a correct analysis. The importantpoint is that the $90,000 is not an element of difference betweenalternatives and, therefore, may be safely ignored. The onlyrelevant items are those expected future items that will differbetween alternatives.5. The $90,000 purchase of the original equipment, the sales, andthe other expenses are irrelevant because they are common toboth alternatives. The relevant items are the following (inthousands of dollars):Three YearsTogetherKeep Replace Operating of machine(3 × $60; 3 × $22) $180 $ 66 Incremental cost of new machine:Total cost $99Less proceeds of old machine 15Incremental cost -- 84 Total relevant costs $180 $150 Difference in favor of buying $ 306-B1 (15-20 min.)1. Make BuyTotal Per Unit Total Per Unit Purchase cost €10,000,000€50 Direct material €5,500,000€27.50Direct labor 1,900,000 9.50Factory overhead, variable 1,100,000 5.50Factory overhead, fixedavoided 900,000 4.50Total relevant costs €9,400,000 €47.00 €10,000,000€50 Difference in favor of making €600,000 € 3.00The numerical difference in favor of making is €600,000 or €3.00per unit. The relevant fixed costs are €900,000, not €3,000,000.2. Buy and LeaveMake Capacity Idle Buy andRentRent revenue -- -- € 1,150,000 Obtaining of components €(9,400,000) €(10,000,000)€(10,000,000)Net relevant costs €(9,400,000) €(10,000,000) € (8,850,000) The final column indicates that buying the components andrenting the vacated capacity will yield the best results in this case.The favorable difference is €9,400,000 - €8,850,000 = €550,000.6-B2 (15 min.)1. If fixed manufacturing cost is applied to products at $1.00 permachine hour, it takes $.75 ÷ $1.00, or 3/4 of an hour toproduce one unit of XY-7. Similarly, it takes $.25 ÷ $1.00 or 1/4of an hour to produce BD-4.2. If there are 100,000 hours of capacity:XY-7: 100,000 hours ÷ 3/4 = 133,333 units.BD-4: 100,000 hours ÷ 1/4 = 400,000 units.Total contribution margins show that BD-4 should be produced, generating $200,000 of contribution margin, which is $66,667 more than would be earned by XY-7.Per Unit Units Total XY-7 $6.00 - ($3.00 + $2.00) = $1.00 133,333 $133,333 BD-4 $4.00 - ($1.50 + $2.00) = $ .50 400,000 $200,0006-B3 (15-20 min.)All amounts are in thousands of British pounds.The major lesson is that a product that shows an operating loss based on fully allocated costs may nevertheless be worth keeping. Why? Because it may produce a sufficiently high contribution to profit so that the firm would be better off with it than any other alternative.The emphasis should be on totals:Replace Magic Department WithExisting GeneralOperations Merchandise Electronic ProductsSales 6,000 -600 + 250 = 5,650 -600 + 200 = 5,600 Variable expenses 4,090 -390 + 175a= 3,875 -390 + 100 b= 3,800 Contribution margin 1,910 -210 + 75 = 1,775 -210 + 100 = 1,800 Fixed expenses 1,100 -120 + 0 = 980 -120 + 30 = 1,010 Operating income 810 - 90 + 75 = 795 - 90 + 70 = 790 a(100% - 30%) × 250b(100% - 50%) × 200The facts as stated indicate that the magic department should not be closed. First, the total operating income would drop. Second, fewer customers would come to the store, so sales in other departments maybe affected adversely.6-B4 (15 min.)1. Sales ($400 + $600 + $100) $1,100Costs:Raw materials $700Processing 100Total 800Profit $ 3002. Sales ($840 + $850 + $170) $1,860Costs:Joint costs $800Frozen dinner costs 440Salisbury steak costs 200Tanning costs 80Total costs 1,520Profit $ 340Although it is more profitable to process all three products furtherthan it is to sell them all at the split-off point, it is important tolook at the economic benefit from further processing of eachindividual product.3. Steaks to frozen dinners:Additional revenue from processing further ($840 - $400)$440Additional cost for processing further 440Increase (decrease) in profit from processing further $ 0Hamburger to Salisbury steaks:Additional revenue from processing further ($850 - $600)$250Additional cost for processing further 200Increase (decrease) in profit from processing further $ 50Untanned hide to tanned hide:Additional revenue from processing further ($170 - $100)$ 70Additional cost for processing further 80Increase (decrease) in profit from processing further $ (10)Only the hamburger dictates that it should be processed further,because it is the only product whose additional revenue forprocessing further exceeds the additional cost. You are indifferent about processing further steak to frozen dinners, as theincremental profit is 0.4. The resulting profit would be $350:Sales ($400 + $850 + $100) $1,350Costs:Joint costs $800Further processing of hamburger 200Total cost 1,000Profit $ 3506-B5 (15-20 min.)1. Three Years TogetherKeep Replace Difference Cash operating costs $42,000 $27,000 $15,000 Old equipment, book value:Periodic write-off asdepreciation 15,000 -or lump-sum write-off - 15,000 * Disposal value -6,000 *6,000 New equipment, acquisition cost 15,000 ** - 15,000 Total costs $57,000 $51,000 $ 6,000 *In a formal income statement, these two items would be combined as "loss on disposal" of $15,000 - $6,000 = $9,000.**In a formal income statement, written off as straight-linedeprec iation of $15,000 ÷ 3 = $5,000 for each of three years.2. Three Years TogetherKeep Replace Difference Cash operating costs $42,000 $27,000 $15,000 Disposal value of old equipment - -6,000 6,000 New equipment, acquisition cost - 15,000 - 15,000 Total relevant costs $42,000 $36,000 $ 6,000This tabulation is clearer because it focuses on only those items that affect the decision.3. Benefits of the replacement alternative* $15,000Deduct initial net cash outlay required* 9,000 Difference in favor of replacement $ 6,000 * 3 × ($14,000 - $9,000)** $15,000 - $6,000Also, the new equipment is likely to be faster, thus saving operator time. The latter is important, but it is not quantified in this problem.6-B6 (10 min.)1. The replacement alternative would be chosen because the countywould have $6,000 more cash accumulated in three years.2. The keep alternative would be chosen because the higher overallcosts of photocopying for the first year would be shown for thereplacement alternative (under accrual accounting):First YearKeep Replace Cash operating costs $14,000 $ 9,000 Depreciation expense 5,000 5,000 Loss on disposal 9,000 Total costs $19,000 $23,000 Thus, the performance evaluation model might motivate themanager to make a decision that would be undesirable in the longrun.6-1 An opportunity cost does not entail a disbursement of cash at any future time, whereas an outlay cost does entail an additional disbursement sooner or later.6-2 The $800 represents an opportunity cost. It is the amount forgone by rejecting an opportunity. It signifies that the value to the owner of keeping those strangers out of the summer house for that two-week period is at least $800.6-3 Accountants do not ordinarily record opportunity costs in accounting records because those records are traditionally concernedwith real transactions rather than possible transactions. It is impossible to record data on all lost opportunities.6-4 A differential cost is any difference in total cost or revenue between two alternatives. A differential cost is an incremental cost when one of the alternatives contains all the costs of the other plus someadditional costs. The additional costs are the incremental costs – which are also differential.6-5 No. Incremental cost has a broader meaning. It is the addition to total costs by the adoption of some course of action. Another term, marginal cost, is used by economists to indicate the addition to costs from the manufacture of one additional unit. Of course, marginal cost is indeed the incremental cost of one unit.6-6 The decline in costs would be called differential or incremental savings.6-7 Not necessarily. Qualitative factors can favor either making or buying. Often factors such as product quality and assurance of delivery schedules favor making. However, sometimes establishing long-term relationships with suppliers is an important qualitative factor favoring the purchase of components.6-8 The choice in many cases is not really whether to make or buy. Instead, the choice is how best to use available capacity.6-9 Yes. The costs that make a difference when a product or department is being deleted are the avoidable costs.6-10 Four examples of scarce factors are: (a) labor hours, (b) money (investment capital), (c) supervisory hours, and (d) computer hours.6-11 Joint products are two or more manufactured products that (1) have relatively significant sales values and (2) are not separately identifiable as individual products until their split-off point. Examples of joint products include chemicals, lumber, flour, and meat.6-12 The split-off point is where the individual products produced in a joint process become separately identifiable. Costs before the split-off point are irrelevant for decisions about the individual products. They affect the decision about whether to undertake the entire productionprocess, but they do not influence decisions about what to do with the individual products.6-13 Yes. Techniques for assigning joint-product costs to individual products are useful only for product costing, not for deciding on further processing after the split-off point. The product must be considered separately at that point apart from its joint cost. The proper basis of the decision on further processing is a comparison of incremental revenue versus incremental expense between the alternatives of selling at the split-off point and processing further.6-14 No. Once inventory has been purchased, the price paid is a sunk cost. It is true that selling at a price less than $5,000 would produce a reported loss. However, a sale at any price above $0 is economically beneficial provided that the only alternative is to scrap the inventory.6-15 No. Sunk costs are irrelevant to the replacement decision.6-16 No. Past costs are not relevant because they cannot be affected by a decision. Although past costs are often indispensable for formulating predictions, past costs themselves are not the predictions that are the inputs to decision models. Clear thinking is enhanced by these distinctions.6-17 Only b and c are relevant.a. Book value of old equipment is irrelevant to a replacementdecision because it does not change under any alternative andcannot be realized.b. Disposal value of old equipment is relevant to a replacementdecision because it can either be realized (by replacement) orforgone (by continued use).c. Cost of new equipment is relevant to a replacement decisionbecause it can be incurred (by replacement) or avoided (bycontinued use).6-18 Yes. Some expected future costs may be irrelevant because they will be the same under all feasible alternatives.6-19 Yes. The statement is correct in terms of total variable costs.6-20 Two reasons why unit costs should be analyzed with care in decision making are:1. Most unit costs are stable only over a certain range of output, andcare must be taken to see that allowances are made whenalternatives are considered outside that range.2. Some unit costs are an allocation of fixed costs; thus when ahigher volume of output is being considered, unit cost willdecrease proportionately, and vice versa.Two other reasons are mentioned in the text:1. Some unit costs are based on both relevant and irrelevant factorsand should be broken down further before being considered.2. Unit costs must be reduced to the same base (denominator) beforecomparing or combining them.6-21 Sales personnel sometimes neglect to point out that the unit costs are based on outputs far in excess of the volume of their prospective customer.6-22 An inconsistency between a decision model and a performance evaluation model occurs when a decision about whether to replace a piece of equipment is based on the cash flow effects over the life of the equipment but a manager's performance evaluation is based on the first year's reported income. The loss on disposal of the equipment is irrelevant for decision purposes, but it affects the first year income, hence the performance evaluation.6-23 The wide use of income statements to evaluate performance may overly influence managers to maximize short-run performance that may hurt long-run performance. They may pass up profitable opportunities to replace equipment because of the large loss on disposal shown on the first year’s income statement.6-24 Yes, this statement is generally correct. Accountants record transactions. But opportunity cost is the cost of transactions that do not occur (or have not occurred yet). It is the cost of opportunities forgone. Managers usually have much better information about forgone opportunities than do accountants.6-25 Deciding whether to outsource payroll functions requires estimates of the cost of designing, maintaining, and using a payroll system internally compared to the cost of a contract with an outside supplier. To operate an internal payroll system requires hiring personnel with the needed expertise in both legal/governmental issues affecting payroll and information processing to implement a system. Small companies often find it less costly to outsource payroll to a company that has broad expertise in these areas.6-26 Whenever total costs are unitized by dividing by total units and the resulting unit costs are then used to predict new total costs based on a different level of production, errors are being made if any of the costs are fixed. If the new production level is higher, predicted total costs are overestimated. If the new production level is lower, predicted total costs are underestimated. Never unitize fixed costs if the resulting unit cost will be used for planning purposes!Consider the following simple example:Fixed Cost Variable Cost TotalTotal $100 $100 $200Units ÷10÷10÷10Unit Cost $10 $10 $20If a new planned number of units is 20, what will be the new, predicted total cost?The correct cost function and cost prediction isTotal Cost = $100 + $10 × Number of units= $100 + $10 × 20 =$300The correct cost function is based on the two amounts that are constant within the relevant range – the total fixed cost and the unit variable cost.The incorrect unitized cost function and incorrect and overestimated prediction isTotal Cost = $20 × Number of units= $20 × 20= $400It is easy to see that the error comes from treating fixed costs as if they were variable.6-27 The amount paid for inventory is a sunk cost. Once a company has the inventory, it cannot change what it paid for it. Thus the only relevant issue is what can be done with the inventory. If there is a choice of selling the inventory for less than what the company paid for it or not selling it at all, it is certainly better to get something rather than nothing for it.6-28 (10-15 min.)1. IndependentPractice Employee DifferenceOperating revenues $350,000 $110,000 $240,000 Operating expenses 220,000 -- 220,000 Income effects per year $130,000 $110,000 $ 20,000Choose Independent PracticeRevenues $350,000 Expenses:Outlay costs $220,000Opportunity cost of employee compensation 110,000 330,000 Income effects per year $ 20,000 Each tabulation produces the key difference of $20,000. As ageneral rule, we favor using the first tabulation when feasible. Itoffers a straightforward presentation of inflows and outflowsunder sharply stated alternatives.2. Choice as EmployeeRevenue $ 110,000Expenses:Outlay costs $ 0Opportunity cost of accounting practice 130,000 130,000Income effects per year $ (20,000)If the employee alternative is selected, the key difference in favor of becoming a sole practitioner is again $20,000. Bridgeman is sacrificing $20,000 to avoid the risks of an independent practice.6-29 (10-15 min.)Alternatives Under Consideration(1) (2) (1) - (2)Sell, Rent, and HoldInvest in Bonds Present Home DifferenceRevenue $10,000* $ - $10,000 Less: Outlay cost 12,000 6,000 6,000 Income effects per year $ (2,000) $(6,000) $ 4,000 *5% × $200,000Advantage of selling the home is $6,000 - $2,000 = $4,000. Obviously, if rent is higher, the advantage decreases.The above analysis does not contain explicit opportunity costs. If opportunity costs were a part of the analysis, the following presentation applies (whereby the interest on investment in bonds is not listed as a separate alternative but is regarded as a forgone alternative):Alternative Chosen:Hold Present HomeOpportunity cost $(10,000)Outlay cost 6,000Income effects per year $ (4,000)As before, the advantage of selling the home and renting is $4,000. The opportunity cost of home ownership is 5% × 200,000 = $10,000.6-30 (15-20 min.) Opportunity cost is the maximum available contribution to profit forgone by using limited resources for a particular purpose. In this case, the opportunity cost of the machine when analyzing the alternative to produce 12-oz. bottles of Juice Cocktails is $90,000, the larger of the $90,000 contribution margin from additional sales of the 100% Juices or the $75,000 proceeds from the sale of themachine. The $160,000 historical cost of the machine is a past cost and thus irrelevant.6-31 (15-20 min.) The first tabulation is probably easier to understand, but the choice of a tabulation is a matter of taste:(a) (b) (c)Expand Expand Rent toLaboratory Eye GiftTesting Clinic Shop Revenues $330,000 $500,000 $11,000Expenses 290,000 480,000 0Income effects per year $ 40,000 $ 20,000 $11,000Treating the gift shop as the forgone (rejected) alternative, the tabulation is:(a) (b)Expand ExpandLaboratory Testing Eye Clinic Revenue $330,000 $500,000 Expenses:Outlay costs $290,000 $480,000Opportunity cost,rent forgone 11,000 301,000 11,000 491,000 Income effects per year $ 29,000 $ 9,000 The numbers favor laboratory testing, which will generate a contribution to hospital income that is $20,000 greater than the eyeclinic's.The numbers have been analyzed correctly under both tabulations. Both answer the key query: What difference does it make? As a general rule, we prefer using the first tabulation. It is a straightforward presentation.6-32 (15 min.)1. It is easiest to analyze total costs, not unit costs.Make PurchaseDirect materials $400,000Avoidable overhead costs:Indirect labor 30,000Supplies 20,000Allocated occupancy cost 0Purchase cost $420,000Total relevant costs $450,000 $420,000The difference in favor of purchasing is $450,000 - $420,000 =$30,000.2. Because the quantitative difference is small, qualitative factorsmay dominate the decision. Companies using a just-in-timesystem need assurance of both quality and timeliness of suppliesof materials, parts, and components. A small, local company maynot be reliable enough for Bose. In essence, Bose may be willing to "invest" $30,000, the quantitative advantage of purchasing, inorder to have more control over the supply of the components.The division manager may have made the right decision for thewrong reason. He incorrectly ignored avoidable fixed costs, leading to a mistaken belief that making the components was less costly by $.20 per unit or $20,000 in total. The $50,000 of avoidable fixedcosts makes the purchase option less costly by $30,000. If themanager's decision is to make the component, it should bebecause forgoing profits of $30,000 has a long-run qualitativebenefit of more than $30,000, not because the bid is greater thanthe variable cost6-33 (20-25 min.)Nantucket Nectars should make the bottles.。

亨格瑞管理会计英文第15版答案11.docx

亨格瑞管理会计英文第15版答案11.docx

亨格瑞管理会计英文第15版答案11CHAPTERllCapitalBudgetin ; 1. ; Thepresentvalueis$480,00(a)$480,000=annualpaymen ; annualpayment=$480,0004- 1 annualpaymcnt=$480,000 4- 9 ; annualpayment=$480,000 4- 8 armualpaymcnt 二$480, 0004-8; anCHAPTER 11 Capital Budgeting1.The present value is $480, 000 and the annual payments are an annuity, requiring use of Table 2:(a)$480,000 = annual payment X 11.2578 annual payment 二 $480, 000 4- 11. 2578 二 $42, 637 (b) $480, 000 二 annual payment X 9.4269annual payment = $480, 000payment X 8.0552 annual payment二 $480,000payment X 8.5595 annual payment= $480, 000 payment X 7.6061 annual payment = $480, 000payment X 6.8109 annual payment= $480, 000 4- 6.8109 =$70,475 (a) Total payments=30 X $50,918 = $1,527,540Total interest paid= $1, 527, 540- $480, 000 = $1, 047, 540 2.3.(b) Total payments 二 15 X $63, 107= $946, 605 Total interest paid 二$946, 605 一 $480, 000 = $466, 6059. 4269 = $50,918 (c) $480, 000 = annual8. 0552 二$59, 589 (a)$480, 000 = annual 8. 5595 二 $56, 078 (b) $480, 000 = annual 7. 6061 = $63, 107 (c) $480, 000 二 annualmin.) Buy. The net present value is positive.Initial outlay *Present value of cash operating savings, from12-year, 12% column of Table 2, 6. 1944 X $5, 000 Net present value$ (21,000) * The trade-in allowance really consists of a $5,000 adjustme nt of the sei ling price and a bona fide $10,000 cash al Iowa neo for the old equipment ・ The relevant amo unt is the incremental cash outlay, $21,000. The book value is irrelevant・ min.)Copyright ?2011 Pearson Education11.NPV @ 10% = 10, 000 X 3. 7908 = $37, 908 - $36, 048 = $1, 860 NPV @ 12% =10, 000 X 3. 6048 = $36, 048 - $36, 048 = $0NPV @ 14% = 10, 000 X 3.4331 = $34, 331 - $36, 048 = $(1,717)The IRR is the interest rate at which NPV 二$0; therefore, from requirement 1 we know that IRR 二12%・The NPV at the company? s cost of capital, 10%, is positive, so the project should be accepted・The TRR (12%) is greater than the company' s cost of capital (10%), so the project should be accepted・ Note that the IRR and NPV models give the same decision.2.3.4.min.)Payback period is $36, 000 $10, 000 = 3.6 years・ It is not a good measure of profitabi1ity because it ignores returns beyond the payback period and it does not account for the time value of money.NPV = $5, 114. Accept the proposal because NPV is positive・ Computation: NPV 二($10, 000 X 4. 1114) - $36,000 =$41, 114 一$36, 000 = $ 5, 114 2.3. ARR 二(Increase in average cash f 1 ow - Increase in depreciation)4- Initial investmenl二($10, 000 - $6, 000) 一$36, 000 二11. 1%min.)Salaries $49, 920 (a) $41, 600(b) $ 8,320 Overtime 1, 728(c) — 1,728 Repairs and maintenanee 1,800 1,050 750Toner, supplies, etc. Total annual cash outflows(a) ($ 8 X 40 hrs.) X 52 weeks X 3 employees 二$320 X 52 X 3 =$49,920 (b) ($10 X 40 hrs.) X 52 weeks X 2 employees = $400 X 52 X 2 二$41, 600 (c) ($12 X 4 hrs.) X 12 months X 3 machines =$ 48 X 12 X 3 = $ 1,728Purchase of Cannon machines $ -- $50,000 $50,000Copyright ?2011 Pearson Education2 1.Sale of Xerox machines Training and remodeling Total 一一-3,000-3,000 Copyright ?2011 Pearson Education 3All numbers are expressed in Mexican pesos・ 2. 18% Total Sketch ofRelevant Cash Flows (in thousands) Cash operating savings:* ・847583,902 99,000 10& 900 119, 790 131,769 .4371 144,946 Income tax savings fromdepreciation not changed by inflation, see 1 3.1272 33,600 33, 600 33, 60033,600 33,600 Required outlay at time zero 1.0000 Net present value^Amounts are computed by multiplying (150,000 X .6) = 90, 000 by 1. 10, 1. 102, 1. 10 3, etc.Copyright ?2011 Pearson Education 461PV Present of $1.00 Value ofTOTAL PROJECT APPROACH: Cannon:Init. cash outflow 1.0000 $ (51,000) Oper. cash flows (45,950) (45, 950) (45,950) (45, 950) (45, 950) Total $(216, 641)Xerox:Oper. cash flows 3. 6048 (57, 048) (57, 048) (57, 048) (57, 048) (57, 048)Differenee in favor of retaining XeroxINCREMENTAL APPROACH: Initial investment 1.0000 $(51,000) Annual operatingcash savings 3. 6048 11, 098 11, 098 11, 098 11, 098 11, 098 Net present valueof purchase 2. The Xerox machines should not be replaced by the Cannonequipment. Net savings = (Present value of expenditures to retain Xeroxmachines) 1 ess (Present value of expenditures toconvert to Cannon machines)二$205, 647 - $216,641 二$ (10, 994) 3. a. How flexible is the new machinery? Will it be useful only for the presently intended functions, or can it beeasilyadapted for other tasks that may arise over the next 5 years?b. What psychological effects will it have on various interested parties? Copyright ?2011 Pearson Education。

