Comparison between marginal and absorption costing, Cost Accounting

Comparison between Marginal Costing and Absorption Costing

There are accountants who favour all costing method.

Arguments in favour about absorption costing are specified as:

  1. To make output fixed production costs are incurred; consequently it is 'fair' to charge all output along with a share of these costs.
  2. Closing stock values via involving a share of fixed production overhead will be valued on the principle required for the financial accounting valuation of stocks via Standard accounting practice' statement on stocks and long-term contracts as SSAP 9.
  3. A problem along with calculating the contribution of various products made via a company is such it may not be clear whether the contribution earned via each product is sufficient to cover fixed costs, whereas via charging fixed overhead to a product it is probable to ascertain if it is profitable or not.

Arguments in favour about marginal costing are specified as:

  1. It is easy to operate
  2. There are no apportionments that are frequently done on the arbitrary basis, of fixed costs. Many costs, as like the managing director's salary, are indivisible along with nature.
  3. Fixed costs will be the similar regardless of the volume of output, since they are period costs. It makes as hence, to charge them in full like a cost to the period.
  4. The cost to make an extra unit is the variable production cost. It is realistic to value closing stock items at its directly attributable cost.
  5. Beneath or over absorption of overheads is avoided.
  6. Marginal costing information can be required for decision-making however absorption costing information is not appropriate for decision-making.
  7. Fixed costs as like depreciation, rent and salaries concern to a period of time and must be charged against the revenues of the period whether they are incurred.

Obviously, the choice of method does not have to be between marginal costing and absorption costing. Now we looked at ABC like an alternative to absorption costing.  Attributable contribution costing is one more alternative. This includes attributing certain fixed costs to the activities that cause them and then utilizing marginal costing to compute a contribution for every activity, the surplus of contribution over attributable fixed costs being known like attributable contribution.

Posted Date: 2/7/2013 12:13:54 AM | Location : United States







Related Discussions:- Comparison between marginal and absorption costing, Assignment Help, Ask Question on Comparison between marginal and absorption costing, Get Answer, Expert's Help, Comparison between marginal and absorption costing Discussions

Write discussion on Comparison between marginal and absorption costing
Your posts are moderated
Related Questions

weekly working hour 48 , hourly wage rate 15$ , price rate per unit 6$ , normal time taken per piece 36 minuets , normal output per week 220 pieces , actual output per week 275 pie

A local government authority owns and operates a leisure centre with numerous sporting facilities, residential accommodation, a cafeteria and a sports shop. The summer season lasts

DIFFERENTIAL COSTING Marginal costing is often confused with differential costing. The word 'DIFFERENTIAL COSTING' means 'a technique used in the preparation of adhoc informati

Interstate Manufacturing produces brass fasteners and incurred the following costs for the year just ended: Materials and supplies used Brass $75,000 Repair parts 16,000

Determine the Absorption Rate of Overheads The budgeted production overheads and other budgeted data of compute are given as: Budget Overhead cost for the period = Ks

(i) In terms of cashflow, which month will be the most costly for your project? (ii) If the 3rd and 4th months are more expensive by 25% each because the outsourced labour took

We have earlier explained working capital by total current assets less current liabilities. It, in other words, implies that all the assets held through the business along with the

ln an attempt to conceal a thefi of funds, Kaito Kid, controller of Shinichi Products, lnc. placed a bomb in the company s record vault. The ensuing explosion left only fragments o