0% found this document useful (0 votes)
9 views9 pages

Chapter 3: Absorption Costing and Variable Costing Example: Per Aircraft Per Month

The document discusses absorption costing and variable costing methods, highlighting their differences in treating manufacturing costs. It provides examples of cost calculations per aircraft and outlines the implications of each costing method on financial statements and net operating income. Additionally, it addresses the advantages and disadvantages of both methods, emphasizing the impact on decision-making and external reporting requirements.

Uploaded by

tranhakhanh145
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
9 views9 pages

Chapter 3: Absorption Costing and Variable Costing Example: Per Aircraft Per Month

The document discusses absorption costing and variable costing methods, highlighting their differences in treating manufacturing costs. It provides examples of cost calculations per aircraft and outlines the implications of each costing method on financial statements and net operating income. Additionally, it addresses the advantages and disadvantages of both methods, emphasizing the impact on decision-making and external reporting requirements.

Uploaded by

tranhakhanh145
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 9

‭Chapter 3: Absorption costing and Variable costing‬ ‭Example:‬

‭I. General Understanding‬


‭Per Aircraft‬ ‭Per Month‬

‭Absorption Cost‬ ‭Variable Cost‬ S‭ elling price. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .‬ ‭ 100,000‬


$
‭Direct materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .‬ ‭$19,000‬
t‭ reats all manufacturing costs as‬ ‭ nly those manufacturing costs that‬
o ‭Direct labor. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .‬ ‭$5,000‬
‭product costs, regardless of whether‬ ‭vary with output are treated as product‬ ‭Variable manufacturing overhead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .‬ ‭$1,000‬
‭they are variable or fixed.‬ ‭costs. (direct materials, direct labor,‬ ‭Fixed manufacturing overhead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .‬ ‭$70,000‬
‭variable manuf overhead)‬ ‭Variable selling and administrative expenses. . . .‬ ‭$10,000‬
‭ he cost of a unit of product consist of‬
T
‭Fixed selling and administrative expenses. . . . . . .‬ ‭$20,000‬
‭direct materials, direct labor, and both‬ ‭ ote: Fixed manuf overhead is period‬
N
‭variable and fixed manufacturing‬ ‭cost (like admi expens, …)‬
‭overhead‬
t‭ he cost of a unit of product in‬ ‭January‬ ‭February‬ ‭March‬
‭Note: absorption costing includes all‬
‭manufacturing costs in product costs, it‬ ‭inventory or in cost of goods sold‬
‭ eginning inventory . . . . . . . . . . . . . .‬
B ‭‬
0 ‭‬
0 ‭‬
1
‭is frequently referred to as the full cost‬ ‭doesnt contain Fixed manuf overhead‬
‭Units produced . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .‬ ‭1‬ ‭2‬ ‭4‬
‭method‬ ‭Units sold . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .‬ ‭1‬ ‭1‬ ‭5‬
‭Ending inventory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .‬ ‭0‬ ‭1‬ ‭0‬

‭II. Variable Costing vs Absorption Costing‬

‭ ariable Costing Contribution Format Income Statement‬


V
‭1.‬ ‭Variable Costing Unit Product Cost → Variable Costing Cost of Goods Sold‬
‭2.‬ ‭Selling and Administrative Expenses‬
‭3.‬ ‭Putting all together‬
‭4.‬ ‭Contribution Margin → for each month‬

‭1. Compute 1&2 in Variable costing form‬

‭Variable Costing Unit Product Cost‬

‭Direct materials‬ ‭$19,000‬

‭Direct labor‬ ‭5,000‬

‭Variable manufacturing overhead‬ ‭1,000‬

‭Variable costing unit product cost‬ ‭25,000‬


‭4. Conducting Contribution Margin (Selling price - VC per/total)‬
‭Variable Costing Cost of Goods Sold‬
‭Contribution Margin per Aircraft Sold‬
‭January‬ ‭February‬ ‭March‬
‭Selling price per aircraft‬ ‭$100,000‬
‭Variable production cost (a)‬ ‭$25,000‬ ‭$25,000‬ ‭$25,000‬
‭Variable production cost per aircraft‬ ‭$25,000‬
‭Units sold (b)‬ ‭1‬ ‭1‬ ‭5‬
‭Variable selling and administrative expense per aircraft‬ ‭10,000‬ ‭35,000‬
‭Variable cost of goods sold (a) × (b).‬ ‭$25,000‬ ‭$25,000‬ ‭$125,000‬
‭Contribution margin per aircraft‬ ‭$ 65,000‬
‭2. Selling and Administrative Expenses‬

