MA: CVP/ TAC/ MC/ ABC

relevant costing accept/ reject behavioural factors (6)

(1) Company (prestige/ reputation) (2) Company strategy (LT vs ST) (3) Company business (affect on other products/ spare capacity) (4) Staff (redundancy costs/ motivation) (5) Supplier (relationship/ reliability) (6) Customer (quality/ relationship)

1 of 29

CVP assumptions (6)

(1) all other variables cst (only volume changes) (2) single product/ cst. sales mix (3) TC+TR linear functions (4) profits MC (5) costs separable (6) analysis only ST relevant range

2 of 29

margin of safety + equation

% sales can fall before loss is occurred

3 of 29

profit-volume ratio (contribution ratio) + equation

proportion of £1 of sales able to cover FC and provide for profit

4 of 29

Mark up

relationship between profit and cost (market driven + doesn't take into account fixed costs)

5 of 29

Margin

relationship between profit and selling price (takes into account all costs)

6 of 29

MC vs TAC: manufacturing costs (direct and indirect)

MC: VC (direct) FC (period)/ TAC: VC (direct) FC (direct = FOAR)

7 of 29

FOAR equation

.

8 of 29

MC vs TAC: overheads

MC: Fixed + variable/ TAC: production, administrative, selling + distribution

9 of 29

MC vs TAC: profitability

MC: function of sales vol change/ TAC: function of sales + production (inventory) vol change

10 of 29

MC (3) +ves

(1) useful for decision making (ST projections) (2) smoothes profits when stable sales + fluctuating inventory (doesn't increase profit with increased inventory) (3) avoids FC being capitalised in unsaleable inventories (not being deducted in period)

11 of 29

TAC (4) +ves

(1) consistent with IFRS (2) ensures decisions based on full cost (3) fixed OH essential for production (4) avoids reporting false losses (FC only expensed when sold)

12 of 29

MC layout

Sales/ less: COS (opening stock + VC - closing stock)/ less: FC

13 of 29

TAC layout

Sales/ less: COS (opening stock + production costs (VC+FOAR) - closing stock)/ over/(under) abs

14 of 29

MC vs TAC: profit reconciliation

MC --> TAC (inc/(dec) stock x FOAR)

15 of 29

TAC: over/ (under) abs equation

less/ (more) overheads incurred than expected

16 of 29

Relevant costing: include/ ignore costs

INCLUDE: revenues/ mat+lab. incremental costs/ opportunity costs IGNORE: sunk costs/ non-cash flows/ committed costs (contracts)/ common costs (facility sustaining)

17 of 29

Relevant costing: when needed (5)

(1) special selling price (ST/ outside main market) (2) product mix decisions when limiting factor (3) replacement decisions (4) subcontracting decisions (5) discontinuation decisions

18 of 29

Investment appraisal: NPV (equation, definition, +ves/ -ves)

total present value of a time series of future cash flows/ +ves = time value for money/ used CF/ -ves: not comparable (%)/ need to determine CoC/ doesn't consider CF timings

19 of 29

Investment appraisal: IRR (equation, definition, +ves/ -ves)

cost of capital when NPV=0/ +ves: time value of money/ comparable (%)/ -ves: assume linearity/ assume only 1 sign change/ need to estimate CoC

20 of 29

Investment appraisal: ARR (equation, definition, +ves/ -ves)

compares profit with money invested/ +ves: comparable (%)/ shoes project profitability/ -ves: uses profits/ ignores time value of money

21 of 29

Investment appraisal: payback period (equation, definition, +ves/ -ves)

time taken to repay initial investment/ +ves: good in rapidly changing market/ easy to calculate/ -ves: ignores time value of money/ ST approach (ignores past payback)

22 of 29

ABC: (4) reasons for it

(1) information processing costs cheaper (c-b analysis) (2) mechanisation producing wider product range (OH in differing proportions - high non-vol) (3) direct lab. hrs lower (results in OH per lab hr being overstated) (4) intensive competition

23 of 29

ABC: 2 types of OH

(1) Volume (OH vary with production level in ST) (2) Non-volume (OH vary with some other activity)

24 of 29

ABC: 4 steps

(1) identify activities (c-b analysis) (2) cost drivers (factors influencing activity, cause-and-effect, not arbitrary) (3) cost pool (measurable no. of drivers --> total across all products) (4) assign cost per driver to individual product OH cost

25 of 29

ABC: (5) advantages

(1) simple after step 1 (2) recognises complexity (range/ ST/ products) (3) realistic decision making (in CVP) (4) takes MA past traditional 'factory floor' boundary (OH cost concern --> quality + control) (5) used in service org (mostly indirect $)

26 of 29

ABC: (4) disadvantages

(1) degree of arbitrary cost apportionment (cost pool stage) (2) Drivers can't be specific (3) only quantitative/ related to production (4) needs to be effectively used (c-b analysis)

27 of 29

ABC: (4) activity hierarchies

(1) unit-level (volume/ per unit - lab.) (2) batch-level (per batch - setups) (3) product-sustaining (incurred irrespective - maintenance) (4) facility-sustaining (common - admin)

28 of 29

splitting semi-varible costs: High low method equation

comparing changes in cost that result from highest and lowest activity levels

29 of 29

Get Revising

MA: CVP/ TAC/ MC/ ABC

Other cards in this set

Card 2

Front

Back

Card 3

Front

Back

Card 4

Front

Back

Card 5

Front

Back

Comments

Similar Accounting resources:

Other cards in this set

Card 2

Front

Back

Card 3

Front

Back

Card 4

Front

Back

Card 5

Front

Back

Comments

Related discussions on The Student Room

Similar Accounting resources: