• Save
Variable and absorption costing
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Variable and absorption costing

on

  • 1,815 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,815
Views on SlideShare
1,815
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
1
Downloads
0
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Variable and absorption costing Variable and absorption costing Presentation Transcript

  • Absorption vs. Variable Costing
  • Absorption costing is required for GAAP
    • Absorption costing charges fixed overhead to production
    • Fixed overhead is expensed as cost of goods sold is written off against revenues
  • Absorption costing: how it works
    • Suppose production is greater than sales.
      • We’re adding to finished goods inventory
      • A pro-rata share of variable and fixed production costs are held back in finished goods until the product is sold
      • Less than 100% of the total fixed overhead will be written off in the current period
    • Under FIFO, the “old” production costs will be expensed in the next fiscal period, along with the costs of the new production that is actually sold
    View slide
  • Absorption costing: how it works, continued
    • But, suppose we have the reverse situation; sales exceeds production and we draw down inventory
      • Now we’re selling all of the current production, plus some of whatever we had sitting around on the shelf
      • As a result, we’ll write off all of the current year’s fixed overhead, plus some fixed overhead from the previous year
    View slide
  • But what happens under variable costing
    • Under variable costing, 100% of fixed costs are expensed in the period incurred. Zero (zip, nada) fixed costs are charged to inventory.
  • Let’s use the Widget Works data to illustrate the difference between absorption and variable costing. Here’s the original information again.
  • What would a variable costing income statement look like here?
  • But absorption costing net income was... Hmmm…that’s a difference of $9,000! We’re better off (smaller loss), but where did the $9,000 come from?
  • Absorption and variable costing net income reconciliation
    • Recall that we produced 36,000 units and sold 34,000 units.
      • 2,000 units wound up in inventory
      • The fixed costs of those 2,000 units is:
        • $3.00/DLH * 1.5 DLH/unit * 2,000 units, or $9,000!
    • Therefore under absorption costing, $9,000 of fixed overhead is held back in inventory. Under variable costing, that amount is expensed in the period incurred.
  • This leads directly to the following conclusions. Ceteris paribus ,
    • when production > sales, absorption costing net income will be greater than variable costing net income due to the current period fixed costs held in inventory.
    • when production < sales, absorption costing net income will be less than variable costing net income due to the “old” fixed costs released from inventory.
    • when production = sales, absorption costing net income and variable costing net income will be equal.
  • Now suppose you find yourself in the following situation:
    • Your bonus is a function of profit
    • 4th quarter sales are off; prospects for that bonus are looking less and less favorable
    • The factory has excess production capacity
    • How can you take advantage of this set of circumstances to improve the likelihood of getting the bonus?
  • Answer?
    • Crank up production!
      • What doesn’t get sold will just go to inventory.
      • The variable costs of the unsold output won’t affect profits anyway
      • The fixed costs per unit will drop as production increases.
      • We’ll write off less fixed overhead resulting in higher profits, even if total sales are unchanged.
  • Ethical?
    • Not really, but it happens.
    • During a period when its sales were taking a hit in the 1960s, Chrysler Corporation kept building cars for inventory in order to drive up apparent profits.
    • They rented cow pastures, vacant lots, any space they could find to store the unsold vehicles
    • It got to the point that the rent and security costs (vandalism got to be a serious problem) were a substantial expense.