‭Variable Costing Cost of Goods Sold‬


‭January‬ ‭February‬ ‭March‬
‭January‬ ‭February‬ ‭March‬
‭Number of aircraft sold‬ ‭1‬ ‭1‬ ‭5‬
‭ ariable selling and administrative expense‬
V
‭(@ $10,000 per unit sold)‬ ‭$10,000‬ ‭$10,000‬ ‭$50,000‬ ‭Contribution margin per aircraft‬ ‭x‬ ‭$65,000‬ ‭$65,000‬ ‭$65,000‬

‭Fixed selling and administrative expense‬ ‭20,000‬ ‭20,000‬ ‭20,000‬ ‭Total contribution margin‬ ‭$65,000‬ ‭$65,000‬ ‭$325,000‬

‭Total selling and administrative expense‬ ‭$30,000‬ ‭$30,000‬ ‭$70,000‬ ‭Total fixed expenses‬ ‭90,000‬ ‭90,000‬ ‭90,000‬

‭Net operating income (loss)‬ ‭$(25,000)‬ ‭$(25,000)‬ ‭$235,000‬


‭3. Putting all together‬
‭CONCLUSION‬

-‭ ‬ D‭ ù ng VC method thì sẽ record DL, DC, ManuOver vào Cost of Goods‬


‭-‬ ‭Có 2 cách lập IncStatement (nhận biết Net operating income là gain/loss):‬
‭+ Dù ng cách cũ : Tính VC per unit product cost → Tính ra VC of cost of goods‬
‭+ Dù ng cách CM:‬
‭Selling price - VC = CM/unit → CM/unit x Volume = Total CM‬
‭Total CM - Total Fixed expenses = Net operating income‬

‭ ote:‬‭In‬‭the‬‭VC‬‭contribution‬‭format‬‭income‬‭statement,‬‭V‬‭Selling‬‭and‬‭Adminis‬
N
‭expens are in Variable expenses (vice versa with fixed)‬
‭Absorption Costing Income Statement:‬ ‭Reconciliation of Variable Costing with Absorption Costing Income‬
‭1.‬ ‭Conduct Absorption Costing Unit Product Cost → Income statement‬ ‭→ There are certain differences between VC and AC in IncStatement:‬
‭+‬ ‭Under‬ ‭absorption‬ ‭costing‬ ‭some‬ ‭fixed‬‭manufacturing‬‭overhead‬‭is‬‭capitalized‬
‭Absorption Costing Unit Product Cost‬ ‭in‬ ‭inventories‬ ‭(included‬ ‭in‬ ‭Product‬ ‭Cost)‬ ‭rather‬ ‭than‬ ‭expenses‬ ‭on‬ ‭the‬
‭IncStatement → some cases net operating income is lower than VC‬
‭January‬ ‭February‬ ‭March‬
‭→ Differences occurs when Inventories increase or decrease:‬
‭Direct materials‬ ‭$19,000‬ ‭$19,000‬ ‭$19,000‬

