Chapter10 Solutions Hansen6e
Chapter10 Solutions Hansen6e
Chapter10 Solutions Hansen6e
DECENTRALIZATION:
RESPONSIBILITY ACCOUNTING, PERFORMANCE
EVALUATION, AND TRANSFER PRICING
QUESTIONS FOR WRITING AND DISCUSSION
210
than the maximum price. The prices, income tax purposes. The four acceptable
however, are simple to use and, in some methods are the comparable uncontrolled
cases, may reflect the outcome of a price method, the resale price method, the
negotiated agreement. cost-plus method, and any method jointly
acceptable to the IRS and the company.
15. Internal Revenue Code Section 482 outlines
the transfer pricing methods acceptable for
211
EXERCISES
10–1
1. Sporting Goods Division ROI:
Year 1: $2,800,000/$20,000,000 = 14%
Year 2: $3,000,000/$20,000,000 = 15%
Sporting Goods Division Margin:
Year 1: $2,800,000/$70,000,000 = 4.0%
Year 2: $3,000,000/$75,000,000 = 4.0%
Sporting Goods Division Turnover:
Year 1: Turnover: $70,000,000/$20,000,000 = 3.5
Year 2: Turnover: $75,000,000/$20,000,000 = 3.75
3. ROI for the Sporting Goods Division increased from 14% to 15%. This
increase is due entirely to the increase in turnover from 3.5 to 3.75. (Margin
for this division stayed the same from Year 1 to Year 2.) The Camping
Division, on the other hand, experienced a drop in ROI from 12% to 10%.
Margin in this division decreased from 5% to 4%, and the small increase in
turnover (from 2.4 to 2.5) was not enough to overcome the margin decline.
212
10–2
1. Ever-Tent ROI = $55,000/$500,000
= 11.0%
KiddieKamp ROI = $38,000/$400,000
= 9.5%
The manager will invest only in the Ever-Tent since that alternative has the
highest ROI.
10–3
1. Ever-Tent residual income = $55,000 – (0.09 × $500,000)
= $10,000
KiddieKamp residual income = $38,000 – (0.09 × $400,000)
= $2,000
The manager will invest in both the Ever-Tent and the KiddieKamp because
residual income is positive for each, and the overall residual income is
highest when both projects are accepted.
3. If the company had retained the $900,000 and invested it at 9%, the income
would have been $81,000 ($900,000 × 0.09). However, the investment of the
$900,000 in the two projects suggested by the Camping Division yields total
incremental operating income of $93,000 ($55,000 + $38,000). This is a gain of
$12,000 before taxes. Yes, the correct decision was made.
213
10–4
1. After-Tax Weighted
Percent Cost Cost
Common stock................................... 0.50 0.180 0.0900
10-year bonds..................................... 0.50 0.039* 0.0195
Weighted average cost of capital....................................................... 0.1095
*0.039 = 0.06 – (0.06 × 0.35).
EVA = $210,000 – (0.1095 × $2,000,000) = ($9,000)
2. Year 1:
After-Tax Weighted
Percent Cost Cost
Common stock.................................... 0.50 0.150 0.0750
10-year bonds..................................... 0.50 0.039 0.0195
Weighted average cost of capital....................................................... 0.0945
EVA = $210,000 – (0.0945 × $2,000,000) = $21,000
Year 2:
After-Tax Weighted
Percent Cost Cost
Common stock.................................... 0.50 0.120 0.0600
10-year bonds..................................... 0.50 0.039 0.0195
Weighted average cost of capital....................................................... 0.0795
EVA = $210,000 – (0.0795 × $2,000,000) = $51,000
3. After-Tax Weighted
Percent Cost Cost
Common stock.................................... 0.80 0.180 0.1440
10-year bonds..................................... 0.20 0.039 0.0078
Weighted average cost of capital....................................................... 0.1518
EVA = $750,000 – (0.1518 × $5,000,000) = ($9,000)
10–4 Concluded
214
Year 2 (6% premium):
After-Tax Weighted
Percent Cost Cost
Common stock.................................... 0.80 0.120 0.0960
10-year bonds..................................... 0.20 0.039 0.0078
Weighted average cost of capital....................................................... 0.1038
EVA = $750,000 – (0.1038 × $5,000,000) = $231,000
10–5
1. Whirlmore, Inc.
Income Statement (in thousands)
For the Year 20XX
Home-Supreme Apartment International Total
Sales.................................... $2,700 $ 2,400 $1,300 $ 6,400
COGS................................... 1,770 1,870 1,040 4,680
Gross profit.................... $ 930 $ 530 $ 260 $ 1,720
Selling and admin. expense 640 180 100 920
Division profit................ $ 290 $ 350 $ 160 $ 800
Income taxes (30%)............ 87 105 48 240
After-tax income............ $ 203 $ 245 $ 112 $ 560
2. After-Tax Weighted
Percent Cost Cost
Common stock.................................. 0.80 0.110 0.0880
Bonds................................................. 0.20 0.056* 0.0112
Weighted average cost of capital....................................................... 0.0992
*0.08(1 – 0.3) = 0.056.
