Transfer Pricing System Model
Transfer Pricing System Model
a strom of controversy :
1. Extremely high profit the materials costs only to be charged
2. The operation would get “credit” only for the expenses of purchased
materials
3. Less efficient than outside manufacturers no incentive to shift their
source of supply
4. Using only a short-run contribution margin approach would not solve the
problems caused by treating the marketing divisions as revenue centers
What everyone wanted ?
(The characteristics of transfer pricing systems)
consistent with long-run profit
distinguish costs relevant for short-run & long-run
Senior decisions
Management support marketing decisions : product mix, new product
introduction, product deletion, pricing
support operations decisions : inventory levels, batch
size, process improvements, capacity management,
outsourcing
TRADITIONAL METHODS
No feasible
a. Market price
No capture the actual cost
b. Full cost considered
structure
c. Marginal cost but rejected inadequate for their purposes
d. Negotiated price consume excessive time on
nonproductive discussions
MVA :
A cumulative measure of corporate performance that looks at how much a
company’s stock has added to (or taken out of) investor’s pocketbooks over
its life & compares it with the capital those same investors put into the
firm.
calculated
MVA (+) :
FINANCING APPROACH :
result :
NOPAT is a sum of returns attributable to all providers
of funds to the company,
NOPAT return is completely unaffected by the financial
composition of capital.
Two Methods of Calculating a Firm’s EVA
OPERATING APPROACH :
Equity equivalents :
Adjustments that turn a firm’s accounting book value into “economic book value,
which is a truer measure of the cash that investors have at risk in the firm & upon
which they expect to accrue some returns”
CRITICISMS OF EVA & MVA
EVA does not account for real options (growth opportunities) inherent in
investment decisions.
Market value of securities reflect market’s perception of the value of
those growth opportunities, but EVA does not reflect this information.
Firms with fewer assets in place & substantial growth opportunities, year-
to-year changes in EVA are less likely to explain changes in firm value.
General
capital The quality of capital
investment investment decisions
COMPANY
Products, services,
& activities
Environmental
issues considering
resolved EVA
The board lifecycle
Health & safety communicated impact in long-term
corporate profitability
The potential contribution of (life of investment)
project with consistent language
BARRIERS AND CHALLENGES TO EVA IMPLEMENTATION
• A full commitment from top management (CEO), not only must the
value creation philosophy be integrated with all company’s key
systems, but it must constantly be reinforced in management meeting,
training, seminar, newsletter, performance review, & communication
with external.
• A decision on which, if any, adjustments are to be made the GAAP-
based accounting numbers.
• A careful consideration of transfer pricing & overhead allocation
policies & their impact on EVA calculations.
• Intensive training for any manager or employee whose bonuses will
be linked to EVA.