Cost Analysis for Products A & B
Uploaded by
Brian TorresCost Analysis for Products A & B
Uploaded by
Brian TorresCommon questions
Powered by AISetup costs in Illiad Inc. and Dover Corporation serve as critical cost differentiators. Illiad Inc. computes setup costs with a significant impact on total costs, adding $150 per setup distinctly influencing products' overall expenses. In comparison, Dover Corporation uses ABC to explicitly attribute setups ($420 per setup) within broader cost allocations. This explicit accounting under ABC isolates setup costs, enhancing management’s visibility over their impact on product profitability and cost structures. Thus, setup costs directly inflate Illiad’s product costs by their separate allocation, while ABC facilitates an evaluative approach by emphasizing setup incidence and efficiency .
Under the activity-based costing (ABC) system, the selling price is calculated as $8.40 compared to $8.15 under the traditional full cost system. This difference arises because the ABC system includes a more precise allocation of overheads, accounting for activities such as machining, handling, setups, and quality control that result in a higher overhead and thereby a higher total cost per unit. Consequently, the selling price under the ABC system reflects these costs more accurately .
Discrepancies in computed costs per unit for Illiad Inc. arise from differences in how each costing methodology attributes indirect costs. Traditional costing generally uses an average rate over a broad activity base (e.g., machine hours), which can obscure specific cost drivers like setup and utility usage difference. Activity-Based Costing (ABC) introduces cost drivers tailored to specific activities (e.g., per MH, setups, usage), resulting in each unit’s cost reflecting more precise activity costs. This can cause significant variances in unit costs as ABC offers an in-depth depiction of resource consumption tailored to each product .
In traditional costing, overheads are generally allocated based on a singular base such as machine hours. For Dover Corporation, the traditional method includes broad allocations (total overhead rate per MH). In contrast, ABC allocates material handling costs based on the specific number of parts handled, calculated at $0.12 per part. This granularity results in a tailored overhead cost of $3,000 per batch (assuming 25,000 parts) and recognizes distinct activities, thereby providing a more precise allocation of these overheads .
The direct material costs for Product A and Product B are $230,175 and $314,325 respectively, indicating a variance of $84,150. This variance could be attributed to differences in material requirements for the products, the quality or type of materials used, or differences in production processes that necessitate varying quantities. Additionally, price differences in material acquisition or efficiencies in material usage could also account for the observed discrepancies .
Setup costs significantly impact Dover Corporation’s cost structure. In traditional costing, setup costs are likely embedded within a broad overhead rate. Under ABC, they are separately identified and allocated per setup, at $420.00 each, amounting to $840.00 per batch. This separate identification shifts the visibility and potential impact of setup-related inefficiencies directly to those incurring these costs, aligning the cost structure to incentivize efficiency. The explicit cost allocation allows management to better assess process improvements focused on setups, reflecting more accurate product costings and impacting pricing strategies .
The primary reason for the different setup costs between Product A and Product B is the allocation methodology and the number of setups required. Product A incurs a setup cost of $64,500 versus $129,000 for Product B, reflecting a likely difference in the number of setups or the cost per setup (i.e., $150 per setup multiple). This indicates that Product B may have had more frequent or costlier setups compared to Product A, thereby increasing its total cost .
Under the traditional costing method, the cost per unit for Product A is noted as $109.35. When moving to activity-based costing, this increases to $118.64 per unit. This shift accounts for specific cost drivers such as utilities, setup, and material handling costs using realistic bases, such as machine hours and pounds handled. This change in methodology highlights the increased cost sensitivity and accuracy introduced by employing ABC, reflecting a more accurate expense attribution to Product A's cost structure .
Under the traditional costing system, the overhead allocation per unit is $0.96, calculated as 60/MH multiplied by 0.016 MH per unit. When switching to the ABC system, the overhead per unit increases to $1.15. This is due to a more detailed breakdown of costs including handling, setups, machining, and quality control activities applied per batch basis, which are then allocated across the units, leading to a higher overhead allocation per unit .
The allocation of utilities significantly impacts the cost per unit for both Product A and Product B. For Product A, the utilities add to $525,000, whereas for Product B, it is $225,000, leading to per-unit utility costs of $35 and $30, respectively. Since utilities are only one component of indirect costs, these allocations implicitly assume varying levels of utility usage, affecting total production costs and their subsequent impact on unit cost differences. The higher allocation for Product A indicates either greater utility consumption or a different allocation base being used .