The Global Expansion Of Toyota Marketing Essay

The Global Expansion Of Toyota Marketing Essay Using one specific company with which you are familiar, examine the actual and potential impacts of globalization on that company. Explain the reasoning behind the points you make. Evaluate possible strategies going forward which the company might use to respond to impacts of globalization you have identified. Globalization can be described as a historical transformation in political, social, economy and cultural diversity (J.H. Mittelman, 2001). The United Nations on the other hand to describe globalization as a concept that refers both to an increasing flow of goods and resources across national borders and to the emergence of completely set of organizational structures to manage the expanding network of international economic activities and transactions (UNCTAD, 1997a, p. 70). In simple terms it is a process of interaction and integration among peoples, companies and different countries. Which includes the corporate strategies, consumption patterns, regulatory capabilities and governance, technology, the globalization of financial markets, and socio-cultural processes. The globalization can be detected from the increase of manufacturing Foreign Direct Investment (FDI), and financial capital flows. In todays business environment, most of companys activities are naturally become globally. Gradually, organizations have recognized that globalization creates unlimited opportunities of worldwide market. However at the mean time, its also brings negative parts such as: highly competitive environment and threats. On this paper, the Toyota Motor corporation being chosen as reference company, where based on China market to identify what is exist and potential effect of globalization on business, and provide possible solutions for Toyota sustainable development. While, the PEST analysis tool will apply for Toyotas business situation analysing to explain how Toyota influence by political, social, economic, and technological. The multinational enterprise (MNE). A multinational corporation (MNC), sometimes called a transnational corporation(TNC). Is a company that has headquarters in home country but manages production in other counties. In the past two decade, the multi-national corperation (MNCs) plays a role of monopoly, they were able to get business advantages from host country by using the colonial power. In other word, they can get concessions from host countries by using home governments influence (Ohmae, 1995). Whereas, since the rapid growth in world trade and investment, this colonial power no longer existed. Instead, the world market becomes to more competitive. Most importantly, the rising of global practice and thinking between companies and countries has made business interests and orientations more necessary than ever (Abbas, J. 2000). Background on Toyota Since the rapid development of global integration the automobile industry becomes one of the worlds most important economic sectors by revenue. Toyota is one of representative multinational enterprise in the world. Its established in 1937 by Sakichi Toyoda, till present day Toyota was conducts both domestic and global marketing with 52 oversea manufacturing companies in 27 countries. Toyota market and sold the vehicles approximate 7 million in more than 170 countries every year, worldwide employees is 320.808 (Annual report, 2009). As a market leader Toyota holding 15 per cent market share among all the other automobile brands (Business week, 2009).The key success element of Toyota is commitment to designing, engineering and build cars to every target market area. Due to this reason Toyota faced great impact from globalization; the impact can be both negative and positive and differs by context such as new markets, cheaper location for investment, multi-choice of suppliers for raw ma terial and services, and cheaper labor cost. However it can also carry the negative parts. First, the world automobile market is change in economic conditions affecting, and highly competitive environments in which Toyota operates. Second the market highly volatile. Last the global auto crisis was seriously hit down Toyotas market profit. The Global Expansion of Toyota In 2008, Toyota to officially become world largest automaker, the rapid expansion is the main reason Toyota able to overtake GM as worlds top car firm. Toyota operated business across the entire world, which including: Sales vehicle in Africa and Russia and sales leader in Australia. Toyota were Launched Lexus and SCION in United States and norther American market. Figure Toyota sales by region. (Source: Toyota annual report, 2009) In recent years, Toyota has focus on global market expansion, especially, China market. Because the tendency of Chinese consumption pattern is change. Toyota FDI in China. China overtake United States become to new fdi destination by 2004. This is due to the China adoption reform and opening up policy in the late 1970. Toyota believes that Chinas market is potentially as large as the U.S. Market. Toyota aims consistently increase investment in China to grow production capacity and add to product lineup along with begin to produce Camry at Guangzhou Toyota Motor Co., Ltd on May 2006. According to XinHua News report that Toyota intend to invest about $700 million in its first fully-fledged research and Development base (RD) in China. Because, Toyota wants to increase the production in China. Since 2005, Toyota through the form of join-venture with Chinese company (FAW Group Corporation) to build first plant in SiChuan province until now, Toyota was invested to build seven plants in China, and another six plants of Toyota also joint-ventures with FAW. Toyota establish oversea plant in response to incentives such as tariffs, reduction of labour cost, and Toyota production system The PEST analysis on Toyota Political The auto industry is subject to various governmental rules and policies. The political environment of China does favor enterprises with foreign investment. According to Government policy 2009, the Chinese government levies low tax on enterprise with foreign investment, and preferential tax policies are offered to the sectors and regions where investment is encourage by the state. And the low tax policy reflected in three aspects: income tax, circulation tax, and import-stage value-added tax. At the same time, the China government announced several preferential policies to encourage auto consumption, which include the people who living countryside can enjoy 10% subsidy of the original vehicle price for their buy it. Second, the tax of purchase small-displacement vehicles was cut from 10% to 5% (Chinavestor, 2010). These preferential policies stimulated auto consumption significantly, and attract more foreign automobile company invest in China. On the other hand, government play the role of savior. For example, the government bailout policy: in 2009, Toyota was require for emergency loan from the Japan Bank, with the amount of more than 3 billion US dollars. The purpose of the emergency loan is to dealing with cash flow problem or some other cases. Economic The Peoples Republic of China is the second biggest economy in the world (first is United States), and it is worlds fastest-growing economy as well with annual economic growth averaging nearly 9% over the last three decade. The role of China in the world are the factory of the world, because China provides a cheap labour cost, and low cost base for export-oriented production. The major advantage of Toyota is the strong cash position. However, if compare with GM, Toyota still existed weak credit ratings, rising health-care and pension costs, and losses in its automotive division. Toyota expects through use its strong cash position to expanding all over the world increase its commitment to RD. Social The population of China is beyond one billion, it is a largest country in the world by population. The households size: 3.1, total households in China were 351,233,698, as we know the Toyota segmenting group is Households, usually, this group of people in China have middle or upper of income level with good education background age around 25 to 65. Technological The Toyota product line consist of: Electric technology, Plug-in hybrids, All-electric vehicles, Cars, Pickup trucks, Luxury-type vehicles. Toyota is one of largest automobile companies to promote hybrid vehicles in the market. Beside the production lineup, there are have one more important factor able to shapes technology adoption at Toyota plants, which are governments foreign investments control power. The business in China, Chinese government controls type of technological standards on firms operating in the country. The impact of globalization on Toyota. Operating in global market is a challenge for Toyota. Even though the globalization created unlimited opportunities for Toyota, but the adverse affect should not be ignored. The impact of exchange rates on Toyota. The currency exchange rates are very powerful can affect trade investment, finance, tourism, oversea economic transactions, import and export prices of goods and services. Toyota attaches great importance to the fluctuation in foreign currency exchange rates and this is particularly evident in fluctuation between the value of the Japanese yen, the U.S. dollar, Chinese Yuan, and the euro. The negative impact resulting from fluctuation in foreign currency exchange rates may affect Toyotas global performance. The following table illustrates Japanese yen per $1.00 during the periods display Fiscal Year Ended or Ending March 31. At End of Period Average (of month-end rates) (Â ¥ per $ 1.00) High Low 2005 107.22 107.28 114.30 102.26 2006 117.48 113.67 120.93 104.41 2007 117.56 116.55 121.81 110.07 2008 99.85 113.61 124.09 96.88 2009 99.15 100.85 110.48 87.80 2010 (through June 19,2009) 96.15 96.82 100.71 94.45 (Source: Toyota annual report 2009) This table shows that, the yen has been strong when translation with US dollars. According to Toyotas annual financial statement, which clearly present a financial situation of Japanese yen are affected by translation risk and foreign currency transaction risk. The fluctuation of foreign currency change rates may affect the price of Toyotas products in worldwide market and use foreign currencies to purchases materials. Since 2009, Japan central bank to show sign of Japanese yen will further appreciates against U.S. dollars. It can cause adverse effect to Toyotas reported operating results and financial condition. Because Japanese yen is rapidly, consistently appreciates against other foreign currencies that will force Toyota to markup the price of all the export products. But the rapid increase value of Japanese yen can have favorable effect on material purchased, but it only inside of Japan. For Toyota oversea operations still suffered with high raw materials, and gasoline, due to the profit margins was fallen, when translated from dollars back to yen. The impact of consumer preferences on Toyota (Source: Annual Repot, 2006) This table illustrate that, Toyota has build different product line across the China to fulfill local market demand. The consumer preferences are one of the most important factors shaping international production for Toyota. The trend of distinct national preferences is spread every corner of the world. The homogeneity of preferences lead to Toyotas product reduces the benefits of manufactory in China, because of complicated relationship between car design and differences in consumer preferences as a typical example, the Ford promote new car Mondeo to the worldwide but the sales was not good as they expected, because Ford neglected focus localizing production. In particular, after the second oil crisis, Toyota was enhance the production aims to provide an effective and creative production design to gain more market share in China (i.e., Toyotas Corolla produce by global platform and modified for different region to match consumers needs). But Toyota has ignored the preferences are not yet homogeneous across all of China, even in the target region, there are have several differences local tastes of demand. In contrast, the Hondas Accord is also use the global platform but modified the cars exterior body to different specific market area, thus, Honda has completely different automobile production line for each target market, i.e., the difference platforms between Japan, Thailand and China. Due to this reason Toyota fall into extremely passive position compare to other competitors. The Impact of United States Financial Crisis on Toyota . The United States financial crisis of 2007 has considered being the worst economic crisis since the 1930s great depression. The main factor trigger of the financial crisis was the United States real estate bubble was busted, caused property price tied by the value of securities, then the price of house was decline straightly, not only America this financial tsunami has wave to the entire world. Which contributed consumer lost approximate hundreds of billions of U.S. Dollar, several key businesses have failed, and the stock markets have fallen significantly. Obviously, the financial crisis has been hit down United States economy heavily; even the bailout of banks by national government has measured. But the financial markets havent showed the sign of recovery. As biggest auto-maker in north America Toyota was faced an unprecedented situation by the financial recession. The adverse results are largely, the vehicle sale hardest hit in northern America and Europe market with drop in sales of 673 thousand vehicles() especially, the sales of Toyotas luxury division Lexus was drop significantly. Moreover, increase price of crude oil and iron and steel raw material impact Toyotas operation, this fiscal year was drop 68 percent of benefits compare with previous fiscal year and according to Toyota annual report, the net profit loss of 4.2 billion U.S dollars (Toyota Annual Report, 2009). Last the financial market recession resulted negative impacts to Toyotas accumulation of capital. Due to the financial downturn, the organizations or financial institutions may unable to provide capital to the market. The impact from competitive environment to Toyota. Figure:share of U.S. Auto market. (Source) According to this pie chart, GM, which is 18.2%, is the biggest automaker in U.S. among all the motor corporations, then is Toyota with 15.8%, followed by Ford, making up 14.3%: and the next coming is Chrysler at 12.1%. From the pie chart is obviously shows that the big three automaker are still the largest domestic producers which making up 44.6% market share. The United States market always has been a prime concern for Toyota.. Due to its trade liberalization, highly developed, market demand(U.S. Auto market is about ten times bigger than the Canadian market). Especially, the demanding of Toyota luxury division Lexus was increased in recent years. However the U.S. automotive market is highly competitive at least fifteen auto company was market their product in U.S. market. Toyota as a foreign brand faces intense competition from other competitors. The highly competitive business environment lead to cause lower vehicle units sales and inventory backlog. This caused Toyota downward price pressure. The factors influence competition including: quality of product, post-purchase services, and reliability. However, Toyota faced unexpectedly quality problem with sudden unintended acceleration, which caused Toyota economic damages nearly $7 billion, the 94,000 vehicles has been recalled. Sustainability development of Toyota Establishment of Global Special Committee for Global Quality control Implemented approaches to address a deterioration in information gathering and information sharing practices between headquarters and the regional offices. These problem are seen to be the harmful side effects of the rapid globalization. The function of this committee are restructure the quality management system Strategies of interest rate swaps and localized in respond to fluctuation of Money exchange rate. In order to reduce the adverse affect of fluctuation foreign currency exchange rates, Toyota use some certain derivative financial tool such as interest rate swaps and increase the target market production of localized. Likewise, increase the investment in target market to increase production capacity and build local raw material supply chain, that can as possible as minizing losses on currency translation. Nonetheless, the adverse affect still existed, Toyota have to maintain a high level of vigilance the dynamics of international exchange market. Product diversification in respond to highly competitive auto market. In the highly competitive global business environment, Conclusion In todays global business environment multinational enterprise become more important, because countries adoption of opening oriented to promote the economic growth by attract Foreign Direct Investment (FDI). The multinational enterprise plays the role of investor between countries. Whereas, the business environment will become more competitive follow with the increased FDI. As the world forth largest multinational enterprise, Toyota faced several affect from globalization, which can be classified as political, government regulations, economic environment, social lifestyle, and technological factors. Due to those of factor Toyota will continue to seek the way of sustainable development that use some strategy or approach to solve problems, such as, open a new market with innovative product. But there are not ensure Toyota will have a bright future. Car sales around the world in 2009: mostly down . The Truth About Cars. Retrieved 2010-09-09. Automobile Industry Introduction. Plunkett Research. 2008. Retrieved 2010-09-09. World Factbook; Japan-Economy. CIA. 2010.09.05 Retrieved 2010.09.05 Byars, L., 1991. Strategic Management, Formulation and implementation-Concepts and Cases. New York: HarperCollins Johnson, G., Scholes, K., 1993. Exploring Corporate Strategy-Text and Cases. Hemel Hempstead: Prentice-Hall Toyota, 2006. Geared toward Continuing Growth, Annual report 2005-2006. Japan: Tyouta Toyota., 2009. The Right Way Forward, Annual Report 2009. Japan: Toyota Toyota, 2010. Sustainability Report 2009-2010. Japan: Toyota EcPulse., 2010. Toyota to Invest $700 Million for RD in China. General Forex News.[online] 22 November. Available at: [Accessed 11 November 2010] BEST CARS., 2010. Internal Toyota Documents Show Political Influence Lobbying.[online](updated 22 February 2010) Available at: [Accessed 12 November 2010] Ganz, A., 2010. TOYOTA BUILDING 7TH CHINA PLANT. [onlibne] LEFT LANE NEWS.[online] 21 June. Available at: [Accessed 12 November 2010] Kulkarni, A., 2009. Positive Effects of Globalization. [online] Buzzle. Available at: [Accessed 16 November 2010] The Development Principles Group., 2009. Economic Environment in China.[online](updated 2009) Available at: [Accessed 16 November 2010] Elizabeth, C. 2003. Chinas Environmental Challenge: Political Social and Economic Implications.[online] New York:Council on Foreign Relations(published 2003) Available at: [Accessed 17 November 2010] Judy, Z., 2010. Chinas Auto Companies: Will the Legend of 2009 Continue?[online](updated 05 May 2010) Available at: [Accessed 17 November 2010] China Through A lens., 2009. What are the preferential policies offered to enterprises with foreign investment?[online] Available at: [Accessed 18 November] http://www.philforhumanity.com/Globalization_of_the_U.S.A..html http://ideas.repec.org/p/kie/kieliw/1093.html http://www.allbusiness.com/management/benchmarking-key-business-process-benchmarking/219142-1.html www.wikinvest.com/industry/Auto_Makers http://www.robroad.com/light-industry/index.php/financial-crisis-industry-japan/ http://www.wikinvest.com/stock/Toyota_Motor_(TM)/Toyotas%20Operations%20Subject%20Currency%20Interest%20Rate%20Fluctuations http://www.moneycontrol.com/news/world-news/japan-auto-sales-fallsept-india-strong_488274.html http://factsanddetails.com/japan.php?itemid=930catid=24subcatid=157 http://news.frbiz.com/financial_crisis_in_the_automobile-173677.html http://www.monstersandcritics.com/news/business/news/article_1448578.php/Toyota_cutting_costs_to_withstand_financial_crisis_sales_drop http://www.themotorreport.com.au/11817/financial-crisis-prompts-toyota-to-cut-earnings-forecast

ANALYSE THE WHOLE I T CONFIGURATION OF A BIG COMPANY Essay -- essays r

ANALYSE THE WHOLE I T CONFIGURATION OF A BIG COMPANY 1. Introduction In today’s competitive market the firms are bound to reduce their costs and also maximize their profits. The only solution to achieve this objective is the usage of the Computer Systems, which are far more than computational and text processing tools. With their rapid expansion, and certainly via the Networks people can exchange and also sharing a variety of information, regardless of how far they are each other. The introduction of a new technology into a work environment has effectively increased the firm’s investment and also its productivity. Computers are not truly capable of intelligence and independent problem solving, but they become, as they are programmable from the human workers. Nevertheless, the new technology does not necessarily need to replace the workers in a workplace, but to help them to increase their productivity. Despite of these technological advantages, the Information Technology creates a gap between the rich people and poor, as the habitation of a computer system in our days, requires certain skills and money to spent. The company that it was selected for further analysis, as it concerns the current Information Technology configuration, is the P.P.C of Greece. 2. Description of the current configuration of P.P.C 2.1 The Mainframe In the early 1950s , the mid size and large companies were using the mainframes, which they occupy entire rooms for their existence. They are large and powerful computers and also very expensive. A professional staff is needed for the operation of those systems and also some special environmental conditions must be carefully set, such temperature and humidity in order that such a machine will functioning properly. Since 1990, the P.P.C’s Computer Center has one IBM’s mainframe R42 – 9672, with 512MB Real Memory and it is consisted of four processors with total speed 72,8Mips each. All these processors are connected, via 20 Escon technology parallel channels. There are also three large ranges RAMAC –RAID5, with 152 (DASDY) volumes in total, where each of them has a 1,89GB capacity. So the total capacity is 287.28GB. The current protocol that it is used is the Standard Network Architecture, with local controllers IBM-3174 and its duty is to set up certain rules for formatting and regulating the speed of the data, that they are t... ...an integrated database management system, which can distribute information, via a network and satisfies the needs of the top-level management within a company. The scope of such a system is to deliver to the managers the timely and relevant information, for the needs of the whole organization. The managers have access to the whole database anytime from their usual PC’s and there is also available information, which may be helpful for some important decisions to be taken very fast. The development of this system requires, very good analysis of the specific needs of the company, and also very professed and skilled programmers to develop it. 4. Conclusion By a large it seems that P.P.C is a well organized, as it concerns the Information Technology systems, but there is always some space for changes and ideas. Especially when we have to deal with the modern technologies, where every day something new is happened or new software is developed, or a new hardware is come up in the market. So, every big firm or organization, just like P.P.C in our case, must always beware of the technological improvements and upgrade the sooner its current Information Technology systems with new ones.

Argumentative Essay: The Appalling Lack of Gun Control in the United States :: Argumentative Persuasive Argument Essays

There is an appalling, despicable lack of gun control in the United States. In my opinion the manner in which the issue of gun control is approached in this country is bordering on criminal negligence in and of itself. The insanity surrounding this controversial issue is taking the Second Amendment to the Bill of Rights in the United States constitution way too far. I ask myself this question, could the Founding Fathers of this amazing country have possibly envisioned a world in which teenagers could casually walk into a classroom, pull out a loaded pistol and cold bloodily murder their teachers and fellow classmates? I think not. I would posit that these fine men, these symbols of American liberty and democracy would turn in their graves if they could see how their words, their intentions, were manipulated and grossly misinterpreted, to serve the purposes of those who pretend to be protecting the rights of their fellow American Citizens. On the contrary, it is my belief that t hey, the politicians, are recklessly endangering those whose rights they claim to be protecting. The Government needs to take a hard, honest look at the tragic loss of life that occurs in this country due to gun shootings, both intentional and accidental. The government needs to assume responsibility for this outrageous situation and realize that gun control in the United States needs to be Federally regulated, sooner rather than later. Wherein lies the difficulty in subjecting citizens to more stringent gun control measures? What possible reasons could politicians have for opposing safety measures such as the mandatory registration of firearms, five day waiting periods, gun licensing for owners, permits to purchase and permits to carry guns as well as mandatory background checks? If you want to carry a firearm, I feel that all of the afore mentioned requirements, at the very least, should be instituted in every single state. For heavens sake, it is more difficult to enroll your child in school than it is to buy and own a gun in this country. Does that seem logical? Not to me. The reason being that as this controversy plays out, as the NRA (National Rifle Association), the various politicians and the many interest groups squabble aimlessly back and forth with each other, more innocent people are losing their lives everyday, no in fact, every minute!

Child Abuse and Neglect :: Violence Against Children

  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Many children suffer at the hands of adults - often their own parents. They are beaten, kicked, thrown into walls, and burned with cigarettes. They have their heads held under the water of toilet bowls, are scalded by hot water or they are forced to stand in freezing showers until they pass out. A child could be stuffed into running washing machines or sexually molested, suffer from neglect in the forms of starvation and lack of medical attention, and still go unnoticed by outsiders. In fact, it is estimated that about five children die every day in the U.S. from some form of child abuse. It is a sickening practice that has no set standard of rules to finish off the persisting problem. Different states have different methods and agencies to help prevent abuse in the home, some work quite well while others bomb - a dangerous gamble when it comes to the life or mental state of a child.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   The precise number of deaths each year is not known because of the extent of most fatality investigations that could be suspected as child abuse but are seen as open and shut death cases. A report from the National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect, however, depicts more than three million reports of alleged child maltreatment practices in the year of 1995 alone. Many more children are living with abuse rather than dying from it, too. So what steps are being taken to protect our nation's children?   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  All states have a Child Protective Services (or CPS) system. This is the governmental system responsible for investigating reports of child abuse or neglect. In state after state, the CPS agency lacks the resources to respond adequately to the overwhelming number of reports it is legislatively mandated to investigate. All fifty states have child abuse reporting laws requiring reports of suspected abuse to be made by specified professionals and others whose work brings them into regular contact with children. Any citizen may report suspected abuse as state laws provide for reports to be made to the CPS agency or its equivalent, or to a law enforcement agency. In most states, investigations are conducted by CPS personnel, although law enforcement officers may also be involved.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The basic concern of child welfare workers is for the safety of the child. Assessment of the risks involved in leaving a child with its family must be made quickly because children cannot be removed from their families arbitrarily. Child Abuse and Neglect :: Violence Against Children   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Many children suffer at the hands of adults - often their own parents. They are beaten, kicked, thrown into walls, and burned with cigarettes. They have their heads held under the water of toilet bowls, are scalded by hot water or they are forced to stand in freezing showers until they pass out. A child could be stuffed into running washing machines or sexually molested, suffer from neglect in the forms of starvation and lack of medical attention, and still go unnoticed by outsiders. In fact, it is estimated that about five children die every day in the U.S. from some form of child abuse. It is a sickening practice that has no set standard of rules to finish off the persisting problem. Different states have different methods and agencies to help prevent abuse in the home, some work quite well while others bomb - a dangerous gamble when it comes to the life or mental state of a child.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   The precise number of deaths each year is not known because of the extent of most fatality investigations that could be suspected as child abuse but are seen as open and shut death cases. A report from the National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect, however, depicts more than three million reports of alleged child maltreatment practices in the year of 1995 alone. Many more children are living with abuse rather than dying from it, too. So what steps are being taken to protect our nation's children?   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  All states have a Child Protective Services (or CPS) system. This is the governmental system responsible for investigating reports of child abuse or neglect. In state after state, the CPS agency lacks the resources to respond adequately to the overwhelming number of reports it is legislatively mandated to investigate. All fifty states have child abuse reporting laws requiring reports of suspected abuse to be made by specified professionals and others whose work brings them into regular contact with children. Any citizen may report suspected abuse as state laws provide for reports to be made to the CPS agency or its equivalent, or to a law enforcement agency. In most states, investigations are conducted by CPS personnel, although law enforcement officers may also be involved.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The basic concern of child welfare workers is for the safety of the child. Assessment of the risks involved in leaving a child with its family must be made quickly because children cannot be removed from their families arbitrarily.

Spoilage, Rework, and Scrap

Managers have found that improved quality and intolerance for high spoilage have lowered overall costs and increased sales. 18-2Spoilage—units of production that do not meet the standards required by customers for good units and that are discarded or sold at reduced prices. Rework—units of production that do not meet the specifications required by customers but which are subsequently repaired and sold as good finished units. Scrap—residual material that results from manufacturing a product. It has low total sales value compared to the total sales value of the product. 8-3Yes. Normal spoilage is spoilage inherent in a particular production process that arises even under efficient operating conditions. Management decides the spoilage rate it considers normal depending on the production process. 18-4Abnormal spoilage is spoilage that is not inherent in a particular production process and would not arise under efficient operating conditions. Costs of abnormal spoilag e are â€Å"lost costs,† measures of inefficiency that should be written off directly as losses for the accounting period. 18-5Management effort can affect the spoilage rate.Many companies are relentlessly reducing their rates of normal spoilage, spurred on by competitors who, likewise, are continuously reducing costs. 18-6Normal spoilage typically is expressed as a percentage of good units passing the inspection point. Given actual spoiled units, we infer abnormal spoilage as follows: Abnormal spoilage = Actual spoilage – Normal spoilage 18-7Accounting for spoiled goods deals with cost assignment, rather than with cost incurrence, because the existence of spoiled goods does not involve any additional cost beyond the amount already incurred. 18-8Yes.Normal spoilage rates should be computed from the good output or from the normal input, not the total input. Normal spoilage is a given percentage of a certain output base. This base should never include abnormal spoilage, which is included in total input. Abnormal spoilage does not vary in direct proportion to units produced, and to include it would cause the normal spoilage count to fluctuate irregularly and not vary in direct proportion to the output base. 18-9Yes, the point of inspection is the key to the assignment of spoilage costs. Normal spoilage costs do not attach solely to units transferred out.Thus, if units in ending work in process have passed inspection, they should have normal spoilage costs added to them. 18-10No. If abnormal spoilage is detected at a different point in the production cycle than normal spoilage, then unit costs would differ. If, however normal and abnormal spoilage are detected at the same point in the production cycle, their unit costs would be the same. 18-11No. Spoilage may be considered a normal characteristic of a given production cycle. The costs of normal spoilage caused by a random malfunction of a machine would be charged as a part of the manufacturing overhe ad allocated to all jobs.Normal spoilage attributable to a specific job is charged to that job. 18-12 No. Unless there are special reasons for charging normal rework to jobs that contained the bad units, the costs of extra materials, labor, and so on are usually charged to manufacturing overhead and allocated to all jobs. 18-13Yes. Abnormal rework is a loss just like abnormal spoilage. By charging it to manufacturing overhead, the abnormal rework costs are spread over other jobs and also included in inventory to the extent a job is not complete. Abnormal rework is rework over and above what is expected during a period, and is recognized as a loss for that period. 8-14A company is justified in inventorying scrap when its estimated net realizable value is significant and the time between storing it and selling or reusing it is quite long. 18-15Company managements measure scrap to measure efficiency and to also control a tempting source of theft. Managements of companies that report hi gh levels of scrap focus attention on ways to reduce scrap and to use the scrap the company generates more profitably. Some companies, for example, might redesign products and processes to reduce scrap. Others may also examine if the scrap can be reused to save substantial input costs. 8-16(5–10 min. ) Normal and abnormal spoilage in units. 1. Total spoiled units12,000 Normal spoilage in units, 5% ( 132,000 6,600 Abnormal spoilage in units 5,400 2. Abnormal spoilage, 5,400 ( $10$ 54,000 Normal spoilage, 6,600 ( $10 66,000 Potential savings, 12,000 ( $10$120,000 Regardless of the targeted normal spoilage, abnormal spoilage is non-recurring and avoidable. The targeted normal spoilage rate is subject to change. Many companies have reduced their spoilage to almost zero, which would realize all potential savings.Of course, zero spoilage usually means higher-quality products, more customer satisfaction, more employee satisfaction, and various beneficial effects on nonmanufacturing (for example, purchasing) costs of direct materials. 18-17(20 min. )Weighted-average method, spoilage, equivalent units. Solution Exhibit 18-17 calculates equivalent units of work done to date for direct materials and conversion costs. SOLUTION EXHIBIT 18-17 Summarize Output in Physical Units and Compute Output in Equivalent Units; Weighted-Average Method of Process Costing with Spoilage, Gray Manufacturing Company for November 2006. |(Step 1) |(Step 2) | | | |Equivalent Units | | |Physical |Direct |Conversion | |Flow of Production |Units |Materials |Costs | |Work in process, beginning (given) |1,000 | | | |Started during current period |10,150a | | | |To account for |11,150 | | | |Good units completed and transferred out | | | | |during current period: |9,000 |9,000 |9,000 | |Normal spoilage* |100 | | | |100 ( 100%; 100 ( 100% | |100 |100 | |Abnormal spoilage†  |50 | | | |50 ( 100%; 50 (100% | |50 |50 | |Work in process, ending†¡ (given) |2,000 | | | |2,000 ( 100%; 2,000 ( 30% | |2,000 |600 | |Accounted for 11,150 | | | |Work done to date | |11,150 |9,750 | a From below, 11,150 total units are accounted for. Therefore, units started during current period must be = 11,150 – 1,000 = 10,150. *Degree of completion of normal spoilage in this department: direct materials, 100%; conversion costs, 100%. † Degree of completion of abnormal spoilage in this department: direct materials, 100%; conversion costs, 100%. †¡Degree of completion in this department: direct materials, 100%; conversion costs, 30%. 18-18(20(25 min. Weighted-average method, assigning costs (continuation of 18-17). Solution Exhibit 18-18 calculates the costs per equivalent unit for direct materials and conversion costs, summarizes total costs to account for, and assigns these costs to units completed and transferred out (including normal spoilage), to abnormal spoilage, and to units in ending work in process. SOLUTION EXHIBIT 18-18 Compute Cost per Equivalent Unit, Summari ze Total Costs to Account For, and Assign Total Costs to Units Completed, to Spoiled Units, and to Units in Ending Work in Process; Weighted-Average Method of Process Costing, Gray Manufacturing Company, November 2006. |Total | | | | |Production |Direct |Conversion | | |Costs |Materials |Costs | |(Step 3) Work in process, beginning (given) |$ 2,533 |$ 1,423 |$ 1,110 | |Costs added in current period (given) |39,930 |12,180 |27,750 | |Costs incurred to date | |13,603 |28,860 | |Divided by equivalent units of work done to date | |(11,150 |( 9,750 | |Cost per equivalent unit | |$ 1. 22 |$ 2. 6 | |(Step 4) Total costs to account for |$42,463 | | | |(Step 5) Assignment of costs | | | | |Good units completed and transferred out (9,000 units) | | | | |Costs before adding normal spoilage |$37,620 | (9,000# ( $1. 22) + (9,000# ( $2. 96) | |Normal spoilage (100 units) |418 |(100# ( $1. 22) + (100# ( $2. 96) | |(A) Total cost of good units completed & transf. out |38,038 | | |(B) Abnormal spoil age (50 units) |209 |(50# ( $1. 22) + (50# ( $2. 96) | |(C) Work in process, ending (2,000 units) |4,216 |(2,000# ( $1. 22) + (600# ( $2. 6) | |(A)+(B)+(C) Total costs accounted for |$42,463 | | #Equivalent units of direct materials and conversion costs calculated in Step 2 in Solution Exhibit 18-17. 18-19(15 min. )FIFO method, spoilage, equivalent units. Solution Exhibit 18-19 calculates equivalent units of work done in the current period for direct materials and conversion costs. SOLUTION EXHIBIT 18-19 Summarize Output in Physical Units and Compute Output in Equivalent Units; First-in, First-out (FIFO) Method of Process Costing with Spoilage, Gray Manufacturing Company for November 2006. | |(Step 2) | | |(Step 1) |Equivalent Units | | |Physical |Direct |Conversion | |Flow of Production |Units |Materials |Costs | |Work in process, beginning (given) |1,000 | | | |Started during current period |10,150a | | | |To account for |11,150 | | | |Good units completed and transferred out duri ng current period: | | | | |From beginning work in process|| |1,000 | | | |1,000 ( (100% (100%); 1,000 ( (100% ( 50%) | |0 |500 | |Started and completed |8,000# | | | |8,000 ( 100%; 8,000 ( 100% | |8,000 |8,000 | |Normal spoilage* |100 | | | |100 ( 100%; 100 ( 100% | |100 |100 | |Abnormal spoilage†  |50 | | | |50 ( 100%; 50 ( 100% | |50 |50 | |Work in process, ending†¡ |2,000 | | | |2,000 ( 100%; 2,000 ( 30% | |2,000 |600 | |Accounted for |11,150 | | | |Work done in current period only | |10,150 |9,250 | a From below, 11,150 total units are accounted for.Therefore, units started during current period must be 11,150 – 1,000 = 10,150. ||Degree of completion in this department: direct materials, 100%; conversion costs, 50%. #9,000 physical units completed and transferred out minus 1,000 physical units completed and transferred out from beginning work-in-process inventory. *Degree of completion of normal spoilage in this department: direct materials, 100%; conversion co sts, 100%. † Degree of completion of abnormal spoilage in this department: direct materials, 100%; conversion costs, 100%. †¡Degree of completion in this department: direct materials, 100%; conversion costs, 30%. 18-20(20(25 min. )FIFO method, assigning costs (continuation of 18-19).Solution Exhibit 18-20 calculates the costs per equivalent unit for direct materials and conversion costs, summarizes total costs to account for, and assigns these costs to units completed and transferred out (including normal spoilage), to abnormal spoilage, and to units in ending work in process. SOLUTION EXHIBIT 18-20 Compute Cost per Equivalent Unit Costs, Summarize Total Costs to Account For, and Assign Total Costs to Units Completed, to Spoiled Units, and to Units in Ending Work in Process; FIFO Method of Process Costing, Gray Manufacturing Company, November 2006. | |Total | | | | Production |Direct |Conversion | | |Costs |Materials |Costs | |(Step 3) Work in process, beginning (given: $1 ,423 + $1,110) |$ 2,533 | | | |Costs added in current period (given) |39,930 |$12,180 |$27,750 | |Divided by equivalent units of work done in current period | |(10,150 |( 9,250 | |Cost per equivalent unit |______ |$ 1. 0 |$ 3 | |(Step 4) Total costs to account for |$42,463 | | | |(Step 5) Assignment of costs: | | | | |Good units completed and transferred out (9,000 units) | | | | |Work in process, beginning (1,000 units) |$ 2,533 | | |Costs added to beg. work in process in current period |1,500 |(0a ( $1. 0) + (500a ( $3) | |Total from beginning inventory before normal spoilage | | | |Started and completed before normal spoilage (8,000 units) |4,033 | | |Normal spoilage (100 units) |33,600 |(8,000a ( $1. 20) + (8,000a ( $3) | |(A) Total costs of good units completed and transferred out |420 |(100a ( $1. 20) + (100a ( $3) | |(B) Abnormal spoilage (50 units) |38,053 | | |(C) Work in process, ending (2,000 units) |210 |(50a ( $1. 0) + (50a ( $3) | |(A)+(B)+(C) Total costs accounted for |4,200 |(2,000a ( $1. 20) + (60a ( $3) | | |$42,463 | | a Equivalent units of direct materials and conversion costs calculated in Step 2 in Solution Exhibit 18-19. 18-21(30 min. )Weighted-average method, spoilage. 1. Solution Exhibit 18-21A calculates equivalent units of work done in the current period for direct materials and conversion costs. SOLUTION EXHIBIT 18-21A Summarize Output in Physical Units and Compute Output in Equivalent Units; Weighted-Average Method of Process Costing with Spoilage, Appleton Company for August 2006. |(Step 1) |(Step 2) | | | |Equivalent Units | |Flow of Production |Physical Units|Direct |Conversion | | | |Materials |Costs | |Work in process, beginning (given) | 2,000 | | | |Started during current period (given) |10,000 | | | |To account for | 12,000 | | | |Good units completed and tsfd. out during current period: | 9,000 | 9,000 | 9,000 | |Normal spoilagea | 900 | | | | (900 [pic]100%; 900 [pic]100%) | | 900| 900 | |Abnormal spoilageb 300 | | | | (3 00 [pic]100%; 300 [pic]100%) | | 300| 300 | |Work in process, endingc (given) | 1,800 | | | | (1,800 [pic] 100%; 1,800 [pic] 75%) |______ | 1,800 | 1,350 | |Accounted for | 12,000 | | | |Work done to date | | 12,000 | 11,550 | | | | | | | aNormal spoilage is 10% of good units transferred out: 10% ? 9,000 = 900 units. Degree of completion of normal spoilage | | in this department: direct materials, 100%; conversion costs, 100%. | | | |bTotal spoilage = Beg. units + Units started – Good units tsfd. out – Ending units = 2,000 + 10,000 – 9,000 – 1,800 = 1,200; | | Abnormal spoilage = Total spoilage – Normal spoilage = 1,200 – 900 = 300 units. Degree of completion of abnormal spoilage | | in this department: direct materials, 100%; conversion costs, 100%. | | |cDegree of completion in this department: direct materials, 100%; conversion costs, 75%. | | | 2 & 3. Solution Exhibit 18-21B calculates the costs per equivalent unit for direct materials a nd conversion costs, summarizes total costs to account for, and assigns these costs to units completed and transferred out (including normal spoilage), to abnormal spoilage, and to units in ending work in process, using the weighted-average method. SOLUTION EXHIBIT 18-21B Compute Cost per Equivalent Unit, Summarize Total Costs to Account For, and Assign Total Costs to Units Completed, to Spoiled Units, and to Units in Ending Work in Process; Weighted-Average Method of Process Costing, Appleton Company, August 2006.    |   |Total |Direct |Conversion | | | |Production |Materials |Costs | | | |Costs | | | |(Step 3) |Work in process, beginning (given) |$ 28,600 | $17,700 |$ 10,900 | | |Costs added in current period (given) | 174,300 | 81,300 | 93,000 | | |Costs incurred to date | | $99,000 |$103,900 | | |Divide by equivalent units of work done to date | |[pic]12,000 |[pic]11,550 | | |Cost per equivalent unit | _______ | $ 8. 250 |$ 8. 957 | |(Step 4) |Total costs to account for |$20 2,900 | | | |(Step 5) |Assignment of costs: | | | | | |Good units completed and transferred out (9,000 units) | | | | | | Costs before adding normal spoilage |$155,211 |(9,000d [pic]$8. 25) + (9,000 d | | | | |[pic]$8. 957) | | | Normal spoilage (900 units) | 15,521 |(900d [pic]$8. 25) + (900d [pic]$8. 9957) | |(A) | Total costs of good units completed and transferred out | 170,732 | | | |(B) |Abnormal spoilage (300 units) | 5,174 |(300d [pic] $8. 25) + (300d [pic] $8. 9957) | |(C) |Work in process, ending (1,800 units): | 26,994 |(1,800d [pic]$8. 25) + (1,350d | | | | |[pic]$8. 957) | |(A) + (B) + (C) |Total costs accounted for |$202,900 | | | | | | | | | |dEquivalent units of direct materials and conversion costs calculated in step 2 of Solution Exhibit 18-21A. | 18-22 (30 min. )FIFO method, spoilage. 1. Solution Exhibit 18-22A calculates equivalent units of work done in the current period for direct materials and conversion costs. SOLUTION EXHIBIT 18-22A Summarize Output in Physi cal Units and Compute Output in Equivalent Units; FIFO Method of Process Costing with Spoilage, Appleton Company for August 2006. |(Step 1) |(Step 2) | | | |Equivalent Units | |Flow of Production |Physical Units |Direct |Conversion Costs | | | |Materials | | |Work in process, beginning (given) | 2,000 | | | |Started during current period (given) | 10,000 | | | |To account for | 12,000 | | | |Good units completed and transferred out during current period: | | | | | From beginning work in process a | 2,000 | | | | [2,000 ? (100% – 100%); 2,000 ? 100% – 50%)] | | 0 | 1,000 | | Started and completed | 7,000b | | | | (7,000 ? 100%; 7,000 ? 100%) | | 7,000 | 7,000 | |Normal spoilagec | 900 | | | | (900 ? 100%; 900 ? 100%) | | 900 | 900 | |Abnormal spoilaged | 300 | | | | (300 ? 100%; 300 ? 00%) | | 300 | 300 | |Work in process, endinge (given) | 1,800 | | | | (1,800 ? 100%; 1,800 ? 75%) | | 1,800 | 1,350 | |Accounted for | 12,000 |_____ | | |Work done in current period only | | 10,000 | 10,550 | | | | | | | a Degree of completion in this department: direct materials, 100%; conversion costs, 50%. | b 9,000 physical units completed and transferred out minus 2,000 physical units completed and transferred out from beginning | | work-in-process inventory. | | c Normal spoilage is 10% of good units transferred out: 10% ? 9,000 = 900 units. Degree of completion of normal spoilage in this | | department: direct materials, 100%; conversion costs, 100%. | | d Total spoilage = Beg. units + Units started – Good units tsfd. Out – ending units = 2,000 + 10,000 – 9,000 – 1,800 = 1,200 | | Abnormal spoilage = Actual spoilage – Normal spoilage = 1,200 – 900 = 300 units. Degree of completion of abnormal spoilage in | | in this department: direct materials, 100%; conversion costs, 100%. | e Degree of completion in this department: direct materials, 100%; conversion costs, 75%. | 2 & 3. Solution Exhibit 18-22B calculates the costs per equivalent unit for direct materials and conversion costs, summarizes total costs to account for, and assigns these costs to units completed and transferred out (including normal spoilage), to abnormal spoilage, and to units in ending work in process, using the FIFO method. SOLUTION EXHIBIT 18-22B Compute Cost per Equivalent Unit, Summarize Total Costs to Account For, and Assign Total Costs to Units Completed, to Spoiled Units, and to Units in Ending Work in Process; FIFO Method of Process Costing, Appleton Company, August 2006.    |   |Total |Direct |Conversion | | | |Production |Materials |Costs | | | |Costs | | | |(Step 3) |Work in process, beginning (given) ($17,700 + $10,900) |$ 28,600 | | | | |Costs added in current period (given) | 174,300 |$ 81,300 | $93,000 | | |Divide by equivalent units of work done in current period | |[pic]10,000 |[pic]10,550 | | |Cost per equivalent unit | | $ 8. 130 | $ 8. 152 | |(Step 4) |Total costs to account for |$202,900 | | | |(Step 5) |Assignment of costs: | | | | | |Good units completed and transferred out (9,000 units) | | | | | | Work in process, beginning (2,000 units) |$ 28,600 | | | | | Costs added to beg. work in process in current period | 8,815 |(0f ? $8. 13) | + (1,000f ? $8. 152) | | | Total from beginning inventory before normal spoilage | 37,415 | | | | | Started and completed before normal spoilage (7,000 units) | 118,616 |(7,000f ? $8. 13) | + (7,000f ? $8. 8152) | | | Normal spoilage (900 units) | 15,521 |(900f ? $8. 13) | + (900f ? $8. 8152) | |(A) | Total costs of good units completed and transferred out | 171,282 | | | |(B) |Abnormal spoilage (300 units) | 5,084 |(300f ? $8. 13) | + (300f ? $8. 8152) | |(C) |Work in process, ending (1,800 units): | 26,534 |(1,800f ? $8. 13) | + (1,350f ? $8. 152) | |(A) + (B) + (C) |Total costs accounted for |$202,900 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |fEquivalent units of direct materials and conversion costs calculated in step 2 in Solution Exhibit 18-22A. | 18-2 3 (30 min. ) Standard-costing method, spoilage. 1. Solution Exhibit 18-23A calculates equivalent units of work done in the current period for direct materials and conversion costs. (It is the same as Solution Exhibit 18-22A. ) SOLUTION EXHIBIT 18-23A Summarize Output in Physical Units and Compute Output in Equivalent Units; Standard Costing Method of Process Costing with Spoilage, Appleton Company for August 2006. |(Step 1) |(Step 2) | | | |Equivalent Units | |Flow of Production |Physical Units |Direct |Conversion Costs | | | |Materials | | |Work in process, beginning (given) | 2,000 | | | |Started during current period (given) | 10,000 | | | |To account for | 12,000 | | | |Good units completed and transferred out during current period: | | | | | From beginning work in process a | 2,000 | | | | [2,000 ? (100% – 100%); 2,000 ? 100% – 50%)] | | 0| 1,000 | | Started and completed | 7,000b | | | | (7,000 ? 100%; 7,000 ? 100%) | | 7,000 | 7,000 | |Normal spoilagec | 900 | | | | (900 ? 100%; 900 ? 100%) | | 900 | 900 | |Abnormal spoilaged | 300 | | | | (300 ? 100%; 300 ? 00%) | | 300 | 300 | |Work in process, endinge (given) | 1,800 | | | | (1,800 ? 100%; 1,800 ? 75%) | | 1,800 | 1,350 | |Accounted for | 12,000 | | | |Work done in current period only | | 10,000 | 10,550 | | | | | | | a Degree of completion in this department: direct materials, 100%; conversion costs, 50%. | b 9,000 physical units completed and transferred out minus 2,000 physical units completed and transferred out from beginning | | work-in-process inventory. | | c Normal spoilage is 10% of good units transferred out: 10% ? 9,000 = 900 units. Degree of completion of normal spoilage in this | | department: direct materials, 100%; conversion costs, 100%. | | d Total spoilage = Beg. units + Units started – Good units tsfd. Out – ending units = 2,000 + 10,000 – 9,000 – 1,800 = 1,200 | | Abnormal spoilage = Actual spoilage – Normal spoilage = 1,200 â€⠀œ 900 = 300 units. Degree of completion of abnormal spoilage in | | in this department: direct materials, 100%; conversion costs, 100%. | e Degree of completion in this department: direct materials, 100%; conversion costs, 75%. | 2 & 3. Solution Exhibit 18-23B calculates the costs per equivalent unit for direct materials and conversion costs, summarizes total costs to account for, and assigns these costs to units completed and transferred out (including normal spoilage), to abnormal spoilage, and to units in ending work in process, using standard costing. SOLUTION EXHIBIT 18-23B Compute Cost per Equivalent Unit, Summarize Total Costs to Account For, and Assign Total Costs to Units Completed, to Spoiled Units, and to Units in Ending Work in Process; Standard Costing Method of Process Costing, Appleton Company, August 2006.    |   |Total |Direct |Conversion | | | |Production |Materials |Costs | | | |Costs | | | |(Step 3) |Standard cost per equivalent unit (given) | $ 17. 50 | $8. 00 | $9. 50 | | |Work in process, beginning (given) | $ 25,500 | (2,000 ? $8. 00) |+ (1,000 ? $9. 50) | | |Costs added in current period at standard prices | 180,225 | (10,000 ? $8. 00) |+ (10,550 ? $9. 0) | |(Step 4) |Total costs to account for |$205,725 | | | |(Step 5) |Assignment of costs at standard costs: | | | | | |Good units completed and transferred out (9,000 units) | | | | | | Work in process, beginning (2,000 units) |$ 25,500 | | | | | Costs added to beg. work in process in current period | 9,500 |(0f ? $8. 00) |+ (1,000f ? $9. 50) | | | Total from beginning inventory before normal spoilage | 35,000 | | | | | Started and completed before normal spoilage (7,000 units) | 122,500 |(7,000f ? $8. 00) |+ (7,000f ? $9. 50) | | | Normal spoilage (900 units) | 15,750 |(900f ? $8. 00) |+ (900f ? $9. 0) | |(A) | Total costs of good units completed and transferred out | 173,250 | | | |(B) |Abnormal spoilage (300 units) | 5,250|(300f ? $8. 00) |+ (300f ? $9. 50) | |(C) |Work in proce ss, ending (1,800 units): | 27,225 |(1,800f ? $8. 00) |+ (1,350f ? $9. 50) | |(A) + (B) + (C) |Total costs accounted for |$205,725 | | | |f Equivalent units of direct materials and conversion costs calculated in step 2 in Solution Exhibit 18-23A. | 18-24(25 min. ) Weighted-average method, spoilage. 