• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
Free ACCA & CIMA online courses from OpenTuition

Free ACCA & CIMA online courses from OpenTuition

Free Notes, Lectures, Tests and Forums for ACCA and CIMA exams

  • ACCA
  • CIMA
  • FIA
  • OBU
  • Books
  • Forums
  • Ask AI
  • Search
  • Register
  • Login
  • ACCA Forums
  • Ask ACCA Tutor
  • CIMA Forums
  • Ask CIMA Tutor
  • FIA
  • OBU
  • Buy/Sell Books
  • All Forums
  • Latest Topics

20% off ACCA & CIMA Books

OpenTuition recommends the new interactive BPP books for March and June 2025 exams.
Get your discount code >>

Relevant Cost

Forums › Ask ACCA Tutor Forums › Ask the Tutor ACCA PM Exams › Relevant Cost

  • This topic has 10 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 9 years ago by John Moffat.
Viewing 11 posts - 1 through 11 (of 11 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • November 10, 2015 at 11:51 am #281464
    dansindo
    Member
    • Topics: 24
    • Replies: 38
    • ☆☆

    Sir could u pls explain the answer to this question: Event hough i have understood the concept of relevant costing
    H has inventory 15,000 kg of M, a raw material which it bought for 3/kg five yrs ago, for a product line which was discontinued four yrs ago. M has no use in its existing state but could be sold as scrap for 1 per kg. One the company’s current products (HN) requires 4 kg of a raw material, available for 5 per kg. M can be modified at a cost of 0.75 per kg so that it may be used as a substitute for this material. However, after modification, 5 kg of M is required for every unit of HN to be produced.
    H has now received an invitation to tender for a product which could use M in its present state.

    What is the relevant cost per kg of M to be included in the cost estimate for the tender?

    November 10, 2015 at 2:36 pm #281494
    John Moffat
    Keymaster
    • Topics: 57
    • Replies: 54671
    • ☆☆☆☆☆

    The original cost of M is not relevant, because it is a sunk cost.
    The lost scrap value of $1 is not relevant because they will lose the $1 whether they modify and use it in HN or whether they use it for the new product.

    However if they use if for the new product, they will have to buy raw material specially for HN at a cost of $5 per kg, but they will save $0.75 a kg because they will not need to spend money modifying M.

    So the relevant cost is 5 – 0.75 = $4.25 per kg.

    November 10, 2015 at 2:53 pm #281498
    dansindo
    Member
    • Topics: 24
    • Replies: 38
    • ☆☆

    actually sir the answer key is $3.35 per kg. I don’t know how.

    November 10, 2015 at 3:14 pm #281501
    John Moffat
    Keymaster
    • Topics: 57
    • Replies: 54671
    • ☆☆☆☆☆

    Ooops – I have realised my mistake 🙂

    I will start again!!

    Currently, for every unit of HN they are using 5kg of M and are therefore paying 5 x 0.75 = 3.75 to modify it.

    If they use M for the new product, then will not be paying 3.75 for every unit of HN but will instead have to pay for 4kg of raw material at $5, so a cost of $20 per unit.

    Therefore every 5 kg of M that they use for the new product will cost them an extra 20 – 3.75 = $16.25. That means the cost per kg for taking M is 16.25 / 5 = $3.25

    (I think you will find that the Kaplan Kit does show $3.25 as the correct answer (not $3.35))

    Sorry about that 🙁

    November 10, 2015 at 3:47 pm #281524
    dansindo
    Member
    • Topics: 24
    • Replies: 38
    • ☆☆

    and sir why did u deduct 3.75?

    November 10, 2015 at 4:26 pm #281544
    dansindo
    Member
    • Topics: 24
    • Replies: 38
    • ☆☆

    Sir last question, when the question states “in its present state” it means that material M should use the same amount of kg in the new product as it is used in product HN?

    November 11, 2015 at 7:51 am #281645
    John Moffat
    Keymaster
    • Topics: 57
    • Replies: 54671
    • ☆☆☆☆☆

    I subtracted 3.75 because although they will have to pay for the other material, they will save from not having to modify material M.

    No – present state simply means it will not need modifying.

    November 11, 2015 at 8:15 am #281650
    dansindo
    Member
    • Topics: 24
    • Replies: 38
    • ☆☆

    why did u divide 16.25 by 5? Its not clear to me.

    November 11, 2015 at 8:52 am #281666
    John Moffat
    Keymaster
    • Topics: 57
    • Replies: 54671
    • ☆☆☆☆☆

    Because (as I wrote before) for every 5kg that they use it will cost them an extra 16.25.

    The question asks for the cost per kg and so if 5 kg is 16.25, then one kg is 16.25 / 5

    November 11, 2015 at 4:28 pm #281749
    dansindo
    Member
    • Topics: 24
    • Replies: 38
    • ☆☆

    ok thanks 🙂

    November 12, 2015 at 5:39 am #281846
    John Moffat
    Keymaster
    • Topics: 57
    • Replies: 54671
    • ☆☆☆☆☆

    You are welcome 🙂

  • Author
    Posts
Viewing 11 posts - 1 through 11 (of 11 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Log In

Primary Sidebar

Donate
If you have benefited from our materials, please donate

ACCA News:

ACCA My Exam Performance for non-variant

Applied Skills exams is available NOW

ACCA Options:  “Read the Mind of the Marker” articles

Subscribe to ACCA’s Student Accountant Direct

ACCA CBE 2025 Exams

How was your exam, and what was the exam result?

BT CBE exam was.. | MA CBE exam was..
FA CBE exam was.. | LW CBE exam was..

Donate

If you have benefited from OpenTuition please donate.

PQ Magazine

Latest Comments

  • huunghia18499 on Foreign currency- Functional currency – ACCA (SBR) lectures
  • DuDE on Inventory Control (part 1) The EOQ Formula – ACCA Management Accounting (MA)
  • Nabiha on FA Chapter 2 Questions The Statement of Financial Position and Statement of Profit or Loss
  • John Moffat on The Statement of Financial Position – ACCA Financial Accounting (FA) lectures
  • Bainamura on The Statement of Financial Position – ACCA Financial Accounting (FA) lectures

Copyright © 2025 · Support · Contact · Advertising · OpenLicense · About · Sitemap · Comments · Log in