Nama : Irga Ayudias Tantri

NIM : 12030121410011

Case 8–42
Lehighton Chalk Company manufactures sidewalk chalk, which it sells online by the box at $50
per unit. Lehighton uses an actual costing system, which means that the actual costs of direct
material, direct labor, and manufacturing overhead are entered into work-in-process inventory.
The actual application rate for manufacturing overhead is computed each year; actual
manufacturing overhead is divided by actual production (in units) to compute the application rate.
Information for Lehighton’s first two years of operation is as follows:

Required:
Lehighton Chalk Company had no beginning or ending work-in-process inventories for either year.
1. Prepare operating income statements for both years based on absorption costing.
2. Prepare operating income statements for both years based on variable costing.
3. Prepare a numerical reconciliation of the difference in income reported under the two
costing methods used in requirements 1 and 2.
Jawaban :
1.
LEHIGHTON CHALK COMPANY
Income Statement
Sales revenue $ 125.000 $ 125.000
Less: Cost of goods sold: $ 52.500 $ 52.500
Gross margin $ 72.500 $ 72.500
Less : Selling and administrative expenses $ 25.000 $ 25.000
Variable Fixed $ 20.000 $ 20.000
Operating income $ 27.500 $ 27.500
2.
Year 1 Year 2

Production 3.000
Finished goods inventory (in units), Jan 1 - 500
Actual production (in units) 3.000 2.000
Sales (in units) 2.500 2.500
Finished goods inventory (in units), Dec 31 500 -
Revenue and cost data, all two years :
Sales price per unit $ 50
Product cost per unit :
Variable manufacturing costs ( $21.000/3.000 = $7) $ 7
Fixed manufacturing overhead ($42.000/3.000 = $14) $ 14
Total absorbtion cost per unit $ 29
Variable selling and administrative cost per unit $ 10
Fixed selling and administrative cost per year $ 20.000

LEHIGHTON CHALK COMPANY

Variable-Costing Income Statement

Year 1 Year 2
Sales revenue at $50 per unit $ 125.000 $ 125.000
Less variable expenses :
Variable manufacturing costs $ 17.500 $ 17.500
Variable selling and administrative costs $ 25.000 $ 25.000
Contribution margin $ 82.500 $ 82.500
Less fixed expenses :
Fixed manufacturing overhead $ 35.000 $ 35.000
Fixed selling and administrative costs $ 20.000 $ 20.000
Operating income $ 27.500 $ 27.500

3.
Year 1 Year 2
Cost of goods sold under absorption costing $ 52.500 $ 52.500
Variable manufacturing costs under variable costing $ 17.500 $ 17.500
Sub Total $ 35.000 $ 35.000
Fixed manufacturing overhead as period
expense under variable costing $ 35.000 $ 35.000
Total $ - $ -
Operating income under variable costing $ 27.500 $ 27.500
Operating income under absorption costing $ 27.500 $ 27.500
Difference in operating income $ - $ -

Case 8–43
Refer to the information given in the preceding case for Lehighton Chalk Company
Required:
1. Reconcile Lehighton’s operating income reported under absorption and variable costing,
during each year, by comparing the following two amounts on each income statement:
 Cost of goods sold
 Fixed cost (expensed as a period expense)
2. What was Lehighton’s total operating income across both years under absorption costing
and under variable costing?
3. What was the total sales revenue across both years under absorption costing and under
variable costing?
4. What was the total of all costs expensed on the operating income statements across both
years under absorption costing and under variable costing?
5. Subtract the total costs expensed across both years (requirement 4) from the total sales
revenue across both years (requirement 3): (a) under absorption costing and (b) under
variable costing.
6. Comment on the results obtained in requirements 1, 2, 3, and 4 in light of the following
assertion: Timing is the key in distinguishing between absorption and variable costing
Jawaban :
1.
Year 1 Absorption Costing Variable Costing
Income Statement Income Statement
Cost of goods sold $52,500 $17,500
Fixed cost (expensed as period expense) 20,000a 62,000b
Total $72,500 $79,500
Difference (cost greater on variable ($79,500 - $72,500)
costing income statement)
$7,000
Operating income $27,500
Difference in reported income (income ($27,500 - $20,500)
greater on absorption-costing income =
statement) $7,000
 Year 2 Absorption Costing Variable Costing
Income Statement Income Statement
Cost of goods sold $66,500 $17,500
Fixed cost (expensed as period expense) 20,000 62,000
Total $86,500 $79,500