1. Solution Exhibit 18-24, Panel A, calculates the equivalent units of work done to date for each cost category in September 2006. 2. & 3.Solution Exhibit 18-24, Panel B, calculates the costs per equivalent unit for each cost category, summarizes total costs to account for, and assigns these costs to units completed (including normal spoilage), to abnormal spoilage, and to units in ending work in process using the weighted-average method. SOLUTION EXHIBIT 18-24 Weighted-Average Method of Process Costing with Spoilage; Superchip, September 2006. PANEL A: Steps 1 and 2—Summarize Output in Physical Units and Compute Output in Equivalent Units | |(Step 1) |(Step 2) | | | |Equivalent Un its | | Physical |Direct |Conversion | |Flow of Production |Units |Materials |Costs | |Work in process, beginning (given) |400 | | | |Started during current period (given) |1,700 | | | |To account for |2,100 | | | |Good units completed and transferred out | | | | |during current period: |1,400 |1,400 |1,400 | |Normal spoilage* |210 | | | |210 ( 100%; 210 ( 100% | |210 |210 | |Abnormal spoilage†  |190 | | | |190 ( 100%; 190 ( 100% | |190 |190 | |Work in process, ending†¡ (given) |300 | | | |300 ( 100%; 300 ( 40% | |300 |120 | |Accounted for |2,100 | | | |Work done to date | |2,100 |1,920 | *Normal spoilage is 15% of good units transferred out: 15% ? 1,400 = 210 units.Degree of completion of normal spoilage in this department: direct materials, 100%; conversion costs, 100%. † Total spoilage = 400 + 1,700 – 1,400 – 300 = 400 units; Abnormal spoilage = Total spoilage ( Normal spoilage = 400 ( 210 = 190 units. Degree of completion of abnormal spoilage in this department: direct materials, 100%; conversion costs, 100%. †¡Degree of completion in this department: direct materials, 100%; conversion costs, 40%. SOLUTION EXHIBIT 18-24 PANEL B: Steps 3, 4, and 5—Compute Cost per Equivalent Unit, Summarize Total Costs to Account For, and Assign Total Costs to Units Completed, to Spoiled Units, and to Units in Ending Work in Process |Total | | | | |Production |Direct |Conversion | | |Costs |Materials |Costs | |(Step 3) Work in process, beginning (given) |$ 74,200 |$ 64,000 |$ 10,200 | |Costs added in current period (given) |531,600 |378,000 |153,600 | |Costs incurred to date | |$442,000 |$163,800 | |Divided by equivalent units of work done to date | |( 2,100 |( 1,920 | |Cost per equivalent unit costs of work done to date | |$210. 476 |$85. 125 | |(Step 4) Total costs to account for |$605,800 | | | |(Step 5) Assignment of costs | | | | |Good units completed and transferred out (1,400 units) | | | | |Costs before adding normal spoilage |$414,104 |(1,400#( $210. 476) + (1,400#( $85. 3125) | |Normal spoilage (210 units) |62,116 |(210# ( $210. 476) + (210# ( $85. 125) | |(A) Total cost of good units completed and transferred out | | | |(B) Abnormal spoilage (190 units) |476,220 | | |(C) Work in process, ending (300 units) |56,199 |(190# ( $210. 476) + (190# ( $85. 3125) | |(A)+(B)+(C) Total costs accounted for |73,381 |(300# ( $210. 476) + (120# ( $85. 3125) | | |$605,800 | | # Equivalent units of direct materials and conversion costs calculated in Step 2 in Panel A. 8-25 (25 min. ) FIFO method, spoilage. 1. Solution Exhibit 18-25, Panel A, calculates the equivalent units of work done in the current period for each cost category in September 2006. 2. & 3. Solution Exhibit 18-25, Panel B, calculates the costs per equivalent unit for each cost category, summarizes the total Microchip Department costs for September 2006, and assigns these costs to units completed and transferred out (including normal spoilage), to abno rmal spoilage, and to units in ending work in process under the FIFO method. SOLUTION EXHIBIT 18-25 First-in, First-out (FIFO) Method of Process Costing with Spoilage; Superchip, September 2006.PANEL A: Steps 1 and 2—Summarize Output in Physical Units and Compute Output in Equivalent Units | | |(Step 2) | | |(Step 1) |Equivalent Units | | |Physical |Direct |Conversion | |Flow of Production |Units |Materials |Costs | |Work in rocess, beginning (given) |400 | | | |Started during current period (given) |1,700 | | | |To account for |2,100 | | | |Good units completed and transferred out | | | | |during current period: | | | | |From beginning work in process|| |400 | | | |400 ( (100% (100%); 400 ( (100% ( 30%) | |0 |280 | |Started and completed |1,000# | | | |1,000 ( 100%; 1,000 ( 100% | |1,000 |1,000 | |Normal spoilage* |210 | | | |210 ( 100%; 210 ( 100% | |210 |210 | |Abnormal spoilage†  |190 | | | |190 ( 100%; 190 ( 100% | |190 |190 | |Work in process, ending†¡ |300 | | | |300 ( 100%; 300 ( 40% | |300 |120 | |Accounted for |2,100 | | | |Work done in current period only | |1,700 |1,800 | ||Degree of completion in this department: direct materials, 100%; conversion costs, 30%. #1,400 physical units completed and transferred out minus 400 physical units completed and transferred out from beginning work in process inventory. Normal spoilage is 15% of good units transferred out: 15% ( 1,400 = 210 units. Degree of completion of normal spoilage in this department: direct materials, 100%; conversion costs, 100%. † Abnormal spoilage = Actual spoilage ( Normal spoilage = 400 ( 210 = 190 units. Degree of completion of abnormal spoilage in this department: direct materials, 100%; conversion costs, 100%. †¡Degree of completion in this department: direct materials, 100%; conversion costs, 40%. SOLUTION EXHIBIT 18-25 PANEL B: Steps 3, 4 and 5—Compute Cost per Equivalent Unit, Summarize Total Costs to Account For, and Assign Total Costs to Units Completed, to Spoiled Units, and to Units in Ending Work in Process |Total | | | | |Production |Direct |Conversion | | |Costs |Materials |Costs | |(Step 3) Work in process, beginning, $64,000 + $70,200 (given) |$ 74,200 | | | |Costs added in current period (given) |531,600 |378,000 |153,600 | |Divided by equivalent units of work done in | | | | |current period | |( 1,700 |( 1,800 | |Cost per equivalent unit | |$222. 353 |$ 85. 33 | |(Step 4) Total costs to account for |$605,800 | | | |(Step 5) Assignment of costs: | | | | |Good units completed and transferred out (1,400 units) | | | | |Work in process, beginning (400 units) |$ 74,200 | | |Costs added beg. work in process in current period |23,893 |(0 § ( $222. 353) + (280 § ( $85. 33) | |Total from beginning inventory before normal spoilage | | | |Started and completed before normal spoilage |98,093 | | |(1,000 units) | | | |Normal spoilage (210 units) |307,686 |(1,000 §($222. 353) + (1,000 §($85. 333) | |(A) Total costs of good units completed and |64,614 |(210 §($222. 353) + (210 §($85. 333) | |transferred out | | | |(B) Abnormal spoilage (190 units) |470,393 | | |(C) Work in process, ending (300 units) |58,461 |(190 §($222. 353) + (190 §($85. 33) | |(A)+(B)+(C) Total costs accounted for |76,946 |(300 §($222. 353) + (120 §( $85. 333) | | |$605,800 | |  §Equivalent units of direct materials and conversion costs calculated in Step 2 in Panel A. 18-26 (30 min. ) Standard costing method, spoilage. 1. Solution Exhibit 18-25, Panel A, shows the computation of the equivalent units of work done in September 2006 for direct materials (1,700 units) and conversion costs (1,800 units). (This computation is the same for FIFO and standard-costing. ) 2.The direct materials cost per equivalent unit of beginning work in process and of work done in September 2006 is the standard cost of $210 given in the problem. The conversion cost per equivalent unit of beginning work in process and of work done in Se ptember 2006 is the standard cost of $80 given in the problem. 3. Solution Exhibit 18-26 summarizes the total costs to account for, and assigns these costs to units completed (including normal spoilage), to abnormal spoilage, and to units in ending work in process using the standard costing method. SOLUTION EXHIBIT 18-26 Standard Costing Method of Process Costing with Spoilage; Superchip, September 2006.Steps 3, 4, and 5—Compute Cost per Equivalent Unit, Summarize Total Costs to Account For, and Assign Total Costs to Units Completed, to Spoiled Units, and to Units in Ending Work in Process | |Total | | | | |Production |Direct |Conversion | | |Costs |Materials |Costs | |(Step 3) Standard costs per equivalent unit (given) |$ 290 | $ 210 | $ 80 | |Work in process, beginning* |93,600 |(400 ( $210) + |(120 ( $80) | |Costs added in current period at standard prices |501,000 |(1,700 ( $210) + |(1,800 ( $80) | |(Step 4) Costs to account for $594,600 | | | |(Step 5) Assignment of cost s at standard costs: | | | | |Good units completed and transferred out | | | | |(1,400 units) | | | | |Work in process, beginning (400 units) |$ 93,600 | | |Costs added beg. ork in process in current period |22,400 |(0 § ( $210) + (280 § ( $80) | |Total from beginning inventory before normal | | | |spoilage |116,000 | | |Started and completed before normal spoilage | | | |(1,000 units) |290,000 |(1,000 § ( $210) + (1,000 § ( $80) | |Normal spoilage (210 units) |60,900 |(210 § ( $210) + (210 § ( $80) | |(A) Total costs of good units completed and | | | |transferred out |466,900 | | |(B) Abnormal spoilage (190 units) |55,100 |(190 § ( $210) + (190 § ( $80) | |(C) Work in process, ending (300 units) |72,600 |(300 § ( $210) + (120 § ( $80) | |(A)+(B)+(C) Total costs accounted for |$594,600 | | *Work in process, beginning has 400 equivalent units (400 physical units (100%) of direct materials and 120 equivalent units (400 physical units ( 30%) of conversion costs.  §Equivalent units of direct materials and conversion costs calculated in Step 2 in Solution Exhibit 18-25, Panel A. 18-27(20–30 min. )Spoilage and job costing. 1. Cash 200 Loss from Abnormal Spoilage1,000 Work-in-Process Control1,200 Loss = ($6. 00 ( 200) – $200 = $1,000 Remaining cases cost = $6. 00 per case.The cost of these cases is unaffected by the loss from abnormal spoilage. 2. a. Cash 400 Work-in-Process Control 400 The cost of the remaining good cases = [($6. 00 ( 2,500) – $400] = $14,600 The unit cost of a good case now becomes $14,600 ( 2,300 = $6. 3478 b. Cash 400 Manufacturing Department Overhead Control800 Work-in-Process Control1,200 The unit cost of a good case remains at $6. 00. c. The unit costs in 2a and 2b are different because in 2a the normal spoilage cost is charged as a cost of the job which has exacting job specifications. In 2b however, normal spoilage is due to the production process, not the particular attributes of this specific job. These costs are, therefore, charged as part of manufacturing overhead and the manufacturing overhead cost of $1 per case already includes a provision for normal spoilage. 3. a. Work-in-Process Control 200 Materials Control, Wages Payable Control, Manufacturing Overhead Allocated 200 The cost of the good cases = [($6. 00 ( 2,500) + $200] = $15,200 The unit cost of a good case is $15,200 ( 2,500 = $6. 08 b. Manufacturing Department Overhead Control 200 Materials Control, Wages Payable Control, Manufacturing Overhead Allocated200 The unit cost of a good case = $6. 00 per case c. The unit costs in 3a and 3b are different because in 3a the normal rework cost is charged as a cost of the job which has exacting job specifications.In 3b however, normal rework is due to the production process, not the particular attributes of this specific job. These costs are, therefore, charged as part of manufacturing overhead and the manufacturing overhead cost of $1 per case already includes a provision for this normal rework. 18-28(15 min. ) Reworked units, costs of rework. 1. The two alternative approaches to account for the materials costs of reworked units are: a. To charge the costs of rework to the current period as a separate expense item as abnormal rework. This approach would highlight to White Goods the costs of the supplier problem. b. To charge the costs of the rework to manufacturing overhead as normal rework. 