亨格瑞管理会计英文第15版练习答案.docx

1、亨格瑞管理会计英文第15版练习答案CHAPTER 6COVERAGE OF LEARNING OBJECTIVESLEARNING OBJECTIVEFUNDA-MENTAL ASSIGN-MENTMATERIALCRITICAL THINKING EXERCISES AND EXERCISESPROBLEMSCASES, EXCEL, COLLAB. & INTERNET EXERCISESLO1: Use a differential analysis to examine income effects across alternatives, and show that an oppor

2、tunity cost analysis yields identical results.24,27,28,29, 30,31, 42,4445,46,47,48,49,50,56,61LO2: Decide whether to make or to buy certain parts or products.A1,B125,32,33,3462,6365,66,67,68, 70LO3: Choose whether to add or delete a product line using relevant information.B336LO4: Compute the optima

3、l product mix when production is constrained by a scarce resource.A2,B23551,53LO5: Decide whether a joint product should be processed beyond the split-off point.A3,B437,3854,5569LO6: Decide whether to keep or replace equipment.A4,B54057,59LO7: Identify irrelevant and misspecified costs.26,39,4152,58

4、,6471LO8: Discuss how performance measures can affect decision making.B64360CHAPTER 6Relevant Information and Decision Making With a Focus on Operational Decisions6-A1 (20 min)1. The key to this question is what will happen to the fixed overhead costs if production of the boxes is discontinued. Assu

5、me that all $60,000 of fixed costs will continue. Then, Sunshine State will lose $20,000 by purchasing the boxes from Weyerhaeuser: Payment to Weyerhaeuser, 80,000 $2.10 $168,000 Costs saved, variable costs 148,000 Additional costs $ 20,0002. Some subjective factors are: Might Weyerhaeuser raise pri

6、ces if Sunshine State closed down its box-making facility? Will sub-contracting the box production affect the quality of the boxes? Is a timely supply of boxes assured, even if the number needed changes? Does Sunshine State sacrifice proprietary information when disclosing the box specifications to

7、Weyerhaeuser?3. In this case the fixed costs are relevant. However, it is not the depreciation on the old equipment that is relevant. It is the cost of the new equipment. Annual cost savings by not producing the boxes now will be: Variable costs $148,000 Investment avoided (annualized) 80,000 Total

8、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 = $15 Professional = $100 - $75 = $25 Contribution margi

9、n ratios: Plain = $15 $70 = 21.4% Professional = $25 $100 = 25%2. Plain Professional a. Units per hour 2 1 b. Contribution margin per unit $15 $25 Contribution 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 machi

10、ne hours. For a given capacity, the criterion for maximizing profits is to obtain the greatest possible contribution to profit for each unit of the limiting or scarce factor. Moreover, fixed costs are irrelevant unless their total is affected by the choice of products.6-A3 (15 min.) Table is in thou

11、sands of dollars.1,2. (a) (b) (a)-(b) (c) (a)-(b)-(c) Separable Sales Sales Costs Incremental Beyond at Incremental Beyond Gain or Split-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,

12、 B, and C 5 The 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

13、sold 100,000 217,000Operating 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 proce

14、ssing 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) $40,000 Operating inflows for each year, new machine: $910,000 -

15、 ($810,000 + $22,000*) $78,000 * $60,000 - $38,000 Cash flow statements (in thousands of dollars): Keep Replace Three Three Year Years Years Year Years Years 1 2 & 3 Together 1 2 & 3 TogetherReceipts, inflows from operations 40 40 120 78 78 234Disbursements: Purchase of old equipment (90)* - (90) (9

16、0) - (90) Purchase of new equipment: Total costs less proceeds from 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

17、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 cros

18、s 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 Replace Three Three Years Years Year Years Years 1, 2 & 3 Together 1 2 & 3 TogetherSales 910 2,730 910 910 2,730Expenses: Other expenses 8

19、10 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 2,595Loss on disposal: Proceeds (revenue) - - (15) - (15) Book value (expense) - - 90 - 90* Loss - - 75 - 75Total charges 900 2,700 940 865 2,670Net income 10 30 (30) 45 60* As i

20、n 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 di

21、sposal 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 reluctant to replace simply because the large loss on disposal will severely harm the profit performance in Year 1.3. The net difference

22、 for the three years taken together would be unaffected because the item is a past cost. You can substitute any 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 (in

23、 thousands of dollars): Keep: Replace: Three Years Three Years Together Together DifferenceReceipts, inflows from operations 120 234 114Disbursements: 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 ( 88

24、0) ( 850) 30In sum, this may be a horrible situation. The manager really blundered. But keeping the old equipment will compound the blunder to the cumulative tune of $30,000 over the next three years.4. Diplomatically, Lee should try to convey the following. All of us tend to indulge in the erroneou

25、s idea that we can soothe the wounded pride of a bad purchase decision by using the item instead of replacing it. The fallacy is believing that a current or future action can influence the long-run impact of a past outlay. All past costs are down the drain. Nothing can change what has already happen

26、ed. The $90,000 has been spent. Subsequent accounting for the item is irrelevant. The schedules in parts (1) and (2) clearly show that we may completely ignore the $90,000 original outlay and still have a correct analysis. The important point is that the $90,000 is not an element of difference betwe

27、en alternatives and, therefore, may be safely ignored. 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, and the other expenses are irrelevant because they are common to both alternatives. The r

28、elevant items are the following (in thousands of dollars): Three Years Together Keep Replace Operating of machine (3 $60; 3 $22) $180 $ 66Incremental cost of new machine: Total cost $99 Less proceeds of old machine 15 Incremental cost - 84Total relevant costs $180 $150Difference in favor of buying $

29、 306-B1 (15-20 min.)1. Make Buy Total Per Unit Total Per UnitPurchase cost 10,000,000 50Direct material 5,500,000 27.50Direct labor 1,900,000 9.50Factory overhead, variable 1,100,000 5.50 Factory overhead, fixed avoided 900,000 4.50 Total relevant costs 9,400,000 47.00 10,000,000 50Difference in fav

30、or of making 600,000 3.00 The 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 Leave Make Capacity Idle Buy and RentRent revenue - - 1,150,000Obtaining of components (9,400,000) (10,000,000) (10,000,000)Net relevant c

31、osts (9,400,000) (10,000,000) (8,850,000) The final column indicates that buying the components and renting 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 per machine hour, it takes $.75 $1.00, or 3/4 of an hour to produce one unit of XY-7.