3.
Home-Supreme Apartment International Total
After-tax income.............. $ 203,000 $245,000 $ 112,000 $
560,000
Less cost of capital:
(0.0992 × $2,100,000) 208,320
(0.0992 × $500,000)... 49,600
(0.0992 × $400,000)... 39,680 297,600
EVA..................................$ (5,320) $ 195,400$ 72,320 $ 262,400
215
10–5 Concluded
4. While EVA is positive for Whirlmore, Inc., as a whole, it is negative for the
Home-Supreme Division. Therefore, even though the Home-Supreme Division
has positive net income, it needs to increase net income or reduce the capital
used to generate positive economic value added.
10–6
Since the Glassware Division has idle capacity, the minimum price is the
variable cost of $1.15 for the excess capacity. (The avoidable selling costs of
$0.10 should not affect the minimum transfer price for the excess capacity
because the Glassware Division will be worse off if the transfer price does
not cover its variable manufacturing costs). Yes, the transfer should take
place.
2. Eric might negotiate for a lower price. Jill would consider the $2.40 price, as
her income would increase $125,000 [($2.40 – $1.15) × 100,000].
10–7
1. The comparable uncontrolled price method should be used because a market
price exists.
216
10–8
1. The comparable uncontrolled price method should be used because a market
price exists.
2. The cost-plus method should be used because a market price does not exist,
and the U.S. division is not going to resell the paint.
10–9
1. The resale price method should be used because a market price does not
exist and the paint will be resold and not used in further manufacturing.
10–10
1. Pacific-Rim: $126,000 – (0.12 × $900,000) = $18,000
European: $1,350,000 – (0.12 × $9,000,000) = $270,000
Residual income is an absolute dollar measure, so it does not adjust for the
relative sizes of the divisions.
2. Pacific-Rim: $18,000/$900,000 = 2%
European: $270,000/$9,000,000 = 3%
217
10–10 Concluded
4. Pacific-Rim: 2% + 12% = 14%
European: 3% + 12% = 15%
The residual rate of return and the required rate of return will always sum to
the ROI.
10–11
1.
A B C D
Revenue............... $10,000 $48,000 $96,000 $19,200*
Expenses............. $8,000 $36,000* $90,000 $18,000*
Net Income.......... $2,000 $12,000 $6,000* $1,200*
Assets.................. $40,000 $96,000* $48,000 $9,600
Margin.................. 20%* 25% 6.25%* 6.25%
Turnover.............. 0.25* 0.50 2* 2
ROI....................... 5%* 12.5%* 12.5%* 12.5%*
*Indicates calculated amounts.
10–12
1. Net income = $1,000,000 – $600,000 – $100,000 = $300,000
Residual income = $300,000 – (0.15)($1,500,000) = $75,000
218
10–13
If Casey accepts the new position, she will earn $56,000 (salary of $40,000 and
bonus of $16,000) in Year 1. After two years, if Litton’s stock rises at the same
rate as it has over the past five years, she will be able to exercise her stock
option and realize a gain of the following:
The final decision rests on Casey’s assessment of the risk versus reward of the
two positions. She should also consider the risk of remaining in her present
position; that is, what are her prospects for making partner at the public
accounting firm?
219
PROBLEMS
10–14
1. Since the Transistor Division can sell all its transistors to the outside
competitive market, the minimum transfer price is $3.40. The Systems
Division can buy its transistors from the outside market at $3.40, so the
maximum transfer price is $3.40.
2. Yes, since the minimum transfer price for the idle capacity is $1.90 ($2.65 less
the $0.75 of allocated fixed overhead). The Division is better off if the transfer
price is greater than $1.90 for the excess capacity.
3. The negotiated price of $11.00 provides profit for both the Board Division and
the Systems Division. The Board Division realizes a profit of $1.85 per board
($11.00 – $9.15). The Systems Division realizes a reduction in cost of $1.25
per board ($12.25 – $11.00).
It should be noted that the $12.25 is not a true market price because this
particular board is not sold externally. Thus, the Board Division is not
necessarily foregoing profit by not selling externally at its regular markup.