亨格瑞管理会计英文第15版 答案 10-12章

亨格瑞管理会计英文第15版 答案 10-12章

CHAPTER 11Capital Budgeting11-A1 (15-25 min.) Answers are printed in the text at the end of the assignment material.11-29 (10-15 min.)1. The present value is $480,000 and the annual payments are an annuity, requiringuse of Table 2:(a)$480,000 = annual payment × 11.2578annual payment = $480,000 ÷ 11.2578 = $42,637(b)$480,000 = annual payment × 9.4269annual payment = $480,000 ÷ 9.4269 = $50,918(c)$480,000 = annual payment × 8.0552annual payment = $480,000 ÷ 8.0552 =$59,5892. (a)$480,000 = annual payment × 8.5595annual payment = $480,000 ÷ 8.5595 = $56,078(b)$480,000 = annual payment × 7.6061annual payment = $480,000 ÷ 7.6061 = $63,107(c)$480,000 = annual payment × 6.8109annual payment = $480,000 ÷ 6.8109 =$70,4753. (a) Total payments= 30 × $50,918 = $1,527,540Total interest paid= $1,527,540- $480,000 = $1,047,540(b) Total payments= 15 × $63,107= $946,605Total interest paid = $946,605 - $480,000 = $466,60511-36 (10 min.)Buy. The net present value is positive.Initial outlay * $(21,000)Present value of cash operating savings, from12-year, 12% column of Table 2, 6.1944 × $5,000 30,972Net present value $ 9,972* The trade-in allowance really consists of a $5,000 adjustment of the sellingprice and a bona fide $10,000 cash allowance for the old equipment. Therelevant amount is the incremental cash outlay, $21,000. The book value isirrelevant.11-39 (10-15 min.)Copyright ©2011 Pearson Education 1Copyright ©2011 Pearson Education21. NPV @ 10% = 10,000 × 3.7908 = $37,908 - $36,048 = $1,860 NPV @ 12% = 10,000 × 3.6048 = $36,048 - $36,048 = $0NPV @ 14% = 10,000 × 3.4331 = $34,331 - $36,048 = $(1,717)2.The IRR is the interest rate at which NPV = $0; therefore, from requirement 1 we know that IRR = 12%.3.The NPV at the company’s cost of capital, 10%, is positive, so the project should be accepted.4.The IRR (12%) is greater than the company’s cost of capital (10%), so the project should be accepted. Note that the IRR and NPV models give the same decision.11-46 (10-15 min.)Annual addition to profit = 40% × $25,000 = $10,000.1.Payback period is $36,000 ÷ $10,000 = 3.6 years. It is not a good measure of profitability because it ignores returns beyond the payback period and it does not account for the time value of money.2. NPV = $5,114. Accept the proposal because NPV is positive. Computation: NPV = ($10,000 × 4.1114) - $36,000= $41,114 - $36,000 = $ 5,1143. ARR = (Increase in average cash flow – Increase in depreciation) ÷ Initialinvestment= ($10,000 - $6,000) ÷ $36,000 = 11.1%11-51 (30-35 min.)1.Annual Operating Cash FlowsXeroxCannon Difference Salaries $49,920(a) $41,600(b) $ 8,320 Overtime 1,728(c) -- 1,728 Repairs and maintenance 1,800 1,050 750Toner, supplies, etc. 3,6003,300 300 Total annual cash outflows $57,048 $45,950 $11,098(a) ($ 8 × 40 hrs.) × 52 weeks × 3 employees = $320 × 52 × 3 = $49,920 (b) ($10 × 40 hrs.) × 52 weeks × 2 employees = $400 × 52 × 2 = $41,600 (c) ($12 × 4 hrs.) × 12 months × 3 machines = $ 48 × 12 × 3 = $ 1,728Initial Cash FlowsXeroxCannon Difference Purchase of Cannon machines $ -- $50,000 $50,000Sale of Xerox machines -- -3,000 -3,000 Training and remodeling -- 4,000 4,000 Total $ -- $51,000 $51,000Copyright ©2011 Pearson Education 3EXHIBIT 11-50All numbers are expressed in Mexican pesos.2. 18% Total Sketch of Relevant Cash Flows(inthousands)PresentPVFactor Value 0 1 2 3 4 5Cash operating savings:* .8475 83,902 99,000108,90078,212.718272,904119,790.608667,966 131,769 .5158.4371 63,356 144,946Total366,340Income tax savings fromdepreciation not changedby inflation, see 1 3.1272 105,074 33,600 33,600 33,600 33,600 33,600471,414TotalRequired outlay at time zero 1.0000 (420,000) (420,000)Net present value 51,414*Amounts are computed by multiplying (150,000 × .6) = 90,000 by 1.10, 1.10 2, 1.10 3, etc.Copyright ©2011 Pearson Education 461PV PresentofValue$1.00ofCashFlows Annual Cash FlowsDiscountedat 12% 0 1 2 3 4 5T OTAL P ROJECT A PPROACH:Cannon:Init. cash outflow 1.0000 $ (51,000)Oper. cash flows 3.6048 (165,641) (45,950) (45,950) (45,950) (45,950) (45,950)Total $(216,641)Xerox:Oper. cash flows 3.6048 $(205,647) (57,048) (57,048) (57,048) (57,048) (57,048)Difference in favor ofretaining Xerox $ (10,994)I NCREMENTAL A PPROACH:Initial investment 1.0000 $(51,000)Annual operatingcash savings 3.6048 40,006 11,098 11,098 11,098 11,098 11,098Net present valueof purchase $(10,994)2. The Xerox machines should not be replaced by the Cannon equipment.Net savings = (Present value of expenditures to retain Xerox machines) less (Present value of expenditures toconvert to Cannon machines)= $205,647 - $216,641 = $(10,994)3. a. How flexible is the new machinery? Will it be useful only for the presently intended functions, or can it be easilyadapted for other tasks that may arise over the next 5 years?b. What psychological effects will it have on various interested parties?Copyright ©2011 Pearson Education 46211-71 (60-90 min.)This is a complex problem because it requires comparing three alternatives. It reviews Chapter 6 as well as covering several of the topics of Chapter 11. The following answer uses the total project approach. The total net future cash outflows are shown for each alternative.1. Alternative A: Continue to manufacture the parts with the current tools.Annual cash outlaysVariable cost, $92 × 8,000 $(736,000)Fixed cost, 1/3 × $45 × 8,000 × .6 (72,000)Tax savings, .4 × ($736,000 + $72,000) 323,200After-tax annual cost $(484,800)Present value, 3.6048 × $484,800 $(1,747,607)PV of remaining tax savings on MACRS:11.52% × $2,000,000 × .4 × .8929 82,2905.76% × $2,000,000 × .4 × .7972 36,735Total present value of costs, Alternative A $(1,628,582)Alternative B: Purchase from outside supplierAnnual cash outlaysPurchase cost, $110 × 8,000 $(880,000)Tax savings, $880,000 × .4 352,000After-tax annual cost $(528,000)Copyright ©2011 Pearson Education 463Present value, $528,000 × 3.6048 $(1,903,334)Sale of old equipment:Sales price $ 400,000Book value [(11.52% + 5.76%) × $2,000,000] 345,600Gain $ 54,400Taxes @ 40% (21,760)Total after-tax effect ($400,000 - $21,760) 378,240Total present value of costs, Alternative B $(1,525,094)Copyright ©2011 Pearson Education 464Alternative C: Purchase new toolsInvestment $(1,800,000) Annual cash outlaysVariable cost, $73 × 8,000 $(584,000)Fixed cost (same as A) (72,000)Tax savings, .4 × ($584,000 + $72,000) 262,400After-tax annual cost $(393,600)Present value, $393,600 × 3.6048 (1,418,849)Tax savings on new equipment* 579,217Effect of disposal of new equipmentSales price $ 500,000Book value 0Gain $500,000Taxes @ 40% 200,000Total after-tax effect $ 300,000Present value, $300,000 × .5674 170,220Effect of disposal of old equipment (see Alternative B) 378,240Total present value of costs, Alternative C $(2,091,172)* Using the MACRS schedule for tax depreciation, the depreciation rate for each year of a 3-year asset's life is shown inExhibit 11-6:Depreciation Tax PV PresentYear Rate Savings Factor Value1 33.33% .3333 × $1,800,000 × .40 = $239,976 .8929 $214,2752 44.45% .4445 × 1,800,000 × .40 = 320,040 .7972 255,1363 14.81% .1481 × 1,800,000 × .40 = 106,632 .7118 75,9014 7.41% .0741 × 1,800,000 × .40 = 53,352 .6355 33,905Total present value of tax savings $579,217Using Exhibit 11-7, we get .8044 × $1,800,000 × .4 = $579,168, which differs from $579,217 by a $49 rounding error.The alternative with the lowest present value of cost is Alternative B, purchasing from the outside supplier.Copyright ©2011 Pearson Education 4652. Among the major factors are (1) the range of expected volume (both large increases and decreases in volume make thepurchase of the parts relatively less desirable), (2) the reliability of the outside supplier, (3) possible changes inmaterial, labor, and overhead prices, (4) the possibility that the outside supplier can raise prices before the end of five years, (5) obsolescence of the products and equipment, and (6) alternate uses of available capacity (alternative uses make Alternative B relatively more desirable).Copyright ©2011 Pearson Education 466Copyright ©2011 Pearson Education467CHAPTER 12 Cost Allocation12-30 (10-15 min.) 1. Rate = [$2,500 + ($.05 × 100,000)] ÷ 100,000 = $.075 per copy Cost allocated to City Planning in August = $.075 × 42,000 = $3,150. 2. Fixed cost pool allocated as a lump sum depending on predicted usage:To City Planning: (36,000 ÷ 100,000) × $2,500 = $900 per monthVariable cost pool allocated on the basis of actual usage: $.05 × number of copies Cost allocated to City Planning in August: $900 + ($.05 × 42,000) = $3,000. 3. The second method, the one that allocated fixed- and variable-cost pools separately, is preferable. It better recognizesthe causes of the costs. The fixed cost depends on the size of the photocopy machine, which is based on predicted usage and is independent of actual usage. Variable costs, in contrast are caused by actual usage.Exhibit 12-34Customer Type 1Customer Type 2 Customer Type 3 Sales Gross price profit per margin Gross Gross Gross Product unit per unit Units Revenue profit Units Revenue profit Units Revenue profitA $11.031$ 4.14 200 $ 2,206 $ 828 2,200 $ 24,266 $ 9,108 500 $ 5,515 $ 2,070 B 20.47 4.09 100 2,047 409 1,200 24,564 4,908 3,000 61,410 12,270 C 51.38 10.28 50 2,569 514 400 20,552 4,112 5,000 256,900 51,400D 90.00 39.38 400 36,000 15,752 800 72,000 31,504 400 36,000 15,752Total 750 $42,822 17,5034,600 $141,382 49,632 8,900 $359,825 81,492 Cost to serve 7,36845,193 87,439 Operating income $10,135 $4,439 ($5,947) Customer gross margin percentage 40.9% 35.1% 22.6% Cost to serve percentage 17.2% 32.0% 24.3%Customer operating income percentage 23.7%3.1% (1.7%)1$32,000 ÷ 2,900 units; etc. The rounded numbers from the first two columns are used in subsequent calculations.5. The chart below shows customer profitability for the three customer types and suggested strategies for profit improvement.Grow business with this customer type byfocused sales efforts and quantity discounts.Work with customers to lowerthe cost to serve. Seek internalprocess improvements to lowerthose elements of the cost toserve controllable by thecompany.Copyright ©2011 Pearson Education 46912-35 (15-20 min.)of1. AllocationCostsGallons Weighting Joint$300,000 $180,000×A 9,000 9/15SolventSolvent B 6,000 6/15 × $300,000 120,00015,000 $300,0002. Relative Sales Allocation ofCostsValue at Split-off* Weighting JointSolvent A $270,000 27/54 × $300,000 $150,000Solvent B 270,000 27/54 × $300,000 150,000$540,000 $300,000 * $30 × 9,000 and $45 × 6,00012-42 (25-30 min.)There a several ways to organize an analysis that provides product costs. We like to focus first on determining total activity-cost pools and activity cost per driver unit. Then, an analysis similar to the one shown in Exhibit 12-8 can be used.Schedule a: Activity center cost poolsResources Supporting the Allocated Setup/Maintenance Activity Center Allocation Calculation Cost Assembly supervisors $90,000 × 2% $ 1,800 Assembly machines $247,000 × (400 ÷ 1,900) 52,000 Facilities management $95,000 × (400 ÷ 1,900) 20,000 Power $54,000 × (10 ÷ 90) 6,000Total assigned cost $79,800Cost per driver unit (setup) $79,800 ÷ 40 $ 1,995 Resources Supporting the Allocated Setup/Maintenance Activity Center Allocation Calculation Cost Assembly supervisors $90,000 × 98% $ 88,200 Assembly machines $247,000 × (1,500 ÷ 1,900) 195,000 Facilities management $95,000 × (1,500 ÷ 1,900) 75,000 Power $54,000 × (80 ÷ 90) 48,000Total assigned cost $406,200Cost per driver unit (machine hour) $406,200 ÷ 1,500 $ 270.80Copyright ©2011 Pearson Education 470Exhibit 12-42 Contribution to cover other value-chain costs by productStandardDeluxe Custom Cost per Driver unit Driver Driver Driver Activity/Resource (Schedule a) Units Cost Units Cost Units Cost Setup/Maintenance $1,995 20 $ 39,900 12 $ 23,940 8 $ 15,960 Assembly $270.80 1,000 270,800 400 108,320 100 27,080 Parts 1,003,800 115,080 15,980Direct labor 298,00072,000 68,000 Total $1,612,500$319,340 $127,020 Units 100,000 10,000 1,000 Cost per display $16.125 $31.934 $127.02Selling price 20.00050.000 250.00 Unit gross profit $ 3.875$18.066 $122.98 Total gross profit $387,500$180,660 $122,980The total contribution of these products is $387,500 + $180,660 + $122,980 = $691,140.12-43 (25-30 min.) See solution to problem 12-42.12-55 (100 – 200 min.)1. Exhibits 12-55A and 12-55B show the calculation of customer gross margin percentage and customer cost-to-serve percentage for the 4 customer types. Exhibit 12-55C shows a plot of customer gross margin percentage versus customer cost-to-serve percentage for the 4 customer types.2. Suggested strategies for profit improvement for the 4 customer types follow.•Customer type 1 - Mega stores. These stores have the lowest cost-to-serve.Profitability can be improved by focusing on a better product mix. A quarter ofthe sales (cases) to these stores are from bulk and singles products – both ofwhich have a negative gross margin. A shift in mix towards more regular andfragile product types would improve profitability.•Customer type 2 – Local small stores. These stores have a product mix that contains a substantial amount (32%) of the negative gross margin products. Thesame change in sales focus that applies to mega stores can be applied to localsmall stores.But unlike mega stores, small stores are very costly to serve. From Exhibit 12-55 B, the largest single cost to serve local small stores is truck deliveries. Theaverage number of cases per order (the same as per truck delivery) is 6,000,000 ÷ 80,000 = 75. Compare this to mega stores that average 7,680,000 ÷ 32,000 = 240 cases per order (delivery). This is a significant factor causing the high cost-to-serve.For example, suppose that the average order size could be increased from 75,000 to 150,000 cases. If the total annual cases sold is unchanged (6,000,000), a totalof 40 orders, a 50% reduction, would be made. An estimate of the cost savingsand the impact on the cost-to-serve percentage can be made as follows:Cost per Driver Unit Reduction in Driver Cost Savings(Exhibit 12-55B) Units of 50% (000) Truck delivery $167.55 34,000 $5,696.70 Order processing 27.49 40,000 1,099.60 Regular scheduling 5.83 36,000 209.88 Expedited scheduling 19.44 4,000 77.76 Total cost savings (000) $7,083.94 Cost savings as a percent of revenue 24.9%New cost-to-serve as a percent of revenue 60.1%In addition to the above savings, other activities would also be impacted by thereduction in orders such as customer service. So while the total impact ofCopyright ©2011 Pearson Education 472focusing on increasing order size can only be estimated, it is reasonable to expect dramatic cost savings from the current 85% of revenue.Other factors that should be investigated include the high level of corporatesupport and customer service.•Customer type 3 – Local large stores. Local large stores generate $68,400 ÷ $136,230 = 50% of DSI’s total revenue and with a net margin of 58% - 47% = 11%. The key to local large store profitability is sales of a large percentage (80%) of regular product. The cost-to-serve percentage is 47%. This could be reduced as for customer type 2 by increasing the order size from the current level of14,400,000 ÷ 120,000 = 120 cases per order. But a dramatic improvementshould not be expected. In general, local large stores are sustaining DSI’sbusiness and their loyalty should be cultivated.•Customer type 4 – Specialty stores. Specialty stores have a low gross margin of 22% coupled with a very large cost-to-serve percent of 106%! Although thesestores do not account for a significant portion of DSI’s revenue the companyshould rationalize their business. Several actions could be suggested. One is to charge a premium for all high-security products. The vast majority of theseproducts are sold to specialty stores with only marginal sales to mega and local small stores. Another action is to adopt a customer loyalty program based onvolume of sales. The list price of $7.25 per case would apply to customers with sales volumes less than a specified level. Most of DSI’s customers would qualify for discounts (similar to those currently existing) so prices would not besignificantly different. For specialty stores, prices would increase dramatically.This may result in losing specialty-store business so DSI needs to decide is this isa direction they wish to consider.Copyright ©2011 Pearson Education 473Exhibit 12-55A (Units and dollars are in thousands.)C u s t o m e r T y p eProductRegular Short Fragile Bulk HighSecurity Singles Total Gross Profit PercentageProduct mix percentage 60% 5% 5% 20% 5% 5% 100% Cases sold 4,608 384 384 1,536 384 3847,680Total Revenue$ 21,888 $ 1,824$ 1,824$7,296$ 1,824 $ 1,824 $36,480Gross Profit per Case $ 3.28 $ 1.58 $ 2.74 $(1.44)$ 0.54 $ (5.30)1Total Gross Profit$ 15,114 $ 607 $ 1,052 $(2,212)$ 207 $(2,035)$12,733 35%Product mix percentage 50% 5% 5% 30% 8% 2% 100% Cases sold3,000 300 300 1,800 480 120 6,000 Total Revenue @ 4.75/case $ 14,250 $ 1,425 $ 1,425 $ 8,550 $ 2,280 $ 570 $28,500 Gross Profit per Case $ 3.28 $ 1.58 $ 2.74 $ (1.44) $ 0.54 $ (5.30)2Total Gross Profit$ 9,840 $ 474 $ 822 $(2,592) $ 259 $ (636)$ 8,167 29%Product mix percentage 80% 0% 10% 10% 0% 0% 100%Cases sold 11,520 -1,4401,440--14,400Total Revenue @ 4.75/case $ 54,720 $ - $ 6,840 $ 6,840 $ - $ - $68,400Gross Profit per Case $ 3.28 $ 1.58 $ 2.74 $ (1.44) $ 0.54 $ (5.30)3Total Gross Profit$ 37,786 $ - $ 3,946 $(2,074) $ - $ - $39,658 58%Product mix percentage 10% 20% 0% 0% 70% 0% 100% Cases sold 60 120 - - 420-600Total Revenue @ 4.75/case $ 285 $ 570 $ - $ - $ 1,995 $ - $ 2,850 Gross Profit per Case $ 3.28 $ 1.58 $ 2.74 $ (1.44)$ 0.54 $ (5.30)4Total Gross Profit $ 197$ 190$ -$ -$ 227$ - $ 61322%Exhibit 12-55B (Units and dollars are in thousands.)ActivityO r d e r P r o c e s s i n gC u s t o m e r S e r v i c eO r d e r C h a n g e sC o r p o r a t e S u p p o r tR e g u l a r S c h e d u l i n gE x p e d i t e d S c h e d u l i n gS h i p p i n gT r u c k D e l i v e r yP a r c e l D e l i v e r y Cost DriverO r d e r sL a b o r H o u r sN u m b e r o f C h a n g e sL a b o r H o u r sO r d e r sO r d e r sP a l l e t sD e l i v e r i e sD e l i v e r i e sC u s t o m e r T y p eCost/DriverUnit $27.49 $43.34$32.63$51.66$5.83 $19.44 $6.60 $167.55 $23.89Total Driver Units3218.73.2 - 29 3 41625.6 1.6 Cost to Serve $879.68 $810.46$104.42-$169.07$58.32$2,745.6$4,289.28$38.22$9,095.05Revenue (See Exhibit 12-55A) $36,480.001 Cost-to-Serve Percentage24.9%Driver Units 80 100 8 20 72 8 640 68 8Cost to Serve $2,199.2 $4,334$261.04$1,033.2 $419.76$155.52$4,224$11,393.4$191.12$24,211.24Revenue (See Exhibit 12-55A) $28,500.02Cost-to-Serve Percentage85.0%Exhibit 12-55B (continued)ActivityO r d e r P r o c e s s i n gC u s t o m e r S e r v i c eO r d e r C h a n g e sC o r p o r a t e S u p p o r tR e g u l a r S c h e d u l i n gE x p e d i t e d S c h e d u l i n gS h i p p i n gT r u c k D e l i v e r y P a r c e l D e l i v e r y Cost DriverO r d e r sL a b o r H o u r sN u m b e r o f C h a n g e sL a b o r H o u r sO r d e r sO r d e r sP a l l e t sD e l i v e r i e sD e l i v e r i e sC u s t o m e r T y p eCost/DriverUnit $27.49 $43.34$32.63$51.66$5.83 $19.44 $6.60 $167.55 $23.89TotalDriver Units 120 70 2.4 80 108 12 840 90 6Cost to Serve$3,298.8 $3,033.8 $78.31$4,132.8 $629.64 $233.28 $5,544$15,079.5$143.34$32,173.47Revenue (See Exhibit 12-55A) $68,400.03 Cost-to-Serve Percentage47.0%Driver Units 12 30 1.2 0 10 2 60 4.8 2.4Cost to Serve $329.88$1,300.2 $39.16- $58.3 $38.88 $396 $804.24 $57.34$3,023.99Revenue (See Exhibit 12-55A) $2,850.004 Cost-to-Serve Percentage106.1%CUSTOMER PROFITABILITYCT3, 47%, 58%0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%110%120%COST-TO-SERVE PERCENTAGEG R O S S P R O F I T P E R C E N T A G EExhibit 12-55CCopyright ©2011 Pearson Education 478。