‭Direct labor‬ ‭5,000‬ ‭5,000‬ ‭5,000‬ ‭Cases‬ ‭Details‬

‭Variable manufacturing overhead‬ ‭1,000‬ ‭1,000‬ ‭1,000‬ ‭ C > VC‬


A
‭inventories‬ ‭because a portion of the fixed‬
‭ ixed manufacturing overhead‬
F ‭units produced > number of units sold‬ ‭manufacturing overhead for the‬
‭($70,000 ÷ 1 unit produced in January; $70,000 ÷ 2 units‬ ‭increase‬
‭period is deferred in inventory‬
‭produced in February; $70,000 ÷ 4 units produced in‬ ‭(AC)‬
‭March)‬ ‭70,000‬ ‭35,000‬ ‭17,500‬
‭ C < VC‬
A
‭Absorption costing unit product cost‬ ‭$95,000‬ ‭$60,000‬ ‭$42,500‬ ‭because a portion of the fixed‬
‭inventories‬
‭units produced < units sold‬ ‭manufacturing overhead from‬
‭decrease‬
‭ ote:‬‭fixed‬‭manufacturing‬‭overhead‬‭cost‬‭of‬‭$70,000‬‭is‬‭divided‬‭by‬‭the‬‭number‬
N ‭previous periods is released‬
‭of‬ ‭units‬ ‭produced‬ ‭to‬ ‭determine‬ ‭the‬ ‭fixed‬ ‭manufacturing‬ ‭overhead‬ ‭cost‬ ‭per‬ ‭from inventory.‬
‭unit.‬
‭no change in‬ ‭AC = VC‬
‭2.‬ ‭Conduct income statements‬ ‭units produced = units sold‬
‭inventories‬
‭Absorption Costing Unit Product Cost‬
‭III. Advantages and disadvantages of both variable and absorption costing.‬
‭January‬ ‭February‬ ‭March‬

‭Sales‬ ‭$100,000‬ ‭$100,000‬ ‭$500,000‬ ‭Negatives of AC‬


‭ ost of goods sold‬
C ‭Both‬ ‭Impact on the Manager‬ ‭ hose who agaist absorption costing argue‬
T
‭($95,000 × 1 unit; $60,000 × 1 unit; $60,000 × 1 unit +‬ ‭that it can distort financial results because‬
‭$42,500 × 4 units)‬ ‭95,000‬ ‭60,000‬ ‭230,000‬ ‭fixed manufacturing overhead costs can be‬
‭shifted between periods based on‬
‭Gross margin‬ ‭5,000‬ ‭40,000‬ ‭270,000‬
‭inventory changes‬‭. This may lead to poor‬
‭Selling and administrative expenses‬ ‭30,000‬ ‭30,000‬ ‭70,000‬ ‭decision-making.‬

‭Net operating income (loss)‬ ‭$(25,000)‬ ‭$10,000‬ ‭$200,000‬ I‭ n contrast, variable costing provides a clearer‬
‭picture because‬‭net operating income is‬
‭CONCLUSION‬ ‭directly linked to sales volume rather than‬
‭production levels‬‭. This makes it easier for‬
‭-‬ ‭Có nhiều điểm khác nhau giữ a absorption costing và variable costing‬
‭managers to predict profitability, as income‬
