BEC Study Group Q2 2016 - Page 31

Viewing 15 replies - 451 through 465 (of 1,014 total)
  • Author
    Replies
  • #766479
    Spartans92
    Participant

    indirect costs are basically costs that are not related to a specific cost object but supports it. For example, you have a janitor (indirect labor) because he may not be working on the specific job such as the assembling of a car that is in mass production.
    Not sure if that really helps in answering your question. But based on the other options you can rule out C and D immediately since it doesn't quite make sense.

    BEC- PASS

    #766480
    Trying to pass
    Participant

    @Mole351…. is the answer 86,600 units?

    #766481
    Larry
    Participant

    Test is on monday. Trending at 78%. (3000 questions…shoot me) I kind of feel ready but I wish I would be trending higher. I think I have the concept down but I keep tripping up on questions I should know! Ahhh the stress of studying and trying to know everything.

    REG - 82
    FAR - 78
    BEC - 76
    AUD - 8/27/16

    #766482
    Trying to pass
    Participant

    Q. The company plans to tighten its credit policy. the new policy will decrease the average # of days in collection from 75 to 50 days and reduce the ratio of credit sales to total revenue from 70 to 60%. the company estimates that projected sales would be 5% less if the proposed new credit policy were implemented. the firms short-term interest cost is 10%.

    Projected sales for the coming year are $50million. Calculate the dollar impact on A/R of this proposed change in credit policy.
    A. $ 3,819,445 decrease
    B. $ 6,500,000 decrease
    C. $ 3,333,334 decrease
    D. $ 18,749,778 increase

    Please help?

    #766483
    another9215
    Participant

    @ Trying to Pass – You need to know the Receivable turnover formula (number of times Company collects receivables a year) = Number of Days in Year / Average Collection Period. You also need to know the average receivables formula (average amount of AR Company collects) = Credit Sales / Receivables Turnover

    The Old Credit Policy:
    Projected credit sales were 35,000,000 (70% * 50,000,000).
    Receivables turnover = 360 days / 75 days = 4.8.
    Average receivables = Credit Sales / Receivables Turnover, so 35,000,000 / 4.8 = 7,291,667

    The New Credit Policy:
    Revenue decreased 5 % with new policy. So, projected sales are 47,500,000 (50,000,000 – (50,000,000 * 5%)).
    Projected credit sales were 28,500,000 (60% * 47,500,000).
    Receivables turnover = 360 days / 50 days = 7.2.
    Average receivables = Credit Sales / Receivables Turnover, so 28,500,000 / 7.2 = 3,958,333

    Difference between amount of AR collected with old policy and new policy:

    7,291,667 – 3,958,333 = 3,333,334

    #766484
    another9215
    Participant

    I have a question about the NRV of byproducts. I got this question in my ninja mcq.

    The following information pertains to a byproduct called Moy:

    Sales in 20X2 5,000 units
    Selling price per unit $6
    Selling costs per unit 2
    Processing costs 0
    Inventory of Moy was recorded at net realizable value when produced in 20X1. No units of Moy were produced in 20X2. What amount should be recognized as profit on Moy's 20X2 sales?

    A.
    $0

    B.
    $10,000

    C.
    $20,000

    D.
    $30,000

    The explanation per Ninja is:

    Net realizable value equals expected market value (selling price) less any separable processing and selling costs. If byproduct Moy was recorded at net realizable value, the following entry would have been made in 20X1:

    Dr. Byproduct Inventory 5,000($6-$2) $20,000
    Cr. Work-In-Process $20,000
    When the 5,000 units of Moy were sold in 20X2, the sale would be recorded using the following summary journal entry:

    Dr. Cash (5,000 x $6) $30,000
    Cr. Byproduct Inventory $20,000
    Cr. Cash (for selling costs) (5,000 x $2) 10,000

    As can be seen, no profit is recognized when byproduct inventory is recorded at net realizable value.

    I was reading up on this in my book, and it says “if one of the products resulting from production is considered a by-product, and is only being produced as an incidental result of production of the main product or products, then the NRV of the byproduct is simply subtracted from the cost of production of the main.”

    Can someone explain to me how this lines up with no profit being recognized? To me, in the example above, it looks like the NRV of $20K is being ADDED to the costs of production, resulting in $0 profit.

    #766485
    Trying to pass
    Participant

    Thank you another9215

    #766486
    Trying to pass
    Participant

    Which of the following statements is correct regarding variable costing and absorption costing income statements for a company that has no beginning inventory and whose production exceeds sales for the current period?