管理会计 第五章 习题&解答

管理会计 第五章 习题&解答

Snara Company accumulates the following data concerning a mixed cost, using miles as the activity level.Miles Driven Total Cost Miles Driven Total Cost January 10,000 $15,000 March 9,000 $12,500February 8,000 $14,500 April 7,500 $13,000 InstructionsCompute the variable and fixed cost elements using the high-low method.SOLUTION$15,000 − $13,000————————— = $0.80 = variable cost per mile10,000 − 7,500$0.80 (10,000) + FC = $15,000Fixed cost = $7,000Or$0.80 (7,500) + FC = $13,000Fixed cost = $7,000QUESTION 2Determine the missing amounts.Unit Selling Price Unit Variable CostsContributionMargin per UnitContributionMargin Ratio1. $300 $210 A. B.2. $600 C. $120 D.3. E. F. $400 40% SOLUTIONA. $300 – $210 = $90B. $90 ÷ $300 = 30%C. $600 – $120 = $480D. $120 ÷ $600 = 20%E. $400 ÷ 40% = $1,000F. If 40% = CM ratio, then 60% = variable cost percentage; $1,000 × 60% = $600Or $1,000 – $400 = $600Wellington Cabinets has fixed costs totaling $96,000. Its contribution margin per unit is $1.50, and the selling price is $5.50 per unit.InstructionsCompute the break-even point in units.SOLUTION$1.50X – $96,000 = 0X = 64,000 unitsQUESTION 4Diaz Donuts sells boxes of donuts each with a variable cost percentage of 37.5%. Its fixed costs are $46,875 per year.InstructionsDetermine the sales dollars Diaz needs to break even per year.SOLUTIONContribution margin ratio = 100% – 37.5% = 62.5%.625x – $46,875 = 0X = $75,000 of sales dollarsQUESTION 5Kettle Goods Company has a unit selling price of $500, variable cost per unit $300, and fixed costs of $170,000.InstructionsCompute the break-even point in units and in sales dollars.SOLUTION$500X − $300X − $170,000 = 0BEP in units = X = 850 unitsBEP in dollars = 850 units × $500 = $425,000The following monthly data are available for Marketplace, Inc. which produces only one product which it sells for $18 each. Its unit variable costs are $8, and its total fixed expenses are $15,000. Actual sales for the month of May totaled 2,000 units.InstructionsCompute the margin of safety in units and dollars for the company for May.SOLUTIONBEP in units: $18X - $8X – $15,000 = 0BEP in units = X = 1,500 unitsUnits at current sales level = 2,000Margin of safety = (2,000 – 1,500) × $18 = $9,000Sales can drop by $9,000 before the company incurs a lossQUESTION 7Manhattan Cookery reported actual sales of $2,000,000, and fixed costs of $400,000. The contribution margin ratio is 25%.InstructionsCompute the margin of safety in dollars and the margin of safety ratio.SOLUTIONBEP in dollars: $400,000 ÷ 25% = $1,600,000Margin of safety in dollars: $2,000,000 − $1,600,000 = $400,000Margin of safety ratio: $400,000 ÷ $2,000,000 = 20%QUESTION 8Mace Company accumulates the following data concerning a mixed cost, using miles as the activity level.Miles Driven Total CostJanuary 10,000 $15,000February 8,000 13,500March 9,000 14,400April 7,500 12,500InstructionsCompute the variable and fixed cost elements using the high-low method.$15,000 – $12,500————————— = $1.00 = variable cost per mile 10,000 – 7,500($1.00 x 10,000) + fixed cost = $15,000Fixed cost = $5,000。