2.The $50 tumbler cost is the cost of the actual tumblers included in the washing machines. The $44 tumbler units from the new supplier were eventually never used in any washing machine and that supplier is now bankrupt. The units must now be disposed of at zero disposal value. 3. The total costs of rework due to the defective tumbler units include the following: a. the labor and other conversion costs spent on substituting the new tumbler units; b. the costs of any extra negotiations to obtain the replacement tumbler units; c. any higher price the existing suppl ier may have charged to do a rush order for the replacement tumbler units; and d. rdering costs for the replacement tumbler units. 18-29(25 min. )Scrap, job costing. 1. Journal entry to record scrap generated by a specific job and accounted for at the time scrap is sold is: Cash or Accounts Receivable490 Work-in-Process Control490 To recognize asset from sale of scrap. A memo posting is also made to the specific job record. 2. Scrap common to various jobs and accounted for at the time of its sale can be accounted for in two ways: a. Regard scrap sales as a separate line item of revenues (the method generally used when the dollar amount of scrap is immaterial): Cash or Accounts Receivable4,000 Sale of Scrap4,000 To recognize revenue from sale of scrap. b.Regard scrap sales as offsets against manufacturing overhead (the method generally used when the dollar amount of scrap is material): Cash or Accounts Receivable4,000 Manufacturing Department Overhead Control4,000 To record cash rais ed from sale of scrap. 3. Journal entry to record scrap common to various jobs at the time scrap is returned to storeroom: Materials Control4,000 Manufacturing Department Overhead Control4,000 To record value of scrap returned to storeroom. When the scrap is reused as direct material on a subsequent job, the journal entry is: Work-in-Process Control4,000 Materials Control4,000 To record reuse of scrap on a job. Explanations of journal entries are provided here but are not required. 18-30 (30 min. Weighted-average method, spoilage. Solution Exhibit 18-30 calculates the equivalent units of work done to date for each cost category, presents computations of the costs per equivalent unit for each cost category, summarizes total costs to account for, and assigns these costs to units completed (including normal spoilage), to abnormal spoilage, and to units in ending work in process using the weighted-average method. SOLUTION EXHIBIT 18-30 Weighted-Average Method of Process Costing with Spo ilage; Cleaning Department of the Alston Company for May. PANEL A: Steps 1 and 2—Summarize Output in Physical Units and Compute Output in Equivalent Units |(Step 1) |(Step 2) | | | |Equivalent Units | | |Physical Units |Direct |Conversion | |Flow of Production | |Materials |Costs | |Work in process, beginning (given) |1,000 | | | |Started during current period given) |9,000 | | | |To account for |10,000 | | | |Good units completed and transferred out | | | | |during current period: |7,400 |7,400 |7,400 | |Normal spoilage* | | | | |740 ( 100%; 740 ( 100% |740 |740 |740 | |Abnormal spoilage†  | | | | |260 ( 100%; 260 (100% |260 |260 |260 | |Work in process, ending†¡ (given) | | | | |1,600 ( 100%; 1,600 ( 25% |1,600 |1,600 |400 | |Accounted for | | | | |Work done to date |10,000 |10,000 |8,800 | *Normal spoilage is 10% of good units transferred out: 10% ? ,400 = 740 units. Degree of completion of normal spoilage in this department: direct materials, 100%; conversion co sts, 100%. † Total spoilage = 1,000 + 9,000 – 7,400 – 1,600 = 1,000 units; Abnormal spoilage = 1,000 – 740 = 260 units. Degree of completion of abnormal spoilage in this department: direct materials, 100%; conversion costs, 100%. †¡Degree of completion in this department: direct materials, 100%; conversion costs, 25%. SOLUTION EXHIBIT 18-30 PANEL B: Steps 3, 4, and 5—Compute Cost per Equivalent Unit, Summarize Total Costs to Account For, and Assign Total Costs to Units Completed, to Spoiled Units, and to Units in Ending Work in Process | Total | | | | |Production |Direct |Conversion | | |Costs |Materials |Costs | |(Step 3) Work in process, beginning (given) |$ 1,800 |$ 1,000 |$ 800 | |Costs added in current period (given) |17,000 |9,000 |8,000 | |Costs incurred to date | |10,000 |8,800 | |Divided by equivalent units of work done to date | |(10,000 |( 8,800 | |Cost per equivalent unit |______ |$ 1 |$ 1 | |(Step 4) Total costs to account for |$18, 800 | | | |(Step 5) Assignment of costs | | | | |Good units completed and transferred out (7,400 units) | | | | |Costs before adding normal spoilage |$14,800 | (7,400# ( $1) + | (7,400# ( $1) | |Normal spoilage (740 units) |1,480 |(740# ( $1) + |(740# ( $1) | |(A) Total costs of good units completed and | | | | |transferred out |16,280 | | | |(B) Abnormal spoilage (260 units) |520 |(260# ( $1) + |(260# ( $1) | |(C) Work in process, ending (1,600 units) |2,000 |(1,600# ( $1) + |(400# ( $1) | |(A)+(B)+(C) Total costs accounted for |$18,800 | | | | | | | | #Equivalent units of direct materials and conversion costs calculated in Step 2 in Panel A above. 18-31(25 min. )FIFO method, spoilage.For the Cleaning Department, Solution Exhibit 18-31 calculates the equivalent units of work done in the current period for direct materials and conversion costs, presents the costs per equivalent unit for direct materials and conversion costs, summarizes the total costs for May, and assigns these cost s to units completed and transferred out (including normal spoilage), to abnormal spoilage, and to units in ending work in process under the FIFO method. SOLUTION EXHIBIT 18-31 First-in, First-out (FIFO) Method of Process Costing with Spoilage; Cleaning Department of the Alston Company for May. PANEL A: Steps 1 and 2—Summarize Output in Physical Units and Compute Output in Equivalent Units | |(Step 2) | | |(Step 1) |Equivalent Units | | |Physical |Direct |Conversion | |Flow of Production |Units |Materials |Costs | |Work in process, beginning (given) |1,000 | | | |Started during current period (given) | 9,000 | | | |To account for 10,000 | | | |Good units completed and transferred out during current period: | | | | | From beginning work in process|| |1,000 | | | | 1,000 ( (100% (100%); 1,000 ( (100% ( 80%) | |0 |200 | | Started and completed |6,400# | | | | 6,400 ( 100%; 6,400 ( 100% | |6,400 |6,400 | |Normal spoilage* |740 | | | | 740 ( 100%; 740% ( 100% | |740 |740 | |Abnorm al spoilage†  |260 | | | | 260 ( 100%; 260 ( 100% | |260 |260 | |Work in process, ending†¡ |1,600 | | | | 1,600 ( 100%; 1,600 ( 25% |______ |1,600 |400 | |Accounted for |10,000 |_____ |_____ | |Work done in current period only | |9,000 |8,000 | || Degree of completion in this department: direct materials, 100%; conversion costs, 80%. #7,400 physical units completed and transferred out minus 1,000 physical units completed and transferred out from beginning work-in-process inventory. Normal spoilage is 10% of good units transferred out: 10% ( 7,400 = 740 units. Degree of completion of normal spoilage in this department: direct materials, 100%; conversion costs, 100%. † Total spoilage = 1,000 + 9,000 – 7,400 – 1,600 = 1,000 units Abnormal spoilage = 1,000 – 740 = 260 units. Degree of completion of abnormal spoilage in this department: direct materials, 100%; conversion costs, 100%. †¡Degree of completion in this department: direct materials, 100 %; conversion costs, 25%. SOLUTION EXHIBIT 18-31 PANEL B: Steps 3, 4, and 5—Compute Cost per Equivalent Unit, Summarize Total Costs to Account For, and Assign Total Costs to Units Completed, to Spoiled Units, and to Units in Ending Work in Process |Total | | | | |Production |Direct |Conversion | | |Costs |Materials |Costs | |(Step 3) Work in process, beginning (given) |$ 1,800 |$1,000 |$ 800 | |Costs added in current period (given) |17,000 |9,000 |8,000 | |Divided by equivalent units of work done in current period | |(9,000 |(8,000 | |Cost per equivalent unit | |1 |1 | |(Step 4) Total costs to account for |$18,800 | | | |(Step 5) Assignment of costs: | | | | |Good units completed and transferred out (7,400 units) | | | | |Work in process, beginning (1,000 units) |$ 1,800 | | |Costs added to beg. work in process in current period |200 |(0 § ( $1) + (200 § ( $1) | |Total from beginning inventory before normal spoilage |2,000 | | |Started and ompleted before normal spoilage (6,400 units) |12,800 |(6,400 § ( $1) + (6,400 § ( $1) | |Normal spoilage (740 units) |1,480 |(740 § ( $1) + (740 § ( $1) | |(A) Total costs of good units completed and transferred out |16,280 | | |(B) Abnormal spoilage (260 units) |520 |(260 § ( $1) + (260 § ( $1) | |(C) Work in process, ending (1,600 units) |2,000 |(1,600 § ( $1) + (400 § ( $1) | |(A)+(B)+(C) Total costs accounted for |$18,800 | |  §Equivalent units of direct materials and conversion costs calculated in Step 2 in Panel A. 18-32 (35 min. Weighted-average method, Milling Department (continuation of 18-30). For the Milling Department, Solution Exhibit 18-32 calculates the equivalent units of work done to date for each cost category, presents computations of the costs per equivalent unit for each cost category, summarizes total costs to account for, and assigns these costs to units completed (including normal spoilage), to abnormal spoilage, and to units in ending work in process using the weighted-a verage method. SOLUTION EXHIBIT 18-32 Weighted-Average Method of Process Costing with Spoilage; Milling Department of the Alston Company for May. PANEL A: Steps 1 and 2—Summarize Output in Physical Units and Compute Output in Equivalent Units |(Step 1) |(Step 2) | | | |Equivalent Units | | |Physical Units |Transferred- |Direct |Conversion | |Flow of Production | |in Costs |Materials |Costs | |Work in process, beginning (given) |3,000 | | | | |Started during current period (given) |7,400 | | | | |To account for |10,400 | | | | |Good units completed and transferred out | | | | | |during current period: |6,000 |6,000 |6,000 |6,000 | |Normal spoilage* |300 | | | | |300 ( 100%; 300 ( 100%; 300 ( 100% | |300 |300 |300 | |Abnormal spoilage†  |100 | | | | |100 ( 100%; 100 (100%, 100 ( 100% | |100 |100 |100 | |Work in process, ending†¡ (given) |4,000 | | | | |4,000 ( 100%; 4,000 ( 0%; 4,000 ( 25% | |4,000 |0 |1,000 | |Accounted for |10,400 | | | | |Work done to date | |10,40 0 |6,400 |7,400 | *Normal spoilage is 5% of good units transferred out: 5% ? 6,000 = 300 units. Degree of completion of normal spoilage in this department: transferred-in costs, 100%; direct materials, 100%; conversion costs, 100%. † Total spoilage = 3,000 + 7,400 – 6,000 – 4,000 = 400 units. Abnormal spoilage = 400 – 300 = 100 units. Degree of completion of abnormal spoilage in this department: transferred-in costs, 100%; direct materials, 100%; conversion costs, 100%. †¡Degree of completion in this department: transferred-in costs, 100%; direct materials, 0%; conversion costs, 25%. SOLUTION EXHIBIT 18-32PANEL B: Steps 3, 4, and 5—Compute Cost per Equivalent Unit, Summarize Total Costs to Account For, and Assign Total Costs to Units Completed, to Spoiled Units, and to Units in Ending Work in Process | |Total | | | | | |Production |Transferred-in |Direct |Conversion | | |Costs |costs |Materials |Costs | | | | | | | |(Step 3) Work in process, beg inning (given) |$ 8,900 |$ 6,450 |$ 0 |$2,450 | |Costs added in current period (given) |21,870 |16,280* |640 |4,950 | |Costs incurred to date | |22,730 |640 |7,400 | |Divided by equivalent units of work done to date | |(10,400 |( 6,400 |(7,400 | |Cost per equivalent unit | |$2. 1856 |$ 0. 0 |$ 1 | |(Step 4) Total costs to account for |$30,770 | | | | |(Step 5) Assignment of costs | | | | | |Good units completed and transferred out (6,000 units) | | | | | |Costs before adding normal spoilage |$19,713 |6,000# ( ($2. 1856 + $0. 10 + $1) | |Normal spoilage (300 units) |986 |300# ( ($2. 1856 + $0. 