    A. Net income is higher if absorption costing is used.
    B. The ending inventory amount is lower if absorption costing is used.
    C. The cost of goods sold amount is lower if absorption costing is used.
    D. The selling and administrative expense is higher if absorption costing is used.

    A. is the correct answer but why not “C” can someone explain why C can not be the answer? THANK you

    #766487
    Mole351
    Participant

    hi all. i've been having a really difficult time distinguishing between a hash total and check digit (since I took auditing). i realize a has total is a non-sensical total, and a check digit is a a numeric field, but i seem to get the answers wrong on all of the multiple choice.

    can anyone explain this to me? maybe what i'm missing is what happens after the totals are calculated?

    FAR - 87 (5/15)
    AUD - 93 (8/15)
    REG - 86 (2/16)
    BEC - 87 (5/16)

    #766488
    monikernc
    Participant

    think of a hash total as vertical because it is applied to a column of numbers, a check digit can be the total of an account number with a twist (like multipled by pi) so think of it as horizontal.

    FAR 7/25/15 76!
    AUD 10/30/15 93
    BEC 2/27/16 82
    REG 5/23/16 88!
    Ninja Book and MCQ and the forum - all the way!!!
    and a little thing i like to call, time and effort!
    if you want things to change, you have to do something different

    #766489
    norseman88
    Participant

    @ Trying to pass

    Which of the following statements is correct regarding variable costing and absorption costing income statements for a company that has no beginning inventory and whose production exceeds sales for the current period?

    A. Net income is higher if absorption costing is used.
    B. The ending inventory amount is lower if absorption costing is used.
    C. The cost of goods sold amount is lower if absorption costing is used.
    D. The selling and administrative expense is higher if absorption costing is used.

    A. is the correct answer but why not “C” can someone explain why C can not be the answer? THANK you

    The cost of goods sold amount under absorption costing will be higher than variable costing because absorption costing treats fixed manufactoring O/H as a product cost that is included in inventory values. Variable costing treats FM O/H as a period cost and inventory values only include variable manufacturing costs. So the FM O/H is included in the COGS for absorption costing.

    When production is greater than sales, absorption costing will have a higher net income than variable because a portion of the FM O/H is included with each unit in ending inventory. Under variable, that FM O/H would be fully expensed during the period.

    #766490
    Spartans92
    Participant

    Any tips on how to remember all these formulas? I find myself understanding the questions but I keep having to refer back to my notes to find the formula to answer the question correctly.

    BEC- PASS

    #766491
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    I keep forgetting inventory and cost accounting concept too. I always have to keep it fresh by throwing numbers and review the relationships:

    ↑ BI
    ↑ COS
    ↓ GP

    ↑ EI
    ↓ COS
    ↑ GP

    So I find the explanation posted by @Norseman88 to @TryingToPass’ question confusing. If the EI is higher under absorption costing, COS should be lower compared to variable costing.

    Proof:

    Absorption Costing:
    9000 Sales
    ——————
    0000 BI
    1250 Purchases
    ——————
    1250 GAFS
    (300) EI-FC
    (280) EI-VC
    —————–
    670 COS
    —————–
    9330 GP
    ==========

    Variable Costing:
    9000 Sales
    —————–
    0000 BI
    1250 Purchases
    —————–
    1250 GAFS
    (280) EI-VC
    —————–
    970 COS
    —————-
    9030 GP
    ==========
    You see, absorption costing above is showing that COS of $670 is lower than $970 under variable costing.
    So I am echoing @Trying's question why Letter C could not be correct?
    What are we missing here?

    #766492
    RE2PECT
    Participant

    @Spartans92- I have to do the same thing. I'm having a lot of trouble remembering them. I went through Roger's book and made flashcards on Brainscape for every formula. I also write out the formula whenever I do a question that uses one.

    FAR: 75 Roger & Ninja (notes/flashcards/audio/MCQ)
    AUD: 73, 81
    BEC: 71, retake 8/29
    REG:

    #766493
    cdn
    Participant

    I feel so exhausted with BEC. I still have 3 chapters to go through plus do a review/MCQ from NINJA. Test on June 6 – No clue how I will do it.
    Plus just did a scan of writing part.

Viewing 15 replies - 451 through 465 (of 1,014 total)
  • The topic ‘BEC Study Group Q2 2016 - Page 31’ is closed to new replies.