10–15
1. Reigis Steel Company
Unit Contribution Margin
(in thousands except for unit contribution margin)
For the Year Ended November 30, 2010
Sales................................................................. $25,000
Less variable costs:
Cost of goods sold................................. $16,500
Selling expenses ($2,700 × 40%)........... 1,080 17,580
Contribution margin....................................... $ 7,420
Unit contribution margin = $7,420/1,484 units
= $5.00 per unit
220
10–15 Concluded
b. Residual income = $1,845,000 – (0.11 × $15,375,000)
= $1,845,000 – $1,691,250
= $153,750
3. The management of Reigis Steel would have been more likely to accept the
contemplated capital acquisition if residual income were used as the
performance measure because the investment would have increased both the
division’s residual income and the management bonuses. Using residual
income, management would accept all investments with a return higher than
11% as these investments would all increase the dollar value of residual
income. When using ROI as a performance measure, Reigis’s management is
likely to reject any investment that would lower the overall ROI (12% in 2009),
even though the return is higher than the required minimum, as this would
lower bonuses.
4. Reigis must be able to control all items related to profits and investment if it
is to be evaluated fairly as an investment center using either ROI or residual
income as performance measures. Reigis must control all elements of the
business except the cost of invested capital, that being controlled by
Raddington Industries.
10–16
1. Part 4CM Model 7AC Company
Sales..................................... $70,000* $550,000 $620,000
Variable expenses............... 50,000 460,000 510,000
Contribution margin...... $ 20,000 $ 90,000 $110,000
*While all 10,000 units could be sold externally, currently none are.
2. The transfer price should be the market price of $12. This is the minimum
price for the Components Division and the maximum price for the Small AC
Division.
3. Unless the manager of the Small AC Division is able to increase the price of
Model 7AC, he will discontinue production and will not purchase any of the
component. (The cost of producing the window unit will increase from $52 to
$57, a cost greater than the current selling price.)
4. All 10,000 units of Part 4CM will be sold externally at the market price of $12
per unit.
221
10–16 Concluded
5. Sales......................................... $120,000
Variable expenses................... 50,000
Contribution margin.......... $ 70,000
The contribution to profits increases by $20,000. The CEO made the correct
decision.
10–17
1. Raymond should not reduce the price charged to Brandi if he can sell all he
produces at a price of $4.50 per pound. Brandi should buy externally, saving
the company $50,000 (100,000 × $0.50). The $50,000 savings belongs to the
Donut Shop Division. There will be no effect on the Coffee Division.
2. Coffee Division:
Current profit:
950,000 × ($4.50 – $3.50) = $950,000
Profit with no internal transfers:
850,000 × ($4.50 – $3.50) = $850,000
Change in profit = $950,000 – $850,000 = ($100,000)
Donut Shop Division:
Increase in profit:
($4.50 – $4.00) × 100,000 = $50,000
Effect on firm: ($100,000) + $50,000 = ($50,000)
222
10–17 Concluded
For a transfer price of $3.50, the effect for each division and the firm is as
follows:
Coffee Division: ($3.50 – $3.50)100,000 + ($4.50 – $3.50)850,000 = $850,000
Change in profit: $850,000 – $950,000 = ($100,000)
Donut Shop Division: $1 × 100,000 = $100,000 savings
Firm: No change
The outside bid has a direct benefit to the Donut Shop Division.
223
10–18
1. $120
2. Minimum: $108
Maximum: $120
Actual: $114
224
10–19
1. The segment information prepared for public reporting purposes may not be
appropriate for the evaluation of segment management performance
because:
An allocation of common costs incurred for the benefit of more than one
segment must be included for public reporting purposes.
Common costs are generally allocated on an arbitrary basis.
The segments identified for public reporting purposes may not coincide
with actual management responsibilities.
This information does not distinguish between a segment that is a poor
investment and the performance of a manager who has done well despite
adverse circumstances.
10–20
1. $200, because it could purchase the motor externally for that price.
225
1. Fred turned down the proposed investment as the ROI from the investment is
13% ($156,000/$1,200,000) compared to the current ROI of 16%
($2,560,000/$16,000,000). If the iron is produced, then the division’s ROI
would decrease to 15.79% ($2,716,000/$17,200,000).
2. The iron should have been manufactured since the company’s income would
increase $48,000 [$156,000 – (9% × $1,200,000)].
3. Yes. The project has a residual income of $48,000 and accepting it would
have increased the division’s residual income.
5. Since ROI is the main performance measure, Fred was not willing to accept a
profitable investment because it would decrease his division’s ROI. Facing a
possible promotion, he chose to maintain the division’s high ROI rather than
earn extra profits for the company. The decision was motivated by self-
interest. Some may argue that the decision was encouraged by the
company’s reward system. This argument, however, is weak since it is
virtually certain that the intent of higher management is to reward productive
behavior, not manipulative behavior. From this perspective, the decision was
wrong and, thus, unethical.
However, Fred might argue that the true objective of the firm is to encourage
and reward high return on investment. He may be able to develop an
acceptably high ROI project in the next eight to 10 months. Thus, not
accepting the immediate project may give him the ability to invest in a more
profitable project later on.
10–22
Answers will vary.
226