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
Physical Measure and Net Realizable Value Physical Measure/Unit Joint costs are assigned to the joint products according to the ratio of physical measurement of the outpu

On January 1, 2013, VKI Corporation awarded 12 million of its $1 par common shares to key personnel, subject to forfeiture if employment is terminated within three years. On the gr


Shubenacadie Inc. is currently considering a project with a 5-year life that it believes has the potential to return the company to profitability. Based on the results from a marke

Stopover industries ltd, a recently incorporated company plans to go into production next year. the following standard cost matrix has been assembled for one of the products it pro

Bakers Bagels LLC produces and sells 20 types of bagels by the dozen. Bagels are priced at $6.00 per dozen (or $0.50 each) and cost $.020 per unit to produce. The company is consid

2012                     2011 Cash                               12200                 17700 Acct receivable                  25200                  22300 Investments

Assume B, G and T are in real terms (and in billions of dollars). B t-1  = 1000      G t = 220           T t = 200            i t   = .15     π t   = . 10 a) Calculate th

Advertising expense $17,200 Wages expense-assemblers 36,840 Depreciation expense-machines 21,480 Utilities expense-factory 21,120 Wages expense-lathe operators 23,480 Repair expens

Determine why  JIT, TQM and AMTs may not always be entirely compatible with  the practice of standard costing.