‭-‬ ‭The‬ ‭selling‬ ‭and‬ ‭administrative‬ ‭expenses‬ ‭equal‬ ‭the‬ ‭amounts‬ ‭reported‬ ‭in‬ ‭the‬ ‭only changes when sales change,‬‭aligning‬
‭variable‬ ‭costing‬ ‭income‬ ‭statements;‬ ‭however‬ ‭they‬ ‭are‬ ‭reported‬ ‭as‬ ‭one‬ ‭with their expectations.‬
‭amount‬ ‭rather‬ ‭than‬ ‭being‬ ‭separated‬ ‭into‬ ‭variable‬ ‭and‬ ‭fixed‬ ‭components‬ ‭-‬
‭khô ng report 2 cái variable và fixed‬
‭ bsorption‬
A ‭ VP Analysis, and Decision‬
C ‭ C treats fixed manufacturing overhead as a‬
A ‭Variable Costing and Theory of constraint (TOC)‬
‭costing‬ ‭Making‬ ‭variable cost. It assigns per unit fixed‬
I‭ n‬ ‭the‬ ‭Theory‬ ‭of‬‭Constraints‬‭(TOC)‬‭approach,‬‭companies‬‭use‬‭a‬‭form‬‭of‬‭variable‬
‭manufacturing overhead costs to production.‬
‭1. Treating fixed manufacturing overhead as a‬ ‭costing‬ ‭but‬ ‭treat‬ ‭direct‬ ‭labor‬ ‭as‬ ‭a‬ ‭fixed‬ ‭cost‬ ‭instead‬ ‭of‬ ‭a‬ ‭variable‬ ‭cost.‬ ‭This‬ ‭is‬
‭variable cost can: → Lead to‬‭faulty pricing‬ ‭because:‬
‭decisions and‬‭faulty keep-or-drop‬‭decisions.‬ ‭1.‬ ‭Many companies guarantee employees a minimum number of paid hours,‬
‭2. Assigning per unit fixed manufacturing‬ ‭making direct labor costs relatively fixed.‬
‭overhead costs to production can: →‬ ‭2.‬ ‭Direct labor is usually‬‭not‬‭the main bottleneck (constraint)‬‭in production, so‬
‭Potentially produce‬‭positive net operating‬
‭treating it as variable isn’t useful for decision-making.‬
‭income‬‭even when the‬‭number of units sold‬
‭is less than the breakeven point‬‭.‬ ‭3.‬ ‭TOC focuses on continuous improvement, and layoffs hurt employee morale.‬
‭Managers prefer to retain workers to sustain long-term efficiency gains.‬
‭ bsorption‬
A ‭ xternal Reporting and‬
E -‭ In many countries, including US, absorption‬ ‭Essentially,‬ ‭TOC‬ ‭sees‬ ‭direct‬ ‭labor‬ ‭as‬ ‭a‬ ‭long-term‬ ‭investment‬ ‭rather‬ ‭than‬ ‭a‬
‭costing‬ ‭Income Taxes‬ ‭costing must be used when filling out income‬ ‭short-term cost to cut.‬
‭tax returns.‬
‭- Absorption costing must be used for external‬ ‭Impact of Lean Production:‬
‭financial reports → shareholders may feel that‬
‭decisions should be based on absorption‬ ‭ ‬‭When‬‭companies‬‭use‬‭Lean‬‭Production,‬‭Production‬‭tends‬‭to‬‭equal‬‭sales‬‭→‬‭So,‬‭the‬

