Absorption Costing vs. Variable Costingg

Absorption Costing
vs.
Variable Costing
g
Absorption Variable
S S
CGS VC
GP CM
S&A FC
NI ABS NI VC
2
Overview of Absorption
g
and Variable Costing
Absorption Variable
Costing Costing
DM DM
Product
Product
P d t DL DL
Costs
Costs VMOH VMOH
FMOH
Period
Period VS&A VS&A
C t
Costs
Costs FS&A FS&A
Unit Cost Computations
Harvey Company produces a single product

g information available:
with the following
4
Unit p
product cost is determined as follows:
Under absorption
p g, S&A expenses
costing, p are
always treated as period expenses and
deducted from revenue as incurred.
5
Income Comparison of
Absorption and Variable Costing
Let’s assume the following additional

information for Harvey Company
Company.
! 20,000 units were sold during the year at a price of
$30 each.
each
! There were no units in beginning inventory.
Now, let
let’s
s compute net operating income using
both absorption and variable costing.
6
Absorption Costing
Variable Costing
Variable
manufacturing
f t i
Variable Costing
costs only.
Sales (20,000 × $30) $ 600,000
Less variable expenses:
Beginning inventory $ -
Add COGM (25,000 × $10) 250,000
All fixed
Goods available for sale 250 000
250,000
manufacturingg
Less ending inventory (5,000 × $10) 50,000 overhead is
Variable cost of goods sold 200,000 expensed.
V i bl selling
Variable lli & administrative
d i i t ti
expenses (20,000 × $3) 60,000 260,000
Contribution margin 340,000
Less fixed expenses:
Manufacturing overhead $ 150,000
Selling & administrative expenses 100,000 250,000
Net operating income $ 90,000
8
Comparing the Two Methods
We can reconcile
W il the
th difference
diff between
b t
absorption and variable income as follows:
Variable costing net operating income $ 90,000
Add: FMOH deferred in inventory

(5,000 units × $6 per unit) 30,000
Absorption costing net operating income $ 120
120,000
000
FMOH $150,000
= = $6
$6.00
00 per unit
Units produced 25,000 units
10
Extended Comparisons of Income Data
Harvey Company Year Two
11
Since there was no change in the variable costs

per unit, total fixed costs, or the number of
units
it produced,
d d the
th unitit costs
t remaini unchanged.
h d
12
Absorption Costing
Absorption Costing
Sales (30,000 × $30) $ 900,000
Less cost of g
goods sold:
Beg. inventory (5,000 × $16) $ 80,000
Add COGM (25,000 × $16) 400,000
Goods available for sale 480 000
480,000
Less ending inventory - 480,000
Gross margin 420,000
Less selling & admin. exp.
Variable (30,000 × $3) $ 90,000
Fixed 100,000 190,000
Net operating income $ 230,000
These are the 25,000 units

produced in the current period.
13
Variable Costing
Variable
manufacturing
y
costs only.
All fixed
manufacturing
overhead is
expensed.
14
We can reconcile
W il the
th difference
diff between
b t
absorption and variable income as follows:
Variable costing net operating income $ 260,000
Deduct: FMOH costs released from

inventory (5,000 units × $6 per unit) 30,000
Absorption costing net operating income $ 230,000
FMOH $150,000
= = $6
$6.00
00 per unit
Units produced 25,000 units
15
16
Summary of Key Insights
17
CVP Analysis, Decision Making

p
and Absorption costing
g
Absorption costing does not support CVP

analysis because it essentially treats fixed
manufacturing
g overhead as a variable cost by y
assigning a per unit amount of the fixed
overhead to each unit of production.
p
Treating fixed manufacturing overhead as a
variable cost can:
• Lead to faulty pricing decisions and keep-or-drop
decisions.
• Produce positive net operating income even
when the number of units sold is less than the
breakeven point.
18
External Reporting and Income Taxes
To conform
T f to
t
GAAP requirements,
absorption costing must be used for
external financial reports in the
United States. Under the Tax
R f
Reform Act
A t off 1986,
1986
absorption costing must be
used when filing income
Since top executives
tax returns.
are usually evaluated based on
external reports to shareholders
shareholders,
they may feel that decisions
sshould
ou d be based oon
absorption cost income.
19
Advantages of Variable Costing

pp
and the Contribution Approach
Consistent with
CVP analysis.
Management finds Net operating income
it more useful.
f l i closer
is l tto
net cash flow.
Consistent with standard
costs and flexible budgeting.
Advantages
Easier to estimate profitability
of products and segments.
Impact of fixed
costs on p
profits Profit is not affected by
emphasized. changes in inventories.
20
Variable versus Absorption Costing
Fixed
Fi d manufacturing
f t i
costs must be assigned Fixed manufacturing
to products to properly costs are capacity costs
match revenues and and will be incurred
costs. even if nothing is
produced.
Absorption
p Variable
Costing Costing
21

Absorption Costing vs. Variable Costingg

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Absorption Costing vs. Variable Costingg

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Absorption Costing vs. Variable Costingg

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Absorption Costing

Unit Cost Computations

Harvey Company produces a single product

Let’s assume the following additional

Comparing the Two Methods

Add: FMOH deferred in inventory

Unit Cost Computations

Since there was no change in the variable costs

These are the 25,000 units

Variable costing net operating income $ 260,000

Deduct: FMOH costs released from

Comparing the Two Methods

CVP Analysis, Decision Making

Absorption costing does not support CVP

Advantages of Variable Costing

You might also like