0 + $1) | |(A) Total cost of good units completed and transferred out | | | |(B) Abnormal spoilage (100 units) |20,699 | | |(C) Work in process, ending (4,000 units) |329 |100# ( ($2. 1856 + $0. 10 + $1) | |(A)+(B)+(C) Total costs accounted for |9,742 |(4,000# ( $2. 1856)+(0# ( $0. 10)+(1,000# ( $1) | | |$30,770 | | *Total costs of good units completed and transferred out in Step 5 Panel B of S olution Exhibit 18-30. #Equivalent units of direct materials and conversion costs calculated in Step 2 in Panel A above. 18-33(25 min. )FIFO method, Milling Department (continuation of 18-31).Solution Exhibit 18-33 shows the equivalent units of work done in the Milling Department in the current period for transferred-in costs, direct materials, and conversion costs, presents the costs per equivalent unit for transferred-in costs, direct materials, and conversion costs, summarizes the total Milling Department costs for May, and assigns these costs to units completed and transferred out (including normal spoilage), to abnormal spoilage, and to units in ending work-in-process under the FIFO method. SOLUTION EXHIBIT 18-33 First-in, First-out (FIFO) Method of Process Costing with Spoilage; Milling Department of the Alston Company for May.PANEL A: Steps 1 and 2—Summarize Output in Physical Units and Compute Output in Equivalent Units | | |(Step 2) | | |(Step 1) |Equivalent Units | | |Physical |Transferred- |Direct |Conversion | |Flow of Production |Units |in Costs |Materials |Costs | |Work in process, beginning (given) |3,000 | | | | |Started during current period (given) |7,400 | | | | |To account for |10,400 | | | | |Good units completed and transferred out during | | | | | |current period: | | | | | |From beginning work in process|| |3,000 | | | | |3,000 ( (100% ( 100%); 3,000 ( | | | | | |(100% ( 0%); 3,000 ( (100% ( 80%) | |0 |3,000 |600 | |Started and completed |3,000# | | | | |3,000 ( 100%; 3,000 ( 100%; 3,000 ( 100% | |3,000 |3,000 |3,000 | |Normal spoilage* |300 | | | | |300 ( 100%; 300% ( 100%; 300 ( 100% | |300 |300 |300 | |Abnormal spoilage†  100 | | | | |100 ( 100%; 100 ( 100%; 100 ( 100% | |100 |100 |100 | |Work in process, ending†¡ |4,000 | | | | |4,000 ( 100%; 4,000 ( 0%; 4,000 ( 25% | |4,000 |0 |1,000 | |Accounted for |10,400 | | | | |Work done in current period only | |7,400 |6,400 |5,000 | ||Degree of completion in this department : transferred-in costs, 100%; direct materials, 0%; conversion costs, 80%. 6,000 physical units completed and transferred out minus 3,000 physical units completed and transferred out from beginning work-in-process inventory. *Normal spoilage is 5% of good units transferred out: 5% ( 6,000 = 300 units. Degree of completion of normal spoilage in this department: transferred-in costs, 100%; direct materials, 100%; conversion costs, 100%. † Total spoilage = 3,000 + 7,400 – 6,000 – 4,000 = 400 units. Abnormal spoilage = 400 – 300 = 100 units. Degree of completion of abnormal spoilage in this department: transferred-in costs, 100%; direct materials, 100%; conversion costs, 100%. †¡Degree of completion in this department: transferred-in costs, 100%; direct materials, 0%; conversion costs, 25%. SOLUTION EXHIBIT 18-33PANEL B: Steps 3, 4, and 5—Compute Cost per Equivalent Unit, Summarize Total Costs to Account For, and Assign Total Costs to Units Complete d, to Spoiled Units, and to Units in Ending Work in Process | |Total | | | | | |Production |Transferred- |Direct |Conversion | | |Costs |in Costs |Materials |Costs | |(Step 3) Work in process, begin. given) | | | | | |($6,450 + $0 + $2,450) |$ 8,900 | | | | |Costs added in current period (given) |21,870 |16,280* |640 |4,950 | |Divided by equivalent units of work done in | | | | | |current period | |( 7,400 |( 6,400 |( 5,000 | |Cost per equivalent unit | |$ 2. 20 |$ 0. 10 |$ 0. 9 | |(Step 4) Total costs to account for |$30,770 | | | | |(Step 5) Assignment of costs: | | | | | |Good units completed and transferred out (6,000 units) | | | | | |Work in process, beginning (3,000 units) |$ 8,900 | | |Costs added to beg. work in process in | | | |current period |894 |(0 ( $2. 20)+(3,000 §( 0. 10)+( 600 § ( $0. 9) | |Total from beginning inventory before normal spoilage | | | |Started and completed before normal spoilage (3,000 units) |9,794 | | |Normal spoilage (300 units) | | | |(A) To tal costs of good units completed and |9,870 |3,000 § ( ($2. 20 + $0. 10 + $0. 99) | |transferred out |987 |300 § ( ($2. 20 + $0. 10 + $0. 9) | |(B) Abnormal spoilage (100 units) | | | |(C) Work in process, ending (4,000 units) |20,651 | | |(A)+(B)+(C) Total costs accounted for |329 |100 § ( ($2. 20 + $0. 10 + $0. 99) | | |9,790 |(4,000 §( $2. 20)+( 0 §($0. 10)+(1,000 §($0. 99) | | |$30,770 | | *Total costs of good units completed and transferred out in Step 5 Panel B of Solution Exhibit 18-31.  §Equivalent units of direct materials and conversion costs calculated in Step 2 in Panel A. 18-34 (20(25 min. ) Job-costing spoilage and scrap. 1. a.Materials Control 600 Manufacturing Department Overhead Control800 Work-in-Process Control1,400 (650 + 500 + 250 = 1,400) b. Accounts Receivable1,250 Work-in-Process Control1,250 2. a. The clause does not specify whether the 1% calculation is to be based on the input cost ($26,951 + $15,076 + $7,538) or the cost of the good output before the â€Å"1% normal spoilage† is added. b. If the inputs are used to determine the 1%: $26,951 + $15,076 + $7,538 = $49,565 1% of $49,565 = $495. 65 or $496, rounded. Then, the entry to leave the $496 â€Å"normal spoilage† cost on the job, remove the salvageable material, and charge manufacturing overhead would be: Materials Control 600Manufacturing Department Overhead Control304 Work-in-Process Control 904 ($800 spoilage minus $496 = $304 spoilage cost that is taken out of the job; $600 salvage value plus $304 = $904; or $1,400 minus $496 = $904) If the outputs are used to determine the 1%: $26,951 – $650 = $26,301 15,076 – 500 =14,576 7,538 – 250 = 7,288 $49,565$48,165 Then, $48,165 ( 1% = $481. 65 or $482, rounded. The journal entry would be: Materials Control 600 Manufacturing Department Overhead Control318 Work-in-Process Control918 18-35(30 min. ) Job costing, rework. 1. Work-in-Process Control (SM-5 motors) ($550 ( 80)44,000 Material s Control ($300 ( 80)24,000 Wages Payable ($60 ( 80)4,800Manufacturing Overhead Allocated ($190 ( 80)15,200 Total costs assigned to 80 spoiled units of SM-5 Motors before considering rework costs. Manufacturing Department Overhead Control (rework)9,000 Materials Control ($60 ( 50)3,000 Wages Payable ($45 ( 50)2,250 Manufacturing Overhead Allocated ($75 ( 50)3,750 Normal rework on 50 units, but not attributable specifically to the SM-5 motor batches or jobs. Loss from Abnormal Rework ($180 ( 30)5,400 Materials Control ($60 ( 30)1,800 Wages Payable ($45 ( 30)1,350 Manufacturing Overhead Allocated ($75 ( 30)2,250 Total costs of abnormal rework on 30 units (Abnormal rework = Actual rework – Normal rework = 80 – 50 = 30 units) of SM-5 Motors. Work-in-Process Control (SM-5 motors)6,000 Work-in-Process Control (RW-8 motors)3,000Manufacturing Department Overhead Allocated (rework)9,000 (Allocating manufacturing department rework costs to SM-5 and RW-8 in the proportion 1,000:5 00 since each motor requires the same number of machine-hours. ) 2. Total rework costs for SM-5 motors in February 2004 are as follows: Normal rework costs allocated to SM-5$ 6,000 Abnormal rework costs for SM-5 5,400 Total rework costs$11,400 We emphasize two points: a. Only $6,000 of the normal rework costs are allocated to SM-5 even though the normal rework costs of the 50 SM-5 motors reworked equal $9,000. The reason is that the normal rework costs are not specifically attributable to SM-5.For example, the machines happened to malfunction when SM-5 was being made, but the rework was not caused by the specific requirements of SM-5. If it were, then all $9,000 would be charged to SM-5. b. Abnormal rework costs of $5,400 are linked to SM-5 in the management control system even though for financial reporting purposes the abnormal rework costs are written off to the income statement. 18-36(30 min. )Job costing, scrap. 1. Materials Control10,000 Manufacturing Overhead Control10,000 (T o record scrap common to all jobs at the time it is returned to the storeroom) 2. Cash or Accounts Receivable10,000 Materials Control10,000 (To record sale of scrap from the storeroom) 3. A summary of the manufacturing costs for HM3 and JB4 before considering the value of scrap are as follows: |HM3 |JB4 |Total Costs | |Direct materials |$200,000 |$150,000 |$350,000 | |Direct manufacturing labor |60,000 |40,000 |100,000 | |Manufacturing overhead | | | | |(200% of direct manufacturing labor) |120,000 |80,000 |200,000 | |Total manufacturing costs |$380,000 |$270,000 |$650,000 | |Manufacturing cost per unit |$19 |$27 | | |($380,000[pic]20,000; $270,000[pic]10,000) | | | | The value of scrap of $10,000 generated during March will reduce manufacturing overhead costs by $10,000 from $200,000 to $190,000. Manufacturing overhead will then be allocated at 190% of direct manufacturing labor costs ($190,000 ? $100,000 = 190%) The revised manufacturing cost per unit would then be: |HM3 |JB4 |Tot al Costs | |Direct materials |$200,000 |$150,000 |$350,000 | |Direct manufacturing labor |60,000 |40,000 |100,000 | |Manufacturing overhead | | | | |(190% of direct manufacturing labor) |114,000 |76,000 |190,000 | |Total manufacturing costs |$374,000 |$266,000 |$640,000 | |Manufacturing cost per unit | $18. 70 | $26. 60 | | |($374,000[pic]20,000; $266,000[pic]10,000) | | | | 18-37(15(20 min. ) Physical units, inspection at various stages of completion (chapter appendix). |Inspection |Inspection |Inspection | | |at 15% |at 40% |at 100% | |Work in process, beginning (20%)* |14,000 |14,000 |14,000 | |Started during March |120,000 |120,000 |120,000 | |To account for |134,000 |134,000 |134,000 | |Good units completed and transferred out |113,000a |113,000a |113,000a | |Normal spoilage |6,600b |7,440c |6,780d | |Abnormal spoilage (10,000 – normal spoilage) |3,400 |2,560 |3,220 | |Work in process, ending (70%)* |11,000 |11,000 |11,000 | |Accounted for |134,000 |134,000 |134,000 | *D egree of completion for conversion costs of the forging process at the dates of the work-in-process inventories a14,000 beginning inventory +120,000 –10,000 spoiled – 11,000 ending inventory = 113,000 b6% ( (113,000 – 14,000 + 11,000) = 6% ( 110,000 = 6,600 c6% ( (113,000 + 11,000 ) = 6% ( 124,000 = 7,440 d6% ( 113,000 = 6,780 18-38(25(35 min. Weighted-average method, inspection at 80% completion (chapter appendix).The computation and allocation of spoilage is the most difficult part of this problem. The units in the ending inventory have passed inspection. Therefore, of the 80,000 units to account for (10,000 beginning + 70,000 started), 10,000 must have been spoiled in June [80,000 – (50,000 completed + 20,000 ending inventory)]. Normal spoilage is 7,000 [0. 10 ( (50,000 + 20,000)]. The 3,000 remainder is abnormal spoilage (10,000 – 7,000). Solution Exhibit 18-38, Panel A, calculates the equivalent units of work done for each cost category. We co mment on several points in this calculation: Ending work in process includes an element of normal spoilage since all the ending WIP have passed the point of inspection––inspection occurs when production is 80% complete, while the units in ending WIP are 95% complete. †¢ Spoilage includes no direct materials units because spoiled units are detected and removed from the finishing activity when inspection occurs at the time production is 80% complete. Direct materials are added only later when production is 90% complete. †¢ Direct materials units are included for ending work in process, which is 95% complete, but not for beginning work in process, which is 25% complete. The reason is that direct materials are added when production is 90% complete. The ending work in process, therefore, contains direct materials units; the beginning work in process does not.