亨格瑞管理会计英文第15版练习答案06

亨格瑞管理会计英文第15版练习答案06

CHAPTER 6 COVERAGE OF LEARNING OBJECTIVESLO6: DecideA4,B5 40 57,59whether to keep orreplace equipment.26,39,41 52,58,64 71LO7: Identifyirrelevant andmisspecifiedcosts.B6 43 60LO8: Discuss howperformancemeasures canaffect decisionmaking.CHAPTER 6Relevant Information and Decision Making With a Focus on OperationalDecisions6-A1 (20 min)1. The key to this question is what will happen to the fixedoverhead costs if production of the boxes is discontinued.Assume that all $60,000 of fixed costs will continue. Then,Sunshine State will lose $20,000 by purchasing the boxes fromWeyerhaeuser:Payment to Weyerhaeuser, 80,000 × $2.10$168,000Costs saved, variable costs 148,000Additional costs $ 20,0002. Some subjective factors are:Might Weyerhaeuser raise prices if Sunshine State closed downits box-making facility?Will sub-contracting the box production affect the quality ofthe boxes?Is a timely supply of boxes assured, even if the number neededchanges?Does Sunshine State sacrifice proprietary information whendisclosing the box specifications to Weyerhaeuser?3. In this case the fixed costs are relevant. However, it is notthe depreciation on the old equipment that is relevant. It isthe cost of the new equipment. Annual cost savings by not producing the boxes now will be:Variable costs $148,000Investment avoided (annualized) 80,000Total saved $228,000The payment to Weyerhaeuser is $228,000 - $168,000 = $60,000 less than the savings, so Sunshine State would be $60,000 better off subcontracting the production of the boxes.6-A2 (10 min.)1. Contribution margins:Plain = $70 - $55 = $15Professional = $100 - $75 = $25Contribution margin ratios:Plain = $15 ÷ $70 = 21.4%Profe ssional = $25 ÷ $100 = 25%2. PlainProfessionala. Units per hour 2 1b. Contribution margin per unit $15 $25Contribution margin per hour $30 $25 Total contribution for 20,000 hours $600,000 $500,0003. The plain circular saws are the best use of the scarce machinehours. For a given capacity, the criterion for maximizingprofits is to obtain the greatest possible contribution to profitfor each unit of the limiting or scarce factor. Moreover, fixedcosts are irrelevant unless their total is affected by the choiceof products.6-A3 (15 min.) Table is in thousands of dollars.1,2. (a) (b) (a)-(b) (c) (a)-(b)-(c)SeparableSales Sales Costs IncrementalBeyond at Incremental Beyond Gain orSplit-Off Split-Off Sales Split-Off (Loss)A 230 54 176 190 (14)B 330 32 298 300 (2)C 175 54 121 100 21 Increase in overall operating income from further processing of A, B,and C 5The incremental analysis indicates that Product C should be processed further, but Products A and B should be sold at split-off. The overall operating income would be $44,000, as follows:Sales: $54,000 + $32,000 + $175,000 $261,000Joint cost of goods sold $117,000Separable cost of goods sold 100,000 217,000 Operating income $ 44,000Compare this with the present operating income of $28,000. That is, $230,000 + $330,000 + $175,000 - ($190,000 + $300,000 + $100,000 + $117,000) = $28,000. The extra $16,000 of operating income comes from eliminating the $16,000 loss resulting from processing Products A and B beyond the split-off point.6-A4 (30-40 min.)Problem 6-60 is an extension of this problem. The two problems make a good combination.1. Operating inflows for each year, old machine:$910,000 - ($810,000 + $60,000) $40,000Operating inflows for each year, new machine:$910,000 - ($810,000 + $22,000*) $78,000* $60,000 - $38,000Cash flow statements (in thousands of dollars):Keep ReplaceThree ThreeYear Years Years Year Years Years1 2 & 3 Together 1 2 & 3 Together Receipts, inflows from operations 40 40 120 78 78234Disbursements:Purchase of "old" equipment (90)* -- (90) (90) -- (90) Purchase of "new" equipment:Total costs less proceedsfrom disposal of "old"equipment ($99,000-$15,000) -- -- -- (84)-- (84)Net cash inflow (outflow) (50) 40 30 (96) 78 60* Assumes that the outlay of $90,000 took place on January 2, 2010, or sometime during 2010. Some students will ignore this item, assuming correctly that it is irrelevant to the decision. However, note that a statement for the entire year was requested.The difference for three years taken together is $60,000 - $30,000 = $30,000. Note particularly that the $90,000 book value can be omitted from the comparison. Merely cross out the entire line; although the column totals will be affected, the net difference will still be$30,000.2. Income statements (in thousands of dollars):Keep ReplaceThree ThreeYears Years Year Years Years1, 2 & 3 Together 1 2 & 3TogetherSales 910 2,730 910 910 2,730 Expenses:Other expenses 810 2,430 810 810 2,430 Operating of machine 60 180 22 22 66 Depreciation 30 90* 33 33 99 Total expenses 900 2,700 865 865 2,595 Loss on disposal:Proceeds ("revenue") -- -- (15) -- (15) Book value ("expense") -- -- 90 -- 90* Loss -- -- 75 -- 75 Total charges 900 2,700 940 865 2,670 Net income 10 30 (30) 45 60* As in part (1), the $90,000 book value can be omitted from the comparison without changing the $30,000 difference. This would mean dropping the depreciation item of $30,000 per year (a cumulativeeffect of $90,000) under the "keep" alternative, and dropping the book value item of $90,000 in the loss on disposal computation under the "buy" alternative.Difference for three years together, $60,000 - $30,000 = $30,000.Note the motivational factors here. A manager may be reluctantto replace simply because the large loss on disposal willseverely harm the profit performance in Year 1.3. The net difference for the three years taken together would beunaffected because the item is a past cost. You can substituteany number for the original $90,000 figure without changing thisanswer.For example, examine how the results would change in part (1) by inserting $1 million where the $90,000 now appears (in thousandsof dollars):Keep: Replace:Three Years Three YearsTogether TogetherDifferenceReceipts, inflows from operations 120 234 114 Disbursements:Purchase of old equipment (1,000) (1,000) 0 Purchase of new equipment:Gross price (99)Disposal proceeds of "old" 15 -- ( 84) (84) Net cash outflow ( 880) ( 850) 30In sum, this may be a horrible situation. The manager reallyblundered. But keeping the old equipment will compound theblunder to the cumulative tune of $30,000 over the next threeyears.4. Diplomatically, Lee should try to convey the following. All ofus tend to indulge in the erroneous idea that we can soothe thewounded pride of a bad purchase decision by using the iteminstead of replacing it. The fallacy is believing that a current or future action can influence the long-run impact of a pastoutlay. All past costs are down the drain. Nothing can changewhat has already happened. The $90,000 has been spent.Subsequent accounting for the item is irrelevant. The schedulesin parts (1) and (2) clearly show that we may completely ignorethe $90,000 original outlay and still have a correct analysis.The important point is that the $90,000 is not an element ofdifference between alternatives and, therefore, may be safelyignored. The only relevant items are those expected future items that will differ between alternatives.5. The $90,000 purchase of the original equipment, the sales, andthe other expenses are irrelevant because they are common to both alternatives. The relevant items are the following (in thousands of dollars):Three YearsTogetherKeep Replace Operating of machine(3 × $60; 3 × $22)$180 $ 66 Incremental cost of new machine:Total cost $99Less proceeds of old machine 15Incremental cost -- 84 Total relevant costs $180 $150Difference in favor of buying $ 306-B1 (15-20 min.)1. Make BuyTotal Per UnitTotal Per UnitPurchase cost €10,000,000€50 Direct material €5,500,000€27.50Direct labor 1,900,000 9.50Factory overhead, variable 1,100,000 5.50Factory overhead, fixedavoided 900,000 4.50Total relevant costs €9,400,000€47.00€10,000,000€50 Difference in favor of making € 600,000€ 3.00The numerical difference in favor of making is €600,000 or€3.00 per unit. The relevant fixed costs are €900,000, not€3,000,000.2. Buy and LeaveMake Capacity Idle Buy andRentRent revenue -- -- € 1,150,000 Obtaining of components €(9,400,000)€(10,000,000)€(10,000,000)Net relevant costs €(9,400,000) €(10,000,000) € (8,850,000)The final column indicates that buying the components and rentingthe vacated capacity will yield the best results in this case.The favorable difference is €9,400,000 - €8,850,000 = €550,000.6-B2 (15 min.)1. If fixed manufacturing cost is applied to products at $1.00 permachine hou r, it takes $.75 ÷ $1.00, or 3/4 of an hour toproduce one unit of XY-7. Similarly, it takes $.25 ÷ $1.00 or1/4 of an hour to produce BD-4.2. If there are 100,000 hours of capacity:XY-7: 100,000 hours ÷ 3/4 = 133,333 units.BD-4: 100,000 hours ÷ 1/4 = 400,000 units.Total contribution margins show that BD-4 should be produced, generating $200,000 of contribution margin, which is $66,667 more than would be earned by XY-7.Per Unit UnitsTotalXY-7 $6.00 - ($3.00 + $2.00) = $1.00 133,333 $133,333 BD-4 $4.00 - ($1.50 + $2.00) = $ .50 400,000 $200,0006-B3 (15-20 min.)All amounts are in thousands of British pounds.The major lesson is that a product that shows an operating loss based on fully allocated costs may nevertheless be worth keeping. Why? Because it may produce a sufficiently high contribution to profit sothat the firm would be better off with it than any other alternative.The emphasis should be on totals:Replace Magic Department WithExisting GeneralOperations Merchandise ElectronicProductsSales 6,000 -600 + 250 = 5,650 -600 + 200 = 5,600 Variable expenses 4,090 -390 + 175a= 3,875 -390 + 100 b = 3,800 Contribution margin 1,910 -210 + 75 = 1,775 -210 + 100 = 1,800 Fixed expenses 1,100 -120 + 0= 980 -120 + 30 = 1, Operating income 810 - 90 + 75= 795 - 90 + 70= 790a(100% - 30%) × 250b(100% - 50%) × 200The facts as stated indicate that the magic department should notbe closed. First, the total operating income would drop. Second, fewer customers would come to the store, so sales in other departments may be affected adversely.6-B4 (15 min.)1. Sales ($400 + $600 + $100) $1,100Costs:Raw materials $700Processing 100Total 800Profit $ 3002. Sales ($840 + $850 + $170) $1,860Costs:Joint costs $800Frozen dinner costs 440Salisbury steak costs 200Tanning costs 80Total costs 1,520Profit $ 340Although it is more profitable to process all three productsfurther than it is to sell them all at the split-off point, it isimportant to look at the economic benefit from further processingof each individual product.3. Steaks to frozen dinners:Additional revenue from processing further ($840 - $400)$440Additional cost for processing further 440Increase (decrease) in profit from processing further$ 0Hamburger to Salisbury steaks:Additional revenue from processing further ($850 - $600)$250Additional cost for processing further 200Increase (decrease) in profit from processing further$ 50Untanned hide to tanned hide:Additional revenue from processing further ($170 - $100)$ 70Additional cost for processing further 80Increase (decrease) in profit from processing further$ (10)Only the hamburger dictates that it should be processed further,because it is the only product whose additional revenue forprocessing further exceeds the additional cost. You areindifferent about processing further steak to frozen dinners, asthe incremental profit is 0.4. The resulting profit would be $350:Sales ($400 + $850 + $100) $1,350Costs:Joint costs $800Further processing of hamburger 200Total cost 1,000 Profit $ 3506-B5 (15-20 min.)1. Three Years TogetherKeep Replace Difference Cash operating costs $42,000 $27,000 $15,000 Old equipment, book value:Periodic write-off asdepreciation 15,000 -or lump-sum write-off - 15,000* Disposal value -6,000* 6,000 New equipment, acquisition cost 15,000** - 15,000 Total costs $57,000 $51,000 $ 6,000*In a formal income statement, these two items would be combined as "loss on disposal" of $15,000 - $6,000 = $9,000.