Difference (cost greater on variable- ($86,500 - $79,500)

costing income statement) =
$7,000

Operating income $13,500 $20,500

Difference in reported income (income ($13,500 - $20,500)
greater on absorption-costing income =
statement) $7,000

Notes untuk perhitungan :

a
Hanya fixed cost selling and administrative
b
Total fixed cost

2. Lehighton’s total operating income across both years under absorption costing and
variablecosting:
a. Absorption costing : $27,500 + $13,500 = $41,000
b. Variable costing : $20,500 + $20,500 = $41,000

3. Lehighton’s total sales revenue across both years under absorption costing and
variablecosting :
a. Absorption costing : $125,000 + $125,000 = $250,000
b. Variable costing : $125,000 + $125,000 = $250,000

4. Lehighton’s total of all costs expensed on the operating income statements across both
years
under absorption costing and variable costing :
a. Absorption costing : $97,500 + $111,500 = $209,000
b. Variable costing : $104,500 + $104,500= $209,000

5. Lehighton’s total costs expensed across both years (requirement 4) from the total sales
revenueacross both years (requirement 3) under absorption costing and variable costing :
a. Absorption costing : $250,000 – $209,000 = $41,000
b. Variable costing : $250,000 – $209,000 = $41,000
6. Comment on the results obtained in requirements 1, 2, 3, and 4 in distinguishing
between
absorption and variable costing :
Seperti yang ditunjukkan di nomor 1, operating income Lehighton didistribusikan
secara berbeda pada tahun ke-1 dan ke-2 dengan menggunakan metode absorption costing
dan variable costing. Kedua metode biaya menghasilkan pendapatan yang sama selama dua
tahun jika digabungkan, tetapi pendapatan tidak selalu sama dalam setiap tahun dengan dua
metode biaya tersebut. Metode absorption costing menghasilkan pendapatan sebesar $7.000
lebih tinggi di tahunke-1 dan pendapatan sebesar $7.000 lebih rendah di tahun ke-2. Hasil
ini terjadi karena, metode absorption costing melakukan pengeluaran lebih rendah di tahun
ke-1 dan pengeluaran lebih besardi tahun ke-2.
Total operating income Lehighton, selama dua tahun yaitu sebesar $ 41.000 dengan
menggunakan metode absorption costing dan variable costing (ditunjukkan di nomor 2).
Hasil ini tentu saja harus ada, karena total pendapatan penjualan dan total pengeluaran sama
dengan menggunakan kedua metode selama periode dua tahun.
Total sales revenue untuk kedua tahun Operasi Lehighton pada metode absorption
costing dan variable costing yaitu sebesar $250.000 (ditunjukkan di nomor 3). Sales
revenue ini tidak ada hubungannya dengan metode biaya yang digunakan. Lehighton
menjual pada tahun ke-1 sebanyak
2.500 unit dan tahun ke-2 sebanyak 2.500 sehingga totalnya sebanyak 5.000 unit dengan
harga penjualan $50 per unit. Sehingga, ini menghasilkan total sales revenue selama dua
tahun yaitu sebesar $ 250.000.
Total of all costs expensed, selama tahun ke-1 dan ke-2, sama dengan menggunakan
metode absorption costing dan variable costing yaitu sebesar $209.000 (ditunjukkan di
nomor 4). Alasanuntuk hasil ini adalah bahwa Lehighton menghasilkan jumlah unit yang
sama dengan yang dijual perusahaan, selama periode dua tahun tersebut. Lehighton
memproduksi dan menjual sebanyak
5.000 unit selama tahun ke-1 dan ke-2. Dengan demikian, jumlah biaya manufaktur yang
sama dibebankan, selama periode dua tahun tersebut dengan menggunakan metode
absorption costing dan variable costing.
Dengan demikian dapat disimpulkan bahwa, perbedaan antara metode absorption
costing dan variable costing disebabkan oleh waktu dengan pengeluaran mana yang diakui.
Jika metode absorption costing Lehighton pada tahun ke-1, dimana fixed overhead tidak
dibebankan sampai tahun ke-2, ketika unit terjual. Sebaliknya, jika metode variable costing
tahun ke-1 fixed overheaddibebankan pada tahun ke-1 sebagai biaya periode.