“a Rose for Emily, ” “Young Goodman Brown” and “Good Country People, ”

Isolation: Loneliness from Society The time moves on for all people. If we cannot come to terms with that, bad things can happen. A short story, â€Å"A Rose for Emil,† by William Faulkner, was first published on April 30, 1930. William Cuthbert Faulkner was born in New Albany, Mississippi, on September 25, 1897. He is one of the greatest writers in America and obtained Nobel Prize laureate. As he grew up in New Albany, Mississippi, the Southern society influenced to him.Through his works such a Sartoris (book, 1931), The Sound and The Fury (1929), As I Lay Dying (poem, 1930), The Sanctuary (1931), and A Famle (1954), he depicted chronologically the decaying Southern society. In other words, he mainly pointed out the vice of the southern high society and the pursuit to create the universal humanity. (Meyer 83) Nathaniel Hawthorne, an America author of â€Å"Young Goodman Brown,† born on July 4, 1804, in Salem, Massachusetts, grew up in a very strict Puritan family, whic h is where his inspiration came from.In addition, in most of Hawthorne's short stories, he developed the stories in similar settings in time and characters. The author described that time setting is the seventeenth century in New England, especially, Salem, his hometown. Even though he criticized the Puritanism, he was fully a Puritan. â€Å"Good Country People† is a short story written by Flannery O'Connor. Born in Savannah, Georgia, on March 25, 1925, Mary Flannery O'Connor was a female southern writer who wrote two novels and thirty-two short stories that are mainly in Southern Gothic style and relied heavily on regional setting and grotesque characters (Ditsky 3).Flannery O`Connor`s short stories mainly centers around the author`s characteristics as a Southern writer and her treatment of religious themes based on her Catholicism set in the Protestant South. These authors, William Faulkner, Nathaniel Hawthorne and Flannery O’Conner, had common critical perspectives in religion and region, and they developed the stories in similar tones. In the stories: â€Å"A Rose for Emily,† â€Å"Young Goodman Brown† and â€Å"Good Country People,† all of the main characters experience isolation from the society. To begin, William Faulkner's â€Å"A rose for Emily† shows the reader about lonely woman.Emily, the protagonist, has fallen down the social ladder and cannot recognize that time is moving forward, meaning that everything is changing. In her funeral, the beginning of the story from â€Å"No one save an old manservant – a combined gardener and cook-† had seen in at least ten years (Faulkner 84). Nobody has been to her house in ten years, except for her servant. This sets the framework for Emily's isolation in life by beginning with her funeral. When the city authorities go to her house for a tax problem, she tells them she is not subject to taxes in Jefferson even though Colonel Sartoris had been dead almost ten years.She finds her a lover Homer Barron, whom the reader can guess that he is homosexual. When she hears that he is going to leave her, she buys arsenic and kills him. After her death, the townspeople find the grey hair in the bed next to Homer's remains meaning she has been sleeping with the corpse. The reader can discover isolation in the beginning of part II: â€Å"So she vanquished them, horse and foot, just as she had vanquished their fathers thirty years before about the smell† (Faulkner 85). This moment gives the reader another message of Emily's isolation.Most reader can guess the reason for the smell: Homer Barron was dead. The last proof, â€Å"after her father's death she went out very little; after her sweetheart went away, people hardly saw her at all,† (85) reiterates the fact that Emily is isolated. This quotation has two points; her father makes her isolation and Homer Barron isolates her mind, which seems to be what her father intended. There is n o getting around the fact that â€Å"A Rose for Emily† is a story about the extremes of isolation – by physical and emotional.This Faulkner classic shows us the process by which human beings become isolate by their families, by their community, by tradition, by law, by the past, and by their own actions and choices. In effect, this story takes a stand against such isolation, and against all those who isolate others. In the â€Å"Young Goodman Brown† by Hawthorne, the work centers around a young Puritan, lonely man, in New England, and his deal with the Devil. At the beginning of the story, even though his wife, Faith, tries to dissuade him, Goodman Brown, he leaves on the trip anyway and meets old man.When he follows him on a gloomy forest, he sees many people such as Goody Cloyse, pious woman, and the minister of the church and Deacon Gookin, who are also apparently on their way to the ceremony. Goodman Brown was Shocked; he swears that even though everyone els e in the world has gone to the devil, for Faith's sake he will stay true to God. However, he soon hears voices coming from the ceremony and thinks he recognizes Faith's voice. Faith ignores when he screams and has turned to evil. The next morning Goodman Brown return to Salem Village, and every person he passes seems evil to him.He does not trust anyone in his village. He lives the rest of his life in gloom and fear. This short story is famous for being representation of American Romantic literature. The reader can find just a few important quotes from the short story. In the forest Brown saw a mixture of pious and dissolute people, and it was strange to see that â€Å"the good shrank not from the wicked, nor were the sinners abashed by the saints† (331). Brown chose to see that all were evil and lost his chance at redemption when he chose to isolate himself and to â€Å"shrink from his Faith† and fellow man. By the sympathy of your human hearts for sin ye shall scent out all the places—whether in church, bedchamber, street, field, or forest—where crime has been committed, and shall exult to behold the whole earth one stain of guilt, one mighty blood spot† (332). Near the end of the story, Goodman Brown has seen the evil in every person, and it causes isolating of his life. In the story, the narrator poses an important question: â€Å"Had Goodman Brown fallen asleep in the forest, and only dreamed a wild dream of a witch-meeting? † (Meyer 333). The choice is dream or reality.Whatever the reader chooses to believe, Goodman Brown's own horrible doubts create a central theme of the tale (Fogel 21). Hawthorne’s mental and moral beliefs are revealed throughout â€Å"Young Goodman Brown. † Puritans believed that the fall of Adam was the inheritance of all men, and that redemption came only through Christ. Hawthorne came to believe that the fall was by human contrivance, that damnation is not inherited but chosen and is redeemable through human agency. (Adams 5) The devil reminds Brown about the past and the devil knows his father and grandfather from past encounters.Theme is hypocrisy and deception that would describe the devil's temptations and promises to Goodman Brown, his father, his grandfather, and anyone else. Other theme would be isolation because of the location where Goodman Brown is at which is a dark forest where he is all alone with no one in the area. The short story, â€Å"Good country people† by O'Connor, also has a character of isolation. This story starts in rural Georgia; Mrs. Hopewell runs her family farm with the help of tenants Mr. and Mrs. Freeman. Mrs. Hopewell's daughter, Joy, who got her leg cut off in an accident when she was a child.She now lives at home with her mother. Thirty-three-year-old Joy has earned a PhD in philosophy, but she does not seem to have much common sense. In an act of rebellion, she has changed her name to Hulga, and she lives in a st ate of annoyed anger at her mother and Mrs. Freeman. A Bible salesman comes to the door, claiming his name is Manly Pointer, and manages to get invited to dinner. He and Hulga make a date to have a picnic together the next day. That night Hulga imagines with her superior mind and education that she is in control and that she will seduce him.However, the next day by the time they have climbed into a barn loft, Manly manages to persuade her to take off her glasses and then her wooden leg which he packs in a suitcase, between a â€Å"Bible† which is really a box with liquor and pornographic cards in it. As Manly leaves Hulga without her false leg, he tells her that he collects prostheses from the disabled. She is shocked to realize that he is not â€Å"good country people. † Hulga, main character, is always trying to escape from the Southern social conventions and stereotypes in which her mother and Mrs. Freeman are immersed.Hulga is self-assured about her self and her vi sion of life and people from a nihilistic and atheist point of view; as she says in this story, â€Å"If science is right, then one thing stand firm: Science wishes to know nothing of nothing. Such is after all the strictly scientific approach to nothing. we knows it by wishing to know nothing of nothing. † (381) She is also very proud of her education with a Ph. D. in Philosophy. Hulga rejects any possibility of mixing with the people around her. She creates a condition of self-isolation in her life. â€Å"You poor baby. it's just as well you don't understand. (389) The young woman fails to see that there is much more to life than what you can learn in a book. Due to a heart condition, however, Hulga is forced to remain home on the farm, instead of being in an academic setting where her education would be recognized and encouraged. This attitude that she is above most other people isolates Hulga from everyone around her. Hulga does not understand herself as innocent; indeed , she considers herself quite experienced because her education has given her access to philosophers such as Nietzsche, whose words she underlines with a blue pencil: â€Å"science wishes to know nothing of nothing. (Ditsky 3) These short stories have lonely characters, â€Å"Emily,† â€Å"Goodman Brown,† and â€Å"Hulga,† who avoid from their family or society. These stories' authors teach the reader that they can find isolation in processing when the main characters fight against their life. There is one thing common ground between them. That is a tragic fate at the end of their isolation from the world. However, if they think a little differently, the result does not have to be tragic. Thus, the reader can learn a lesson from these stories that we need to stay positive and not become a part of the isolation.