**In a formal income statement, written off as straight-line depreciat ion of $15,000 ÷ 3 = $5,000 for each of three years.2. Three Years TogetherKeep Replace Difference Cash operating costs $42,000 $27,000 $15,000 Disposal value of old equipment - -6,000 6,000 New equipment, acquisition cost - 15,000 - 15,000 Total relevant costs $42,000 $36,000 $ 6,000This tabulation is clearer because it focuses on only those itemsthat affect the decision.3. Benefits of the replacement alternative* $15,000Deduct initial net cash outlay required* 9,000 Difference in favor of replacement $ 6,000 * 3 × ($14,000 - $9,000)** $15,000 - $6,000Also, the new equipment is likely to be faster, thus saving operator time. The latter is important, but it is not quantified in this problem.6-B6 (10 min.)1. The replacement alternative would be chosen because the countywould have $6,000 more cash accumulated in three years.2. The keep alternative would be chosen because the higher overallcosts of photocopying for the first year would be shown for thereplacement alternative (under accrual accounting):First YearKeep Replace Cash operating costs $14,000 $ 9,000 Depreciation expense 5,000 5,000 Loss on disposal 9,000 Total costs $19,000 $23,000Thus, the performance evaluation model might motivate the managerto make a decision that would be undesirable in the long run.6-1 An opportunity cost does not entail a disbursement of cash at any future time, whereas an outlay cost does entail an additional disbursement sooner or later.6-2 The $800 represents an opportunity cost. It is the amountforgone by rejecting an opportunity. It signifies that the value to the owner of keeping those strangers out of the summer house for that two-week period is at least $800.6-3 Accountants do not ordinarily record opportunity costs in accounting records because those records are traditionally concernedwith real transactions rather than possible transactions. It is impossible to record data on all lost opportunities.6-4 A differential cost is any difference in total cost or revenue between two alternatives. A differential cost is an incremental cost when one of the alternatives contains all the costs of the other plus some additional costs. The additional costs are the incremental costs– which are also differential.6-5 No. Incremental cost has a broader meaning. It is the addition to total costs by the adoption of some course of action. Another term, marginal cost, is used by economists to indicate the addition to costsfrom the manufacture of one additional unit. Of course, marginal cost is indeed the incremental cost of one unit.6-6 The decline in costs would be called differential or incremental savings.6-7 Not necessarily. Qualitative factors can favor either making or buying. Often factors such as product quality and assurance of delivery schedules favor making. However, sometimes establishing long-term relationships with suppliers is an important qualitative factor favoring the purchase of components.6-8 The choice in many cases is not really whether to make or buy. Instead, the choice is how best to use available capacity.6-9 Yes. The costs that make a difference when a product or department is being deleted are the avoidable costs.6-10 Four examples of scarce factors are: (a) labor hours, (b) money (investment capital), (c) supervisory hours, and (d) computer hours.6-11 Joint products are two or more manufactured products that (1) have relatively significant sales values and (2) are not separately identifiable as individual products until their split-off point. Examples of joint products include chemicals, lumber, flour, and meat.6-12 The split-off point is where the individual products produced in a joint process become separately identifiable. Costs before the split-off point are irrelevant for decisions about the individual products. They affect the decision about whether to undertake the entire production process, but they do not influence decisions about what to do with the individual products.6-13 Yes. Techniques for assigning joint-product costs to individual products are useful only for product costing, not for deciding onfurther processing after the split-off point. The product must be considered separately at that point apart from its joint cost. The proper basis of the decision on further processing is a comparison of incremental revenue versus incremental expense between the alternatives of selling at the split-off point and processing further.6-14 No. Once inventory has been purchased, the price paid is a sunk cost. It is true that selling at a price less than $5,000 would produce a reported loss. However, a sale at any price above $0 is economically beneficial provided that the only alternative is to scrap the inventory.6-15 No. Sunk costs are irrelevant to the replacement decision.6-16 No. Past costs are not relevant because they cannot be affected by a decision. Although past costs are often indispensable for formulating predictions, past costs themselves are not the predictions that are the inputs to decision models. Clear thinking is enhanced by these distinctions.6-17 Only b and c are relevant.a. Book value of old equipment is irrelevant to a replacementdecision because it does not change under any alternative andcannot be realized.b. Disposal value of old equipment is relevant to a replacementdecision because it can either be realized (by replacement) orforgone (by continued use).c. Cost of new equipment is relevant to a replacement decisionbecause it can be incurred (by replacement) or avoided (bycontinued use).6-18 Yes. Some expected future costs may be irrelevant because they will be the same under all feasible alternatives.6-19 Yes. The statement is correct in terms of total variable costs.6-20 Two reasons why unit costs should be analyzed with care in decision making are:1. Most unit costs are stable only over a certain range of output,and care must be taken to see that allowances are made whenalternatives are considered outside that range.2. Some unit costs are an allocation of fixed costs; thus when ahigher volume of output is being considered, unit cost willdecrease proportionately, and vice versa.Two other reasons are mentioned in the text:1. Some unit costs are based on both relevant and irrelevant factorsand should be broken down further before being considered.2. Unit costs must be reduced to the same base (denominator) beforecomparing or combining them.6-21 Sales personnel sometimes neglect to point out that the unit costs are based on outputs far in excess of the volume of their prospective customer.6-22 An inconsistency between a decision model and a performance evaluation model occurs when a decision about whether to replace a piece of equipment is based on the cash flow effects over the life of the equipment but a manager's performance evaluation is based on the first year's reported income. The loss on disposal of the equipment isirrelevant for decision purposes, but it affects the first year income, hence the performance evaluation.6-23 The wide use of income statements to evaluate performance may overly influence managers to maximize short-run performance that may hurt long-run performance. They may pass up profitable opportunities to replace equipment because of the large loss on disposal shown on thefirst year’s income statement.6-24 Yes, this statement is generally correct. Accountants record transactions. But opportunity cost is the cost of transactions that do not occur (or have not occurred yet). It is the cost of opportunities forgone. Managers usually have much better information about forgone opportunities than do accountants.6-25 Deciding whether to outsource payroll functions requires estimates of the cost of designing, maintaining, and using a payroll system internally compared to the cost of a contract with an outside supplier. To operate an internal payroll system requires hiring personnel with the needed expertise in both legal/governmental issues affecting payroll and information processing to implement a system. Small companies often find it less costly to outsource payroll to a company that has broad expertise in these areas.6-26 Whenever total costs are unitized by dividing by total units and the resulting unit costs are then used to predict new total costs based on a different level of production, errors are being made if any of the costs are fixed. If the new production level is higher, predicted total costs are overestimated. If the new production level is lower, predicted total costs are underestimated. Never unitize fixed costs if the resulting unit cost will be used for planning purposes!Consider the following simple example:Fixed Cost Variable Cost TotalTotal $100 $100 $200Units ÷10÷10÷10Unit Cost $10 $10 $20If a new planned number of units is 20, what will be the new, predicted total cost?The correct cost function and cost prediction isTotal Cost = $100 + $10 × Number of units= $100 + $10 × 20 =$300The correct cost function is based on the two amounts that are constant within the relevant range – the total fixed cost and the unit variable cost.The incorrect unitized cost function and incorrect and overestimated prediction isTotal Cost = $20 × Number of units= $20 × 20= $400It is easy to see that the error comes from treating fixed costs as if they were variable.6-27 The amount paid for inventory is a sunk cost. Once a company has the inventory, it cannot change what it paid for it. Thus the only relevant issue is what can be done with the inventory. If there is a choice of selling the inventory for less than what the company paid for it or not selling it at all, it is certainly better to get something rather than nothing for it.6-28 (10-15 min.)1. IndependentPractice Employee DifferenceOperating revenues $350,000 $110,000 $240,000 Operating expenses 220,000 -- 220,000 Income effects per year $130,000 $110,000 $ 20,000Choose Independent PracticeRevenues $350,000 Expenses:Outlay costs $220,000Opportunity cost of employee compensation 110,000 330,000 Income effects per year $ 20,000Each tabulation produces the key difference of $20,000. As ageneral rule, we favor using the first tabulation when feasible.It offers a straightforward presentation of inflows and outflowsunder sharply stated alternatives.2. Choice as EmployeeRevenue $ 110,000Expenses:Outlay costs $ 0Opportunity cost of accounting practice 130,000 130,000 Income effects per year $ (20,000)If the employee alternative is selected, the key difference infavor of becoming a sole practitioner is again $20,000.Bridgeman is sacrificing $20,000 to avoid the risks of anindependent practice.6-29 (10-15 min.)Alternatives Under Consideration(1) (2) (1) - (2)Sell, Rent, and HoldInvest in Bonds Present Home DifferenceRevenue $10,000* $ - $10,000 Less: Outlay cost 12,000 6,000 6,000 Income effects per year $ (2,000) $(6,000) $ 4,000 *5% × $200,000Advantage of selling the home is $6,000 - $2,000 = $4,000. Obviously, if rent is higher, the advantage decreases.The above analysis does not contain explicit opportunity costs. If opportunity costs were a part of the analysis, the following presentation applies (whereby the interest on investment in bonds is not listed as a separate alternative but is regarded as a forgone alternative):Alternative Chosen:Hold Present HomeOpportunity cost $(10,000)Outlay cost 6,000Income effects per year $ (4,000)As before, the advantage of selling the home and renting is$4,000. The opportunity cost of home ownership is 5% × 200,000 = $10,000.6-30 (15-20 min.) Opportunity cost is the maximum available contribution to profit forgone by using limited resources for a particular purpose. In this case, the opportunity cost of the machine when analyzing the alternative to produce 12-oz. bottles of Juice Cocktails is $90,000, the larger of the $90,000 contribution margin from additional sales of the 100% Juices or the $75,000 proceeds from the sale of the machine. The $160,000 historical cost of the machine is a past cost and thus irrelevant.6-31 (15-20 min.) The first tabulation is probably easier to understand, but the choice of a tabulation is a matter of taste:(a) (b) (c)Expand Expand Rent toLaboratory Eye GiftTesting Clinic Shop Revenues $330,000 $500,000 $11,000Expenses 290,000 480,000 0Income effects per year $ 40,000 $ 20,000 $11,000Treating the gift shop as the forgone (rejected) alternative, the tabulation is:(a) (b)Expand ExpandLaboratory Testing Eye Clinic Revenue $330,000 $500,000 Expenses:Outlay costs $290,000 $480,000Opportunity cost,rent forgone 11,000 301,000 11,000 491,000 Income effects per year $ 29,000 $ 9,000The numbers favor laboratory testing, which will generate a contribution to hospital income that is $20,000 greater than the eyeclinic's.The numbers have been analyzed correctly under both tabulations. Both answer the key query: What difference does it make? As a general rule, we prefer using the first tabulation. It is a straightforward presentation.6-32 (15 min.)1. It is easiest to analyze total costs, not unit costs.Make PurchaseDirect materials $400,000Avoidable overhead costs:Indirect labor 30,000Supplies 20,000Allocated occupancy cost 0Purchase cost $420,000Total relevant costs $450,000 $420,000The difference in favor of purchasing is $450,000 - $420,000 =$30,000.2. Because the quantitative difference is small, qualitative factorsmay dominate the decision. Companies using a just-in-time systemneed assurance of both quality and timeliness of supplies ofmaterials, parts, and components. A small, local company may notbe reliable enough for Bose. In essence, Bose may be willing to"invest" $30,000, the quantitative advantage of purchasing, inorder to have more control over the supply of the components.The division manager may have made the right decision for thewrong reason. He incorrectly ignored avoidable fixed costs,leading to a mistaken belief that making the components was lesscostly by $.20 per unit or $20,000 in total. The $50,000 ofavoidable fixed costs makes the purchase option less costly by$30,000. If the manager's decision is to make the component, itshould be because forgoing profits of $30,000 has a long-runqualitative benefit of more than $30,000, not because the bid isgreater than the variable cost6-33 (20-25 min.)Nantucket Nectars should make the bottles.Make BuyPer PerTotal Bottle Total Bottle Purchase cost $250,000 $.250 Direct materials $80,000 $.080Direct labor 30,000 .030Variable overhead 60,000 .060Avoidable fixedoverhead 60,000 .060 Total relevant costs $230,000 $.230 $250,000 $.250。

  1. 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性,平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
  2. 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
  3. 3、如文档侵犯您的权益,请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间:9:00-18:30)。