‭costing data‬ ‭difference between variable and absorption income tends to disappear.‬

‭Advantages of VC‬
‭PREDETERMINED OVERHEAD RATES - ABSORPTION COSTING‬ ‭Application of Manufacturing Overhead‬
‭ ow to compute underapplied and overapplied overhead and how to dispose‬
h
‭of any balance remaining in the Manufacturing Overhead account at the end‬
‭of a period.‬ ‭Overhead applied =‬ ‭POHR‬ ‭x‬ ‭Actual activity‬

‭I. Allocation base‬ ‭Based on estimates,‬ ‭Actual amount of‬


‭-‬ ‭What? -‬‭Manufacturing overhead is applied to products/jobs‬‭that are in‬ ‭and determined before‬ ‭ llocation is based upon‬
a
‭the period begins.‬ ‭the actual level of activity‬
‭process. An allocation base (direct labor hours, direct labor dollars, or‬
‭(normal costing system)‬‭.‬
‭machine hours) is used to assign manufacturing overhead to individual‬
‭products/jobs.‬ ‭Meaning of POHR‬
‭-‬ ‭Why?‬
‭1. It is impossible or difficult to trace overhead costs to particular‬ f‭ or example: POHR = $3 per Direct labor hours (DLH)‬
‭products/jobs.‬ ‭→‬ ‭For‬ ‭each‬ ‭direct‬ ‭labor‬ ‭hour‬ ‭worked‬ ‭on‬ ‭a‬ ‭particular‬ ‭product,‬ ‭$3.00‬ ‭of‬
‭2. Manufacturing overhead consists of many different items ranging‬ ‭factory overhead will be applied to it‬
‭from the grease used in machines to the production manager’s salary.‬ ‭assuming each unit requires 2 direct labor hours‬
‭3. Many types of manufacturing overhead costs are fixed even though‬ ‭→ each unit of the product absorbs $6 predetermined overhead‬
‭output fluctuates during the period.‬
I‭ II.‬ ‭Implications‬ ‭of‬ ‭basing‬ ‭the‬ ‭predetermined‬ ‭overhead‬ ‭rate‬ ‭on‬ ‭activity‬ ‭at‬
I‭ I. Manufacturing Overhead Application: The predetermined overhead rate‬ ‭capacity rather than on estimated activity for the period.‬
‭(POHR)‬
‭ raditional POHR is criticized by:‬
T
‭1. Product costs fluctuate with activity levels‬
‭POHR‬ ‭is‬ ‭based‬ ‭on‬ ‭budgeted‬ ‭activity,‬ ‭if‬ ‭actual‬ ‭production‬ ‭changes,‬ ‭the‬ ‭applied‬
‭overhead‬‭costs‬‭per‬‭unit‬‭may‬‭vary‬‭.‬‭This‬‭inconsistency‬‭can‬‭make‬‭cost‬‭comparisons‬
‭difficult and affect pricing and profitability analysis.‬
‭2. Products may be charged for unused costs‬
‭→ the allocation base is a cost driver that causes overhead.‬ ‭some‬ ‭products‬ ‭may‬ ‭be‬ ‭assigned‬ ‭overhead‬ ‭costs‬ ‭they‬ ‭didn’t‬ ‭actually‬ ‭incur‬ ‭→‬
‭overcosting‬‭(expensive) or‬‭undercosting‬‭(poor pricing)‬
‭Predetermined overhead rates are calculated using a three-step process:‬
‭1.‬ ‭Estimate the level of production for the period.‬ ‭ xample‬‭:‬ ‭Equipment‬ ‭is‬ ‭leased‬ ‭for‬ ‭$100,000‬ ‭per‬ ‭year.‬ ‭Running‬ ‭at‬ ‭full‬ ‭capacity,‬
e
‭2.‬ ‭Estimate total amount of the allocation base for the period.‬ ‭50,000‬ ‭units‬ ‭may‬ ‭be‬ ‭produced.‬ ‭The‬ ‭company‬ ‭estimates‬ ‭that‬ ‭40,000‬ ‭units‬ ‭will‬ ‭be‬
‭3.‬ ‭Estimate total manufacturing overhead costs.‬ ‭produced and sold next year. What is the predetermined overhead rate?‬
‭→ POHR = 3./2.‬

‭The Need for a POHR:‬ ‭Traditional Method‬ ‭Capacity Method‬


‭+‬ ‭Using‬ ‭a‬ ‭predetermined‬ ‭rate‬ ‭makes‬ ‭it‬ ‭possible‬‭to‬‭estimate‬‭total‬‭product/job‬
‭costs sooner‬
‭+‬ ‭Actual overhead for the period is not known until the end of the period.‬
‭ ‬ ‭This‬ ‭is‬ ‭why‬ ‭some‬ ‭companies‬ ‭prefer‬‭to‬‭use‬‭actual‬‭overhead‬‭rates‬‭or‬‭adjust‬‭for‬

‭overhead variances at the end of the period.‬
‭IV. Underapplied or overapplied overhead cost‬

‭1. General concepts:‬

‭Underapplied overhead‬ ‭Overapplied overhead‬

‭ nderapplied overhead‬‭occurs when‬


U ‭ verapplied overhead‬‭occurs when‬
O
‭the overhead applied to products/jobs‬ ‭the overhead applied to products/jobs‬
‭(using the‬‭predetermined overhead‬ ‭is‬‭more than‬‭the actual overhead costs‬
‭rate‬‭) is‬‭less than‬‭the actual overhead‬ ‭incurred. This means the company‬
‭costs incurred. This means the‬ ‭allocated too much overhead‬‭, making‬
‭company‬‭did not allocate enough‬ ‭product costs appear higher than they‬
‭overhead‬‭, leading to understated‬ ‭should be.‬
‭product costs.‬

‭example for overapplied overhead:‬

a‭ ssume‬ ‭actual‬ ‭overhead‬ ‭for‬ ‭the‬ ‭year‬ ‭was‬ ‭$120,000,‬ ‭the‬ ‭total‬ ‭direct‬ ‭labor‬ ‭hours‬
‭incurred were 50,000. The rest remains the same.‬
‭How‬‭much‬‭total‬‭overhead‬‭was‬‭applied‬‭to‬‭Harvey‬‭Fresh’s‬‭products‬‭during‬‭the‬‭year?‬
‭Use Harvey’s predetermined overhead rate of $3.00 per direct labor hour‬
‭→ Overhead Applied During the Period = POHR x Actual Direct Labor Hours‬
‭= 3 x 50,000 = $150,000‬
‭→ 150,000 - 120,000 = 30,000‬‭Overapplied overhead‬

