¡Descarga Ejercicios contabilidad y más Ejercicios en PDF de Contabilidad solo en Docsity!
Frank Martínez Peréz
E6-1. Alou sold goods costing $38,000 to Comerico Company, FOB shipping point, on December 28. The goods are not expected to arrive at Comerico until January 12. The goods were not included in the physical inventory because they were not in the warehouse.
1. The physical count of the inventory did not include goods costing $95,000 that were shipped to Alou FOB destination on December 27 and were still in transit at year-end. 2. Alou received goods costing $19,000 on January 2. The goods were shipped FOB shipping point on December 26 by Grant Co. The goods were not included in the physical count. 3. Alou sold goods costing $35,000 to Emerick Co., FOB destination, on December 30. The goods were received at Emerick on January 8. They were not included in Alou’s physical inventory. 4. Alou received goods costing $44,000 on January 2 that were shipped FOB shipping point on December 29. The shipment was a rush order that was supposed to arrive December 31. This purchase was included in the ending inventory of $297,000. Alou Company December 31 Account Entries Values Ending inventory – physical count $297,
- No effect: Title passes to purchaser upon shipment when terms are FOB shipping point.
- No effect: Title does not transfer to Alou until good are received. $
- Add to inventory: title passed to Alou when good were shipped. $19,
- Add to inventory: Title remains with Alou until purchaser receives goods. $35,
- No effect: Title passes to purchaser upon shipment when terms are FOB shipping point.
Correct inventory $351, E6-3. FIFO Cost of Goods Sold (#1012) $100 + (#1045) $90 = $ It could choose to sell specific units purchased at specific costs if it wished to impact earnings selectively. If it wished to minimize earnings it would choose to sell the units
purchased at higher costs—in which case the Cost of Goods Sold would be $190. If it wished to maximize earnings it would choose to sell the units purchased at lower costs—in which case the cost of goods sold would be $174. I recommend they use the FIFO method because it produces a more appropriate Statement of Financial Position valuation and reduces the opportunity to manipulate earnings. E6- FIFO Sherper’s Boards September 30 Account Entries Beginning inventory (23 x HK$970) HK$ 22, Sept. 12 (45 x HK$ 1,020) HK$ 45, Sept. 19 (20 x HK$ 1,040) HK$ 20, Sept. 26 (44 x HK$ 1,050) HK$ 46,200 HK$ 112, Cost of goods available for sale HK$ 135, Less: Ending inventory (11 x HK$ 1,050) HK$ 11, Cost of goods sold HK$ 123,
E6-8.
Kinshasa Camera Shop Ending Inventory December 31 Product Cost NRV Lower-of-Cost or NRV Cameras Minolta ₩ 1,360,000 ₩ 1,248,000 ₩ 1,248, Canon ₩ 900,000 ₩ 912,000 ₩ 900, Total ₩ 2,260,000 ₩ 2,160, Light meters Vivitar ₩ 1,500,000 ₩ 1,380,000 ₩ 1,380, Kodak ₩ 1,610,000 ₩ 1,890,000 ₩ 1,610, Total ₩ 3,110,000 ₩ 3,270, Total inventory ₩ 5,370,000 ₩ 5,430,000 ₩ 5,138,
E6-10.
Bamburgh Hardware Corrected COGS Description 2013 2014 Beginning inventory 20,000€ 28,000€ Cost of goods purchased 150,000€ 175,000€ Cost of good available for sale 170,000€ 203,000€ Corrected ending inventory (calculated below) 28,000€ 41,000€ Cost of goods sold 142,000€ 162,000€ Corrected ending inventory 2013 (1): 30,000€ - 2,000€ = 28,000€ Corrected ending inventory 2014 (2): 35,000€ + 6,000€ = 41,000€
June 23 (500 x $7) $3,500 (600 x $6.767) $4, June 27 (440 x $6.767) $2, (160 x $6.767) $1, TOTAL $5, Ending inventory: $1,083. Cost of Goods Sold: $6,300 - $1,083 = $5,217. a) How do the results differ from E6-6? FIFO gives the same ending inventory and cost of goods sold values under both the periodic and perpetual inventory system. Moving average gives different ending inventory and cost of goods sold values under the periodic and perpetual inventory systems, due to the average calculation being based on different pools of costs. b) Why is the average unit cost not $6 x [($5 + $6 + $7) / 3 = $6]? The simple average would be [($5 + $6 + $7) ÷ 3)] or $6. However, the moving-average cost method uses a weighted-average unit cost that changes each time a purchase is made rather than a simple average.