CHAPTER 5 COVERAGE OF LEARNING OBJECTIVESCHAPTER 5Relevant Information for Decision Making with a Focus on Pricing Decisions5-A1 (40-50 min.)1. INDEPENDENCE COMPANYContribution Income StatementFor the Year Ended December 31, 2009(in thousands of dollars)Sales $2,200 Less variable expensesDirect material $400Direct labor 330Variable manufacturing overhead (Schedule 1) 150 Total variable manufacturing cost ofgoods sold $880 Variable selling expenses 80Variable administrative expenses 25Total variable expenses 985 Contribution margin $ 1,215 Less fixed expenses:Fixed manufacturing overhead (Schedule 2) $345Selling expenses 220Administrative expenses 119 Total fixed expenses 684 Operating income $ 531INDEPENDENCE COMPANYAbsorption Income StatementFor the Year Ended December 31, 2009(in thousands of dollars)Sales $2,200 Less manufacturing cost of goods sold:Direct material $400Direct labor 330Manufacturing overhead (Schedules 1 and 2) 495 Total manufacturing cost of goods sold 1,225 Gross margin $ 975 Less:Selling expenses $300Administrative expenses 144 444 Operating income $ 531INDEPENDENCE COMPANYSchedules of Manufacturing OverheadFor the Year Ended December 31, 2009(in thousands of dollars)Schedule 1: Variable CostsSupplies $ 20Utilities, variable portion 40Indirect labor, variable portion 90 $150 Schedule 2: Fixed CostsUtilities, fixed portion $ 15Indirect labor, fixed portion 50Depreciation 200Property taxes 20Supervisory salaries 60 345 Total manufacturing overhead $495 2. Change in revenue $200,000Change in total contribution margin:Contribution margin ratio in part 1is $1,215 ÷ $2,200 = .552Ratio times decrease in revenue is .552 × $200,000 $ 110,400 Operating income before change 531,000 New operating income $420,600 This analysis is readily done by using data from the contribution income statement.In contrast, the data in the absorption income statement must be analyzed and split into variable and fixed categories before the effect on operating income can beestimated.5-A2 (25-30 min.)1. A contribution format, which is similar to Exhibit 5-6, clarifies the analysis.Without WithSpecial Effect of SpecialOrder Special Order Order Units 2,000,000 150,000 2,150,000Total Per UnitSales $11,000,000 $660,000 $4.40 1$11,660,000 Less variable expenses:Manufacturing $ 3,500,000 $322,500 $2.15 2$ 3,822,500 Selling & administrative 800,000 35,250 .2353 835,250 Total variable expenses $ 4,300,000 $357,750 $2.385 $ 4,647,250 Contribution margin $ 6,700,000 $302,250 $2.015 $ 7,002,250 Less fixed expenses:Manufacturing $ 3,000,000 0 0.00 $ 3,000,000 Selling & administrative 2,200,000 0 0.00 2,200,000 Total fixed expenses $ 5,200,000 0 0.00 $ 5,200,000 Operating income $ 1,500,000 $302,250 $2.015 $ 1,802,250 1$660,000 ÷ 150,000 = $4.402Regular unit cost = $3,500,000 ÷ 2,000,000 = $1.75 Logo .40Variable manufacturing costs $2.153Regular unit cost = $800,000 ÷ 2,000,000 = $ .40 Less sales commissions not paid (3% of $5.50) (.165)Regular unit cost, excluding sales commission $ .2352. Operating income from selling 7.5% more units would increase by $302,250 ÷$1,500,000 = 20.15%. Note also that the average selling price on regularbusiness was $5.50. The full cost, including selling and administrative expenses, was $4.75. The $4.75, plus the 40¢ per logo, less savings in commissionsof .165¢ came to $4.985. The president apparently wanted $4.985 + .08($4.985)= $4.985 + .3988 = $5.3838 per pen.Most students will probably criticize the president for being too stubborn. Thecost to the company was the forgoing of $302,250 of income in order to protectthe company's image and general market position. Whether $302,250 was a wise investment in the future is a judgment that managers are paid for rendering.5-A3 (15-20 min.)The purpose of this problem is to underscore the idea that any of a number of general formulas might be used that, properly employed, would achieve the same target selling prices. Desired sales = $7,500,000 + $1,500,000 = $9,000,000.The target markup percentage would be:1. 100% of direct materials and direct labor costs of $4,500,000.Computation is: ($9,000,000 - $4,500,000) ÷ $4,500,000 = 100%2. 50% of the full cost of jobs of $6,000,000.Computation is: ($9,000,000 - $6,000,000) ÷ $6,000,000 = 50%3. [$9,000,000 – ($3,500,000 + $1,000,000 + $700,000)] ÷ $5,200,000 = 73.08%4. ($9,000,000 - $7,500,000) ÷ $7,500,000 = 20%5. [$9,000,000 – ($3,500,000 + $1,000,000 + $700,000 + $500,000)] ÷ $5,700,000= $3,300,000 ÷ $5,700,000 = 57.9%If the contractor is unable to maintain these profit percentages consistently, the desired operating income of $1,500,000 cannot be obtained.1. Revenue ($360 × 70,000) $25,200,000Total cost over product life 16,000,000 Estimated contribution to profit $ 9,200,000 Desired (target) contribution to profit40% × $25,200,000 10,080,000 Deficiency in profit $ 880,000The product should not be released to production.2. Previous total estimated cost $16,000,000Cost savings from suppliers.20 × .70 × $8,000,000 1,120,000 Revised total estimated cost $14,880,000 Revised total contribution to profit:$25,200,000 - $14,880,000 $10,320,000 Desired (target) contribution to profit 10,080,000 Excess contribution to profit $ 240,000The product should be released to production.3. Previous revised total estimated cost fromrequirement 2. $14,880,000 Process improvement savings:.25 × .30 × $8,000,000 $600,000Less cost of new technology 220,000 380,000 Revised total estimated cost 14,500,000 Revised total contribution to profit:$25,200,000 - $14,500,000 $10,700,000 Desired (target) contribution to profit 10,080,000 Excess contribution to profit $ 620,000 The product should be released to production.1. KINGLAND MANUFACTURINGContribution Income StatementFor the Year Ended December 31, 2009(In thousands of dollars)Sales $13,000 Less variable expenses:Direct material $4,000Direct labor 2,000Variable indirect manufacturingcosts (Schedule 1) 960Total variable manufacturing cost of goods sold $6,960Variable selling expenses:Sales commissions $500Shipping expenses 300 800Variable clerical salaries 400Total variable expenses 8,160 Contribution margin $ 4,840 Less fixed expenses:Manufacturing (Schedule 2) $ 702Selling (advertising) 400 Administrative-executive salaries 100Total fixed expenses 1,202 Operating income $ 3,638KINGLAND MANUFACTURINGAbsorption Income StatementFor the Year Ended December 31, 2009(In thousands of dollars)Sales $13,000 Less manufacturing cost of goods sold:Direct material $4,000Direct labor 2,000Indirect manufacturing costs(Schedules 1 and 2) 1,662Gross profit 5,338 Selling expenses:Sales commissions $500Advertising 400Shipping expenses 300 $1,200 Administrative expenses:Executive salaries $100Clerical salaries 400 500 1,700 Operating income $ 3,638KINGLAND MANUFACTURINGSchedules 1 and 2Indirect Manufacturing CostsFor the Year Ended December 31, 2009(In thousands of dollars)Schedule 1: Variable CostsCutting bits $ 60Abrasives for machining 100Indirect labor 800 $ 960Schedule 2: Fixed CostsFactory supervisors' salaries $100Factory methods research 40Long-term rent, factory 100Fire insurance on equipment 2Property taxes on equipment 30Depreciation on equipment 400Factory superintendent's salary 30 702Total indirect manufacturing costs $1,6622. Operating income would decrease from $3,638,000 to $3,268,000:Decrease in revenue $1,000,000Decrease in total contribution margin*:Ratio times revenue is .37 × $1,000,000 $ 370,000Decrease in fixed expenses 0Operating income before increase 3,638,000New operating income $3,268,000*Contribution margin ratio in contribution income statement is $4,840 ÷$13,000 = .37 (rounded).The above analysis is readily calculated by using data from the contribution income statement. In contrast, the data in the absorption income statement must be analyzed and divided into variable and fixed categories before the effect on operating income can be estimated.5-B2 (30-40 min.)1. DANUBE COMPANYIncome StatementFor the Year Ended December 31, 20X0Total Per Unit Sales $40,000,000 $20.00Less variable expenses:Manufacturing $18,000,000Selling & administrative 9,000,000 27,000,000 13.50Contribution margin $13,000,000 $ 6.50Less fixed expenses:Manufacturing $ 4,000,000Selling & administrative 6,000,000 10,000,000 5.00Operating income $ 3,000,000 $ 1.50 2. Additional details are either in the statement of the problem or in the solution torequirement 1:Total Per Unit Full manufacturing cost $22,000,000 $11.00 Variable cost:Manufacturing $18,000,000 $ 9.00 Selling and administrative 9,000,000 4.50 Total variable cost $27,000,000 $13.50 Full cost = fully allocated cost*Full manufacturing cost $22,000,000 $11.00 Selling and administrative expenses 15,000,000 7.50 Full cost $37,000,000 $18.50 Gross margin ($40,000,000 - $22,000,000) $18,000,000 $ 9.00 Contrib. margin ($40,000,000 - $27,000,000) $13,000,000 $ 6.50 * Students should be alerted to the loose use of these words. Their meaning maynot be exactly the same from company to company. Thus, "fully allocatedcost" in some companies may be used to refer to manufacturing costs only.3. Ricardo’s analysis is incorrect. He was on the right track, but he did notdistinguish sufficiently between variable and fixed costs. For example, whenmultiplying the additional quantity ordered by the $11 full manufacturing cost, hefailed to recognize that $2.00 of the $11 full manufacturing cost was a "unitized"fixed cost allocation. The first fallacy is in regarding the total fixed cost asthough it fluctuated like a variable cost. A unit fixed cost can be misleading if itis used as a basis for predicting how total costs will behave.A second false assumption is that no selling and administrative expenses will beaffected except commissions. Shipping expenses and advertising allowances willbe affected also -- unless arrangements with Costco on these items differ fromthe regular arrangements.The following summary, which is similar to Exhibit 5-6 in the textbook, is acorrect analysis. The middle columns are all that are really necessary.Without WithSpecial Effect of SpecialOrder Special Order Order Units 2,000,000 100,000 2,100,000Total Per UnitSales $40,000,000 $1,600,000 $16.00 $41,600,000 Less variable expenses:Manufacturing $18,000,000 $ 900,000 $ 9.00 $18,900,000 Selling and administrative 9,000,000 330,000 3.30* 9,330,000 Total variable expenses $27,000,000 $1,230,000 $12.30 $28,230,000 Contribution margin $13,000,000 $ 370,000 $ 3.70 $13,370,000 Less fixed expenses:Manufacturing $ 4,000,000 0 0.00 $ 4,000,000 Selling and administrative 6,000,000 20,000 0.20** 6,020,000 Total fixed expenses $10,000,000 20,000 0.20 $10,020,000 Operating income $ 3,000,000 $ 350,000 $ 3.50 $ 3,350,000 * Regular variable selling and administrative expenses,$9,000,000 ÷ 2,000,000 = $ 4.50 Less: Average sales commission at 6% of $20 = (1.20) Regular variable sell. and admin. expenses, less commission $ 3.30**Fixed selling and administrative expenses, specialcommission, $20,000 ÷ 100,000 .20Some students may wish to enter the $20,000 as an extra variable cost, makingthe unit variable selling and administrative cost $3.50 and thus adding no fixedcost. The final result would be the same; in any event, the cost is relevantbecause it would not exist without the special order.Some instructors may wish to point out that a 5% increase in volume wouldcause an 11.7% increase in operating income, which seems like a highinvestment by Danube to maintain a rigid pricing policy.4. Ricardo is incorrect. Operating income would have declined from $3,000,000 to$2,850,000, a decline of $150,000. Ricardo’s faulty analysis follows:Old fixed manufacturing cost per unit,$4,000,000 ÷ 2,000,000 = $2.00 New fixed manufacturing cost per unit,$4,000,000 ÷ 2,500,000 = 1.60 "Savings" $ .40Loss on variable manufacturing costs per unit,$8.70 - $9.00 (.30) Net savings per unit in manufacturing costs $ .10The analytical pitfalls of unit-cost analysis can be avoided by using thecontribution approach and concentrating on the totals:Without Effect of WithSpecial Special SpecialOrder Order Order Sales $40,000,000 $4,350,000a$44,350,000Variable manufacturingcosts $18,000,000 $4,500,000b$22,500,000 Other variable costs 9,000,000 0 9,000,000 Total variable costs $27,000,000 $4,500,000 $31,500,000 Contribution margin $13,000,000 $ (150,000)c$12,850,000a500,000 × $8.70 selling price of special orderb 500,000 × $9.00 variable manufacturing cost per unit of special orderc 500,000 × $.30 negative contribution margin per unit of special orderNo matter how fixed manufacturing costs are unitized, or spread over the unitsproduced, their total of $4,000,000 remains unchanged by the special order.5-B3 (10-15 min.)1. Cost-plus pricing is adding a specified markup to cost to cover those components of the value chain not included in the cost plus a desired profit. In this case the markup is 30% of production cost.Price charged for piston pin = 1.30 × $50.00 = $65.00. If the estimated selling price is only $46 and this price cannot be influenced by Caterpillar, a manager would be unlikely to favor releasing this product for production.2. Target costing assumes the