‭2. Disposition of Under/Overapplied Overhead: 2 ways‬


‭1.‬ ‭Allocated‬‭into‬‭accounts‬‭(Work‬‭in‬‭Process,‬‭Finished‬‭Goods,‬‭and‬‭Cost‬‭of‬‭Goods‬
‭Sold), or‬
‭2.‬ ‭Closed out directly to costs of goods sold‬
‭ losed out directly to costs of goods sold:‬
C ‭Adjusted on the income statements‬
‭take a look back to the Harvey Fresh example‬ ‭Absorption Costing‬ ‭Year 1‬
‭T - accounts‬ ‭Produced 25,000 units‬
‭Harvey Fresh’s Cost of‬
‭Sales (20,000 x 30$) ……………………………………‬ ‭$600,000‬
‭Goods
‭Harvey Fresh Sold‬
’s Mfg.‬
‭Overhead‬ ‭Less Cost of goods sold‬
‭Unadjusted‬
Balance‬
‭A ctual‬ ‭Overhead‬ ‭ eginning inventory ………………………………….‬
B ‭$ -‬
‭overhead‬ ‭applied to‬ ‭Add COGM (25,000 x 16$)…………………………‬ ‭ 00,000‬
4
‭costs‬ ‭$
‭p30,000‬
roducts‬ ‭Overapplied adjustment‬‭……………………………‬ ‭(30,000)‬
‭‭120,000‬
A djusted‬ ‭150,000‬ ‭ oods available for sale ……………………………..‬
G ‭370,000‬
‭Balance‬
‭Ending inventory (5,000 x 3$) ……………………‬ ‭80,000‬ ‭290,000‬
‭30,000‬ ‭ 0,000‬
3
‭Overapplied‬ ‭Gross margin ………………………………………………‬ ‭310,000‬

‭Less Selling & Admin.Exp ……………………………‬


‭Entries‬ ‭Variable (20,000 x 3$) ………………………………‬ ‭$ 60,000‬
‭Fixed ……………………………………………………….‬ ‭100,000‬ ‭160,000‬
‭Cost of Goods Sold‬ ‭30,000‬
‭Net operating income‬ ‭$150,000‬
‭Manufacturing Overhead‬ ‭30,000‬
‭ verhead Between Accounts‬
O
‭Adjusted on balance sheets‬
‭Assume:‬ ‭In‬ ‭Year‬ ‭1,‬ ‭Harvey‬ ‭Fresh‬ ‭’s‬ ‭overhead‬ ‭applied‬ ‭in‬ ‭ending‬ ‭Work‬ ‭in‬ ‭Process‬
‭Unadjusted cost of goods sold‬ ‭$118,500‬ ‭Inventory, ending Finished Goods Inventory, and Cost of Goods Sold is shown below:‬
‭Add underapplied overhead‬ ‭5,000‬

‭Adjusted cost of goods sold‬ ‭$123,500‬

‭We would complete the following allocation of $30,000 overapplied overhead:‬

‭Allocation of‬
‭$30,000‬
‭Percent of‬ ‭overapplied‬
‭Amount‬ ‭Total‬ ‭overhead‬

‭Work in process‬ ‭$ -‬ ‭0%‬ ‭$ -‬

‭Finished Goods‬ ‭30,000‬ ‭20%‬ ‭6,000‬


‭20% x 30,000‬
‭Cost of Goods Sold‬ ‭120,000‬ ‭80%‬ ‭24,000‬ ‭IV. Potential problems of using absorption costing:‬

‭Total‬ ‭150,000‬ ‭100%‬ ‭30,000‬ ‭1. Creating Extra Profit Without Increase In Sales: (Overapplied in COGS)‬

