In: Accounting
Classic Container Corp notes the following results for 2016 for variable versus absorption costing. The company's base volume is 4,000,000.
Classic Container Corp | |
---|---|
Budgeted Income Statement | Variable Costing units |
For the year 2016 | 3,800,000 |
Revenues | $ 4,750,000 |
Variable Costs: | |
Material | $ 950,000 |
Labor | $ 950,000 |
Variable Overhead | $570,000 |
Total Variable Costs | $2,470,000 |
Contribution Margin | $2,280,000 |
Fixed manufacturing Costs | $2,000,000 |
Fixed non-manufacturing Costs | $100,000 |
Operating Income | $180,000 |
Absorption Costing units |
||
3,800,000 | ||
Revenues | $4,750,000 | |
Cost of Goods Sold: | ||
Material | $950,000 | |
Labor | $950,000 | |
Variable Overhead | $570,000 | |
Fixed Overhead | $1,900,000 | |
Production Volume Variance | $200,000 | |
Total Manufacturing Costs | $4,570,000 | |
Gross Margin | $180,000 | |
Fixed non-manufacturing Costs | $100,000 | |
Operating Income | $80,000 | |
The company presently uses absorption costing to provide additional compensation and incentivize managers to achieve their production goals. The compensation formula is 10% of operating income. Calculate the amount of the difference of additional compensation between the two income statement methods. If the decline in volume continues and Classic makes 3.6 million units in 2017, should the company switch to variable costing as the basis of compensation? Why or why not? What might be other implications of switching costing methodologies?
Compensation as per Variable costing - 180,000 * 10% = 18,000
Compensation as per Absorbtion costing - 80,000 * 10% = 8,000
Difference - $10,000
Absorbtion rate for Manufacturing Overheads = 2,000,000/4,000,000 = 0.5 per unit.
(This can be verified, as at a level of 3.8 Million units, the Overheads absorbed are 3.8*0.5 = 1,900,000.
Therefore, the company will be better off switching to the variable method.
In absorbtion costing, the Overheads absorbed depend upon the levels of production. Thus, lower production levels lead to lower costs being absorbed, giving a misguided picture.
The unabsorbed costs end up as variances. This eventually is detrimental to company performance.