Transfer Pricing (part d) Example 7

7 Comments
View all free ACCA P5 lectures >> This lecture is based on OpenTuition P5 course notes

Comments

  1. Avatar of cathyf7 cathyf7 says:
    November 4, 2012 at 4:26 pm

    Thanks, this was a great supplemental learning tool, really helped explain TP for me.

  2. Avatar of annajuly annajuly says:
    October 6, 2012 at 11:47 am

    good video and clear

  3. Avatar of custardonut custardonut says:
    September 7, 2012 at 12:18 pm

    Hi John, thanks for your detailed reply. But I still agree with Damien.

    Can you correct me if I am wrong here:
    I agree with you that “If Division B did not exist, then Division A would use all their labour producing product X and would earn $4 per hour (20/5).”
    But for argument sake, had Division A only used all their labour producing product Y and it would have earned $3/h any way.
    So the actual loss in making Y instead of X is only $1/h, the net lost contribution.
    Namely, Division A only needs to be compensated by $1/hour, not $4/hour. As the other $3/h would have been compensated by selling product Y.
    Then the minimum cost would be 80, as Damien said.

    Looking forward to hearing from you.

    Thanks John.

    • Avatar of ferrischan ferrischan says:
      October 15, 2012 at 1:05 pm

      @custardonut,
      Hi if I understand John correctly, we should not be even selling product Y. And should we sell product Y, we would need to sell it at $4/hr to make sense selling it. Thus from this the contribution lost would still be $4/hr. Please do correct me John if I had mistake your meaning. Cheers

  4. Avatar of johnmoffat johnmoffat says:
    May 24, 2012 at 11:20 am

    If Division B did not exist, then Division A would use all their labour producing product X and would earn $4 per hour (20/5).

    They would only be happy to produce Product Y (for anybody!) if it gave them at least $4 per hour. (That is why at the moment they are not producing Product Y – it only gives $3 per hour and so they don’t produce it).

    So…..for Y to be generating $4 per hour it would need to be sold for $110 (70 + (10*4)).

    To sell at any price lower than this would make no sense at all because the contribution per hour would be less than they would make by selling product X.

  5. Avatar of vcookey vcookey says:
    May 23, 2012 at 10:21 pm

    I’m wondering the same thing as Damien. would be happy if someone replies. Thank you.

  6. Avatar of damien11 damien11 says:
    December 7, 2011 at 8:10 pm

    should the opportunity cost not be only 10 since the net lost contribution would only be 4-3=1 per hour (the difference between the contribution of the two units per hour) and therefore the minimum cost would be 70 +10=80

Leave a Comment