‭Adjusted on General journal‬


‭Description‬ ‭Debit‬ ‭Credit‬

‭Manufacturing Overhead‬ ‭30,000‬

‭Work in process Inventory‬ ‭0‬

‭Finished goods Inventory‬ ‭6,000‬

‭Cost of goods sold‬ ‭24,000‬

‭Adjusted on Income Statement‬


‭Absorption Costing‬ ‭Year 1‬

‭Produced 25,000 units‬


I‭ n‬ ‭this‬ ‭case,‬ ‭Harvey‬ ‭Fresh‬ ‭applied‬ ‭fixed‬ ‭manufacturing‬ ‭overhead‬ ‭based‬ ‭on‬ ‭actual‬
‭Sales (20,000 x 30$) ……………………………………‬ ‭$600,000‬ ‭production‬ ‭using‬ ‭a‬ ‭predetermined‬ ‭overhead‬ ‭rate‬ ‭(POHR)‬ ‭of‬ ‭$6‬‭per‬‭unit.‬‭However,‬
‭the‬ ‭actual‬ ‭fixed‬ ‭overhead‬ ‭costs‬ ‭were‬ ‭only‬ ‭$120,000,‬ ‭leading‬ ‭to‬ ‭overapplied‬
‭Less Cost of goods sold‬
‭overhead in both scenarios:‬
‭ eginning inventory ………………………………….‬
B ‭$ -‬ ‭1.‬ ‭Original Scenario (25,000 units produced):‬
‭Add COGM (25,000 x 16$)…………………………‬ ‭ 00,000‬
4 ‭○‬ ‭Applied overhead = 25,000 × $6 = $150,000‬
‭Overapplied adjustment‬‭…………………………‬ ‭(30,000)‬ ‭○‬ ‭Overapplied overhead = $150,000 - $120,000‬‭= $30,000‬
‭ oods available for sale ……………………………..‬
G ‭370,000‬ ‭2.‬ ‭New Scenario (35,000 units produced)‬
‭Ending inventory (5,000 x 3$) ……………………‬ ‭$ 80,000‬ ‭○‬ ‭Applied overhead = 35,000 × $6 = $210,000‬
‭Overapplied adjustment‬ ‭(6,000)‬ ‭74,000‬ ‭296,000‬ ‭○‬ ‭Overapplied overhead = $210,000 - $120,000‬‭= $90,000‬

‭Gross margin ………………………………………………‬ ‭304,000‬ ‭ ‬‭Additional‬‭profit‬‭of‬‭$60,000‬‭arises‬‭due‬‭to‬‭the‬‭increase‬‭in‬‭ending‬‭inventory,‬‭which‬



‭carries forward some of the overapplied overhead.‬
‭Less Selling & Admin.Exp ……………………………‬
‭Variable (20,000 x 3$) ………………………………‬ ‭$ 60,000‬ ‭+‬ ‭If‬ ‭the‬ ‭overapplied‬ ‭overhead‬ ‭is‬ ‭written‬ ‭off‬ ‭to‬ ‭COGS‬‭,‬ ‭the‬ ‭additional‬ ‭profit‬
‭Fixed ……………………………………………………….‬ ‭100,000‬ ‭160,000‬ ‭matches the overapplied difference ($90,000 - $30,000 = $60,000).‬
‭+‬ ‭If‬‭the‬‭adjustment‬‭is‬‭done‬‭using‬‭a‬‭proportional‬‭allocation‬‭method‬‭(instead‬
‭Net operating income‬ ‭$144,000‬ ‭of‬ ‭writing‬ ‭it‬ ‭off‬ ‭to‬ ‭COGS‬ ‭directly),‬ ‭the‬ ‭increased‬ ‭profit‬ ‭may‬ ‭not‬ ‭match‬ ‭the‬
‭overapplied amount.‬
‭→‬‭Net Operating Income is different from the one with‬‭adjustment directly‬
‭REASONS:‬ ‭Overapplied‬ ‭overhead‬ ‭occurs‬ ‭because‬ ‭fixed‬ ‭costs‬ ‭don’t‬ ‭change‬ ‭with‬
‭through COGS ($150,000)‬
‭production,‬ ‭but‬ ‭applying‬ ‭them‬ ‭using‬ ‭POHR‬ ‭leads‬ ‭to‬ ‭higher‬ ‭applied‬ ‭costs‬ ‭when‬
‭more‬ ‭units‬ ‭are‬ ‭produced‬‭.‬ ‭The‬ ‭excess‬ ‭applied‬ ‭overhead‬ ‭is‬ ‭carried‬ ‭forward‬ ‭in‬
‭inventory, artificially inflating profit.‬
‭→ Value of Ending Inventory between 2 types of costing (VC & AC)‬ ‭V. Summary and multiple predetermined overhead rates‬