market price cannot be influenced by companies except by changing the value of the product to consumers. The price charged would then be the $46 estimated by market research.The highest acceptable manufactured cost or target cost, T, isDollarsTarget Price $ 46.00Target Cost TTarget Gross Margin $ .30T46 – T = .30T1.30T = 46T = 46 ÷ 1.30 = $35.383. The required cost reduction over the product’s life isExisting manufacturing cost $50.00Target manufacturing cost 35.38Required cost reduction $14.62Steps that Caterpillar managers can take to meet the required cost reduction include value engineering during the design phase, Kaizen costing during the production phase, and activity-based management throughout the product’s life.5-1 Precision is a measure of the accuracy of certain data. It is a quantifiable term. Relevance is an indication of the pertinence of certain facts for the problem at hand. Ideally, data should be both precise and relevant, but relevance generally takes priority.5-2 Decisions may have both quantitative and qualitative aspects corresponding to the nature of the facts being considered before deciding. Quantitative implications of alternative choices can be expressed in monetary or numerical terms, such as variable costs, initial investment, etc. Other relevant features may not be quantifiable, such as the quality of life in a choice between locating in San Francisco or New York. The advantage of quantitative information is that it is more objective and often easier to compare alternatives than with qualitative judgments.5-3 The accountant's role in decision-making is primarily that of a technical expert on relevant information analysis, especially relevant costs. The accountant is usually an information provider, not the decision maker, although the accountant may be part of a management team charged with making decisions.5-4 No. Only future costs that are different under different alternatives are relevant to a decision.5-5 Past data are unchangeable regardless of present or future action and thus would not differ under different alternatives.5-6 Past costs may be bases for formulating predictions. However, past costs are not inputs to the decision model itself because past costs cannot be changed by the decision.5-7 The contribution approach has several advantages over the absorption approach, including a better analysis of cost-volume-profit relationships, clearer presentation of all variable costs, and more relevant arrangement of data for such decisions as make-or-buy or product expansion.5-8 The terms that describe an income statement that emphasizes the differences between variable or fixed costs are contribution approach, variable costing, or direct costing.5-9 The commonalty of approach is the focus on the differences between future costs and revenues of different available alternatives.5-10 No, fixed costs are not always irrelevant. Often they are not relevant. However, they can be relevant if they are affected by the decision being considered.5-11 Customers are one of the factors influencing pricing decisions because they can buy or do without the product, they can make the product themselves, or they can usually purchase a similar product from another supplier.5-12 Target cost per unit is the average total unit cost over the product’s life cycle that will yield the desired profit margin.5-13 Value engineering is a cost-reduction technique, used primarily during the design function in the value chain, that uses information about all value chain functions to satisfy customer needs while reducing costs.5-14 Kaizen costing is the Japanese term for continuous improvement during manufacturing.5-15 In target costing, managers start with a market price. Then they try to design a product with costs low enough to be profitable at that price. Thus, prices essentially determine costs.5-16 Customer demands and requirements are important in the product development process. Many companies seek customer input on the design of product features. They seek to reduce non-value-added costs without affecting product features that are valuable to customers. Suppliers are also important. Companies purchase many of the materials used in products. They have to work with suppliers to get the lowest cost for these materials.5-17 Not necessarily. There are other important factors that management must consider before discontinuing a product. The product may be necessary to round out a product line. The product may be the company’s attempt to break into a new market area or new product class.5-18 The variable costs of a job can be misused as a guide to pricing. However, the adjusted markup percentages based on variable costs can have the same price result as those based on total costs, plus they have the advantage of indicating the minimum price at which any sale may be considered profitable even in the short run.5-19 Three examples of pricing decisions are (1) pricing new products, (2) pricing products sold under private labels, and (3) responding to new prices of a competitor's products.5-20 Three popular markup formulas are (1) as a percentage of variable manufacturing costs, (2) as a percentage of total variable costs, and (3) as a percentage of full costs.5-21 Two long-run effects that inhibit price cutting are (a) the effects on longer-run price structures and (b) the effects on longer-run relations with customers.5-22 Full costs are more popular than variable costs for pricing because price stability is encouraged and in the long run all costs must be recovered to stay in business.5-23 No. There is a confusion between total fixed costs and unit fixed costs. Increasing sales volume will decrease unit fixed costs, but not total fixed costs. This assumes that the volume increase results in operating levels that are still within the relevant range.5-24 Managers generally find contribution margin income statements more useful, especially if they are concerned with short-term results. The contribution margin statement provides information on the immediate profit impact of increases or decreases in sales.5-25 Marginal cost is the additional cost resulting from producing and selling one additional unit. It changes as production volume changes. With a given fixed capacity, marginal cost generally decreases up to a point and then increases. Variable cost is the accountant's approximation to marginal cost. It remains constant over the relevant range of volume. Because the difference between these two costs often is not material (within the relevant range), in such cases we can use the variable-cost estimate of marginal cost for decision-making purposes.5-26 Pricing decisions must be made within legal constraints. These laws help protect companies from predatory and discriminatory pricing. Predatory pricing involves setting prices so low that they drive competitors out of the market. Discriminatory pricing is charging different prices to different customers for the same product or service.5-27 Managers are directly involved in the research and development and the design functions. During the initial product research phase, managers often are involved in surveys, focus groups (with major airlines), and other market research activities to explore the potential for a new airplane. During process and product design, managers help with such tasks as negotiations with suppliers and cost analyses. Production managers provide input regarding cost reduction ideas. Marketing managers provide input regarding customer needs (a super large plane with more than 500 seats versus more medium-sized planes that can serve more markets). Distribution managers provide input regarding the costs of various channels of distribution. Finally, managers involved with customer relations provide input regarding the likely cost-to-serve profile for expected customers for a new product.5-28 (5 min.)All the data given are historical costs. Most students will identify the $5 and $7 prices as relevant. They will also declare that the $3 price of popcorn is irrelevant. Press them to see that the relevant admission prices are expected future costs that will differ between the alternatives. The past prices are being used as a basis for predicting the future prices.Similarly, the past prices of popcorn were not different. Hence, they are regarded as irrelevant under the assumption that the future prices will not differ.5-29 (20 min.) Some students may forget to apply the 10% wage rate increase to both alternatives.(1) Historical direct materials were $5.00per unit; direct labor was $6.00 per unit. (2) (2) Direct material costs are expected tofall by 10%, or 50¢ per unit. Directlabor costs are affected by a 10% rateincrease and a 5% increase in labortime if the new material is used.(3) (3) Cost comparisons per unit:Old NewMaterial MaterialDirect material $ 5.00 $ 4.50Direct labor$6.00 × 110% 6.60$6.00×110%×105% 6.93Expected futurecost $11.60 $11.43(4) The chosen action is implemented,and the evaluation of performance be-comes a principal source of feedback.This historical information aids thedecision process (prediction, decision,and implementation) of future decisions.5-30 (10 min.)Relevant costs are the future costs that differ between alternatives. Among the irrelevant costs are the cost of tickets to the symphony, automobile costs, and baby-sitting cost for the first four hours. The relevant costs are:Symphony Game Difference Tickets, 2 @ $20 each $0 $40 $40Parking 0 6 6Baby-sitting, 1 extrahour @ $7 0 7 7Total $0 $53 $53 The baseball game is $53 more costly to the Petrocelis than is the symphony.5-31 (10 min.) This is a basic exercise. Answers are in thousands of dollars.1. 200 + 200 + 170 = 5702. 800 - 570 = 2303. 230 - 150 = 804. 570 – 200 = 370; or 200 + 170 = 3705-32 (10-15 min.) This is a basic exercise.Sales ¥950Variable expenses:Direct materials ¥290Direct labor 160Variable factory overhead 60(a) Variable manufacturing cost ofgoods sold ¥510Variable selling and admin. expenses 100Total variable expenses 610(b) Contribution margin ¥340Fixed expenses:Fixed factory overhead ¥120Fixed selling and administrativeexpenses 45 165(c) Operating income ¥ 1755-33 (15-20 min.)This is a straightforward exercise in basic terms and relationships. To fill all theblanks, both absorption and contribution income statements must be prepared. Data arein millions of dollars. Required answers are in italics.Absorption ContributionApproach Approach Sales $920 $920 Direct materials used $350 $350Direct labor 210 210Variable indirectmanufacturing costs 100 100f. Variable manufacturing cost ofgoods sold 660 Variable selling and administrativeexpenses 90 Total variable expenses 750 k. Contribution margin 170 Fixed factory overhead 50 50g. Manufacturing cost of goods sold 710j. Gross profit 210Fixed selling and administrativeexpenses 80 80 130 Variable selling and administrativeexpenses 90 170Operating income $ 40 $ 405-34 (10-20 min.) Answers are in thousands of rands (ZAR).Prime costs = Direct material + Direct labor600 = 370 + DLDL = 230The body of a model income statement follows. The computations are explainedfor each item that was originally blank. Numbers given in the problem are in bold.Sales, 780 + 120 ZAR900Direct materials ZAR370Direct labor, 600 - 370 230Factory overhead, 780 - (370 + 230) 180Manufacturing cost of goods sold 780Gross margin ZAR120Selling and administrative expenses* 100Operating income ZAR 20*120 - 205-35 (15-20 min.) The data are placed in the format of the income statement, and the unknowns are computed as shown:Sales $890 Variable expensesDirect materials $150Direct labor 170Variable indirect manufacturing 110Variable manufacturing cost of goods sold 430 1 Variable selling and administrative expenses 260 2Total variable expenses (890 - 200) 690Contribution margin 200 Fixed expensesFixed indirect manufacturing $ 90 3Fixed selling and administrative expenses 100 190 Operating income $ 10 1150 + 170 + 110 = 4302890 - 200 = 690; 690 - 430 = 2603Total fixed expenses = 200 - 10 = 190Fixed indirect manufacturing = 190 - 100 = 905-36 (10-15 min.)1. Operating income would increase by $300 if the order is accepted.Without Effect of WithSpecial Special SpecialOrder Order Order Units 2,000 100 2,100 Sales $36,000 $1,500 $37,500 Purchase cost 20,000 1,000 21,000 Variable printing cost 4,000 200 4,200 Total variable cost 24,000 1,200 25,200 Contribution margin 12,000 300 12,300 Fixed cost 8,000 0 8,000 Operating income $ 4,000 $ 300 $ 4,300 2. If maximizing operating income in the short run were the only goal, the ordershould be accepted. However, if qualitative considerations favoring rejection are worth more than the $300 increase in operating income, the manager wouldreject the offer. For example, accepting the offer from F. C. Kitsap may generate similar offers from other clubs who now willingly pay the $18 normal price.Lost profits on such business might more than offset the $300 gain on this sale.On the other hand, this might be a way of gaining F. C. Kitsap as a regularcustomer who will then buy other items that generate a profit well in excess ofthe $300.。

相关文档
最新文档