costmanagementaccountingandcontrol第三章解答手册

costmanagementaccountingandcontrol第三章解答手册内容摘要：

$594,000 = $585,600 + $8,400 Note: The analysis is restricted to resources acquired in advance of usage. Only this type of resource will ever have any unused capacity. (In this case, the capacity to process 100,000 rolls of film was acquired—facilities, people, and equipment—but only 96,000 rolls were actually processed.) 3–5 1. a. Graph of direct labor cost: 36 D i r e c t L a b o r C o s t$0$ 5 0 , 0 0 0$ 1 0 0 , 0 0 0$ 1 5 0 , 0 0 0$ 2 0 0 , 0 0 0$ 2 5 0 , 0 0 0$ 3 0 0 , 0 0 00 1 , 0 0 0 2 , 0 0 0 3 , 0 0 0 4 , 0 0 0 5 , 0 0 0U n i t s P r o d u c e d b. Graph of cost of supervision: 37 S u p e r v i s i o n C o s t$0$ 2 0 , 0 0 0$ 4 0 , 0 0 0$ 6 0 , 0 0 0$ 8 0 , 0 0 0$ 1 0 0 , 0 0 0$ 1 2 0 , 0 0 0$ 1 4 0 , 0 0 0$ 1 6 0 , 0 0 00 1 , 0 0 0 2 , 0 0 0 3 , 0 0 0 4 , 0 0 0 5 , 0 0 0U n i t s P r o d u c e d 2. Direct labor cost is a stepvariable cost because of the small width of the step. The steps are small enough that we might be willing to view the resource as one acquired as needed and, thus, treated simply as a variable cost. Supervision is a stepfixed cost because of the large width of the step. This is a resource acquired in advance of usage, and since the step width is large, supervision would be treated as a fixed cost (discretionary—acquired in lumpy amounts). 3. Currently, direct labor cost is $90,000 (in the 1,001 to 1,500 range). If production increases by 400 units next year, the pany will need to hire one additional direct laborer (the production range will be between 1,501 and 2,000), increasing direct labor cost by $30,000. This increase in activity will require the hiring of one new machinist. Supervision costs will increase by $45,000, as a new supervisor will need to be hired. 38 3–6 1. Yes, there appears to be a linear relationship. 2. Low: 700, $2,628 High: 3,100, $6,564 V = (Y2 – Y1)/(X2 – X1) = ($6,564 – $2,628)/(3,100 – 700) = $3,936/2,400 = $ per visit F = $6,564 – $(3,100) = $1,480 OR F = $2,628 – $(700) = $1,480 Y = $1,480 + $ 3. Y = $1,480 + $(1,900) = $1,480 + $3,116 Scattergraph for Tanning Services 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 $7,000 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 Number of tanning visits Cost 39 = $4,596 40 3–7 1. Regression output from spreadsheet program: SUMMARY OUTPUT Regression Statistics Multiple R R Square Adjusted R Square Standard Error Observations 9 ANOVA df SS MS F Regression 1 11432890 11432890 Residual 7 480013 Total 8 11912903 Coefficients Standard Error t Stat Pvalue Intercept X Variable 1 Y = $1,199 + $ 2. Y = $1,199 + $ (1,900) = $1,199 + $3,306 = $4,505 3. R2 is about . This says that about 96% of the variability in the tanning services cost is explained by the number of visits. The t statistic for the number of appointments is , and the t statistic for the intercept term is . Both of these are statistically significant at better than the level, meaning that the number of visit is a significant variable in explaining tanning costs, and that some omitted variables (a fixed cost captured by the intercept) are also important in explaining tanning costs. 41 3–8 1. Y = $9,320 + $ + $ + $ where Y = Total cost of order filling X1 = Number of orders X2 = Number of plex orders X3 = Number of giftwrapped items 2. Y = $9,320 + $(300) + $(65)+ $(100) = $11,126 3. The t value for a 99% confidence interval and degrees of freedom of 20 is (see Exhibit 310). (Note that degrees of freedom is 20 = 24 observations – 4 parameters) Yf 177。 tpSe $11,126 177。 ($150) $11,126 177。 427 (rounded to nearest whole number) $10,699  Y  $11,553 4. In th。