‭Absorption Costing‬ ‭Original‬ ‭New‬ ‭Alternative 1:‬ ‭Alternative 2:‬


I‭ f Manufacturing‬ ‭Close to Cost of Goods‬ ‭Proportional Allocation‬
‭Produced 25,000 units‬ ‭Produced 35,000 units‬ ‭Overhead is . . .‬ ‭Sold‬
‭Overapplied adjustment‬ ‭(30,000)‬ ‭(90,000)‬ ‭UNDERAPPLIED‬ ‭INCREASE‬ ‭INCREASE‬
‭(applied overhead <‬ ‭Cost of Goods Sold‬ ‭Work in Process‬
‭Ending inventory (5,000 x 16$)‬ ‭$ 80,000‬
‭actual overhead)‬ ‭Finished Goods‬
‭(15,000 x 16$)‬ ‭$ 240,000‬ ‭Cost of Goods Sold‬

‭Net operating income (AC)‬ ‭150,000‬ ‭210,000‬ ‭OVERAPPLIED‬ ‭DECREASE‬ ‭DECREASE‬


‭(applied overhead >‬ ‭Cost of Goods Sold‬ ‭Work in Process‬
‭Predetermined fixed manufacturing overhead rate = 6$/unit‬ ‭actual overhead)‬ ‭Finished Goods‬
‭Cost of Goods Sold‬
‭Beginning Inventory/unit‬ ‭-‬ ‭-‬
‭ ultiple predetermined overhead rates:‬
M
‭Ending Inventory/unit‬ ‭5,000‬ ‭15,000‬
‭a)‬‭Plantwide Overhead Rate (Single Rate)‬
‭Increase in Inventory‬ ‭5,000‬ ‭15,000‬ ‭●‬ ‭A‬‭single predetermined overhead rate‬‭is used for the‬‭entire factory.‬
‭●‬ ‭Common in smaller companies‬‭because it is simple and‬‭easy to apply.‬
‭Predetermined overhead rate‬ ‭6$‬ ‭6$‬
‭●‬ ‭However, it may‬‭not accurately reflect‬‭how different‬‭departments incur‬
S‭ ame value as overapplied‬ ‭30,000‬ ‭90,000‬ ‭overhead costs.‬
‭overhead (= difference in the‬
‭profit in VC)‬ ‭b) Multiple Predetermined Overhead Rates‬
‭●‬ ‭Each‬‭production department‬‭has its‬‭own predetermined‬‭overhead rate‬‭.‬
‭Net income statement (VC)‬ ‭120,000‬ ‭120,000‬
‭●‬ ‭More complex but‬‭more accurate‬‭than the plantwide‬‭method.‬
‭●‬ ‭Allows overhead allocation to be‬‭customized‬‭based‬‭on the department’s‬
‭2. Comparing with Variable cost method:‬
‭operations:‬
‭○‬ ‭Labor-intensive departments‬‭→ Overhead allocated based‬‭on‬‭direct‬
‭labor-hours‬‭.‬
‭○‬ ‭Machine-intensive departments‬‭→ Overhead allocated‬‭based on‬
‭machine-hours‬‭.‬

‭c) Benefit of Using Multiple Overhead Rates‬


‭●‬ ‭Improves cost accuracy by‬‭matching overhead allocation‬‭to actual‬
‭resource usage‬‭.‬
‭●‬ ‭More suitable for‬‭larger companies‬‭with diverse production‬‭processes.‬
‭●‬ ‭Overhead costs are‬‭applied separately‬‭in each department‬‭as jobs move‬
‭through production.‬

You might also like