E6-16. Information about Sherper’s Boards is presented in E6-4. Additional data regarding Sherper’s sales of Xpert snowboards are provided below. Assume that Sherper’s uses a perpetual inventory system. Instructions a) Compute ending inventory at September 30 using FIFO and moving-average cost. Sherper’s Boards FIFO September 30 Date Purchases Cost of Goods Sold Balance Sept 1 (23 x HK$ 970) HK$22, Sept 5 (12 x HK$ 970) HK$11,640 (11 x HK$ 970) HK$10, Sept 12 (45 x HK$ 1,020) HK$45,900 (11 x HK$ 970) HK$56, (45 x HK$ 1,020) Sept 16 (11 x HK$ 970) HK$50, (39 x HK$ 1,020) (6 x HK$ 1,020) HK$6, Sept 19 (20 x HK$ 1,040) HK$20,800 (6 x HK$ 1,020) HK$26, (20 x HK$ 1,040) Sept 26 (44 X HK$1,050) HK$46,200 (6 x HK$ 1,020) (20 x HK$ 1,040) HK$73, (44 x HK$ 1,050) Sept 29 (6 x HK$ 1,020) (20 x HK$ 1,040) HK$61, (33 x HK$ 1,050) (11 x HK$ 1,050) HK$11, Sherper’s Boards Moving-Average Cost September 30 Date Purchases Cost of Goods Sold Balance
P6-1A. Anatolia Limited is trying to determine the value of its ending inventory at February 28, 2014, the company’s year-end. The accountant counted everything that was in the warehouse as of February 28, which resulted in an ending inventory valuation of 48,000. However, she didn’t know how to treat the following transactions, so she didn’t record them. Instructions For each of the above transactions, specify whether the item in question should be included in ending inventory and, if so, at what amount. For each item that is not included in ending inventory, indicate who owns it and what account, if any, it should have been recorded in. a) On February 26, Anatolia shipped to a customer goods costing 800. The goods were shipped FOB shipping point, and the receiving report indicates that the customer received the goods on March 2. The goods should not be included in inventory as they were shipped FOB shipping point and shipped February 26. Title to the goods transfers to the customer February 26. Anatolia should have recorded the transaction in the Sales Revenue and Accounts Receivable accounts. b) On February 26, Shira Inc. shipped goods to Anatolia FOB destination. The invoice price was 350. The receiving report indicates that the goods were received by Anatolia on March 2. The amount should not be included in inventory as they were shipped FOB destination and not received until March 2. The seller still owns the inventory. No entry is recorded. c) Anatolia had 620 of inventory at a customer’s warehouse “on approval.” The customer was going to let Anatolia know whether it wanted the merchandise by the end of the week, March 4. Include ₺620 in inventory. d) Anatolia also had 400 of inventory on consignment at a Palletine craft shop. Include ₺400 in inventory.
e) On February 26, Anatolia ordered goods costing 750. The goods were shipped FOB shipping point on February 27. Anatolia received the goods on March 1. ₺750 should be included in inventory as the goods were shipped FOB shipping point. f) On February 28, Anatolia packaged goods and had them ready for shipping to a customer FOB destination. The invoice price was 350; the cost of the items was 220. The receiving report indicates that the goods were received by the customer on March 2. The sale will be recorded on March 2. The goods should be included in inventory at the end of February at their cost of $220. g) Anatolia had damaged goods set aside in the warehouse because they are no longer saleable. These goods cost 400 and Anatolia originally expected to sell these items for 600. The damaged goods should not be included in inventory. They should be recorded in a loss account since they are not saleable.
Jan 6 (150 x $19) $2,850 (100 x $21) $2, Jan 9 (- 10 x $19) (- $190) (10 x $19) Jan 9 (75 x $24) $1,800 (100 x $21) $4, (75 x $24) (10 x $19) (100 x $21) $3, Jan 10 (-15 x $24) (- $360) (60 x $24) Jan 10 (10 x $19) $1, (60 x $21) $2, (40 x $21) (60 x $24) Jan 23 (100 x $26) $2,600 (60 x $21) (60 x $24) $5, (100 x $26) Jan 30 (60 x $21) (60 x $24) $3,740 (60 x $26) $1, (40 x $26) TOTAL $7, (i) Cost of Goods Sold = $7,430. (ii) Ending Inventory = $1,406. (iii) Gross profit = $15,850 - $7,584 = $8,266. Tempo Ltd. Moving-Average January 30 Date Purchases Cost of Goods Sold Balance Jan 1 (150 x $19) $2, Jan 2 (100 x $21) $2,100 (250 x $19.80) $4, Jan 6 (150 x $19.80) $2,970 (100 x $19.80) $1, Jan 9 (-10 x $19.80) (- $198) (110 x $19.80) $2, Jan 9 (75 x $24) $1,800 (185 x $21.503) $3, Jan 10 (-15 x $24) (- $360) (170 x $21.282) $3, Jan 10 (50 x $21.282) $1,064 (120 x $21.282) $2, Jan 23 (100 x $26) $2,600 (220 x $23.427) $5, Jan 30 (160 x $23.427) $3,748 (60 x $23.427) $1, TOTAL $7, (i) Cost of Goods Sold = $7,584. (ii) Ending Inventory = $1,406. (iii) Gross profit = $15,850 - $7,584 = $8,266. b) Compare results for the two cost flow assumptions. FIFO Moving-Average Sales $ 15,850 $ 15, COGS $ 7,430 $ 7, Gross Profit $ 8,420 $ 8, Ending Inventory $ 1,560 $ 1,
In a period of rising costs, the moving-average cost flow assumption results in the higher cost of goods sold and lower gross profit. FIFO gives the lower cost of goods sold and higher gross profits. On the statement of financial position, FIFO gives the higher ending inventory (representing the most current costs); moving-average gives the lower ending inventory. P6-9A. Dominican Appliance Mart began operations on May 1. It uses a perpetual inventory system. During May, the company had the following purchases and sales for its Model 25 Sureshot camera. Instructions a) Determine the ending inventory under a perpetual inventory system using (1) FIFO and (2) moving-average cost. Dominican Appliance Mart FIFO May 30 Date Purchases Cost of Goods Sold Balance May 1 (7 x $155) $1,085 (7 x $155) $1, May 4 (4 x $155) $620 (3 x $155) $ May 8 (8 x $170) $1,360 (3 x $155) $1, (8 x $170) May 12 (3 x $155) $ (2 x $170) (6 x $170) $1, May 15 (6 x $185) $1,110 (6 x $170) $2, (6 x $185) May 20 (3 x $170) $510 (3 x $170) $1, (6 x $185) May 25 (3 x $170) $ (2 x $185) (4 x $185) $
