The case explains about the Asif Rahman, who is sole proprietor and trading the windows. Following is the calculations of the firm:
Annual Purchase Budget |
|
Windows |
|
(Amt in $) |
|
Productions Required (2400*12) |
28800 |
ADD: Closing (2400*2) |
4800 |
Less: Opening (Given) |
1200 |
Units to be purchased |
32400 |
Purchase price (unit * $90) |
$ 29,16,000 |
(Arnaboldi, Lapsley & Steccolini, 2015)
It explains that the total purchase price of the company would be $ 31,32,000 in next year.
Annual Operating budget |
||
Windows |
||
(Amt in $) |
(Amt in $) |
|
Selling Expenses |
||
Advertising |
$ 46,080 |
|
Wages shop |
$ 1,44,000 |
|
Sales commission |
$ 4,60,800 |
|
Vehicle running expenses |
$ 30,000 |
|
Delivery truck expenses |
$ 60,000 |
|
Shop rent |
$ 43,200 |
|
$ 7,84,080 |
||
Distribution expenses |
||
Packaging and freight |
$ 3,45,600 |
|
Warehouse rental |
$ 60,000 |
|
$ 4,05,600 |
||
Administration expenses |
||
Power |
$ 9,600 |
|
Office salaries |
$ 2,40,000 |
|
Office rental |
$ 1,20,000 |
|
$ 3,69,600 |
||
Total Operating expenses |
$ 15,59,280 |
It explains that the total operating expenses of the company would be $ 15,59,280 in next year.
Income statement of the company is as follows:
Income Statement |
|
Revenue |
2018 |
Sales revenue |
46,08,000 |
Closing stock |
4,32,000 |
Total Revenues |
50,40,000 |
Expenses |
|
Direct material |
29,16,000 |
Add: Opening stock |
1,08,000 |
Selling Expenses |
|
Advertising |
46,080 |
Wages shop |
1,44,000 |
Sales commission |
4,60,800 |
Vehicle running expenses |
30,000 |
Delivery truck expenses |
60,000 |
Shop rent |
43,200 |
Distribution expenses |
|
Packaging and freight |
3,45,600 |
Warehouse rental |
60,000 |
Administration expenses |
|
Power |
9,600 |
Office salaries |
2,40,000 |
Office rental |
1,20,000 |
Total Expenses |
45,83,280 |
Net Income Before Taxes |
4,56,720 |
Income tax expense |
1,41,637.6 |
Income from Continuing Operations |
3,15,082 |
It explains that the net profit of the company is $ 4,56,720 in which $ 1,41,637-6 has been paid by the company as tax expenses (Gooneratne & Hoque, 2016).
Revenue |
2018 |
Sales revenue |
46,08,000 |
Closing stock |
4,32,000 |
Total Revenues |
50,40,000 |
Expenses |
|
Direct material |
29,16,000 |
Add: Opening stock |
1,08,000 |
Selling Expenses |
|
Advertising |
46,080 |
Wages shop |
1,44,000 |
Sales commission |
4,60,800 |
Vehicle running expenses |
30,000 |
Delivery truck expenses |
60,000 |
Shop rent |
43,200 |
Distribution expenses |
|
Packaging and freight |
3,45,600 |
Warehouse rental |
60,000 |
Administration expenses |
|
Power |
9,600 |
Office salaries |
2,40,000 |
Office rental |
1,20,000 |
Total Expenses |
45,83,280 |
Net Income Before Taxes |
4,56,720 |
Income tax expense |
1,27,882 |
Income from Continuing Operations |
3,28,838 |
It explains that the tax amount of the company would be lesser. In case of LLC, the total tax of the company is $ 1,27.882.
As given in the case, Asif Rahman is the sole proprietor. Name of the firm of Asif Rahaman is Aluminium windows trading. The above calculations about the firm expresses that net profit of the company would be positive in near future. Though, the case explains that the company is in growth phase. the calculations and the analysis further explains that the Aluminium windows must be form into the limited liability company as if the firm would be form into limited liability company than the following benefits would be enjoyed by the company:
Financial benefits:
Non financial benefits:
It explains that if the sole proprietor firm would be form as a limited liability company than it would offer more benefits to the company.
Company should make the component. As the given case briefs that if the company buys the product from outside than the total cost of the product would be $ 40 and in the case of make, it would be $ 30 only. And company has spare capacity as well. It depicts that if the company would make the components than the cost of the company would be lesser and company could utilize its resource (Weygandt, Kimmel & Kieso, 2015).
Company should buy the component. As the given case briefs that if the company buys the product from outside than the total cost of the product would be $ 40 and in the case of make, it would be $ 55 ($ 30 variable cost + $ 25 opportunity cost) only. And company don’t have any spare capacity as well. It depicts that if the company would make the components than the cost of the company would be higher and thus, it is recommended to the company to buy the components (Otley, 2015).
This quarter |
This quarter |
This quarter |
Year to date |
Year to date |
Year to date |
|||
Budget ($) |
Actual ($) |
Variance |
Favourable/ Adverse |
Budget ($) |
Actual ($) |
Variances ($) |
Favourable/ Adverse |
|
Expenses |
||||||||
Cost of sale |
28750 |
31938 |
-3188 |
U |
54688 |
58125 |
-3437 |
U |
Electricity |
1875 |
2000 |
-125 |
U |
3750 |
3666 |
84 |
F |
General expenses |
5563 |
5979 |
-416 |
U |
10625 |
11038 |
-413 |
U |
Consultancy fee |
3125 |
3125 |
0 |
F |
6250 |
6250 |
0 |
F |
Advertising |
5563 |
5131 |
432 |
F |
10125 |
9619 |
506 |
F |
Wages |
15938 |
17400 |
-1462 |
U |
31250 |
33419 |
-2169 |
U |
Total expenses |
60814 |
65573 |
-4759 |
U |
116688 |
122117 |
-5429 |
U |
This quarter |
This quarter |
This quarter |
Year to date |
Year to date |
Year to date |
|||
Budget ($) |
Actual ($) |
Variance |
Favourable/ Adverse |
Budget ($) |
Actual ($) |
Variance ($) |
Favourable/ Adverse |
|
Expenses |
||||||||
Cost of sale |
35424 |
31938 |
3486.11 |
F |
67383 |
58125 |
9258.4286 |
F |
Electricity |
2310 |
2000 |
310.268 |
F |
4621 |
3666 |
954.53571 |
F |
General expenses |
6854 |
5979 |
875.411 |
F |
13092 |
11038 |
2053.5179 |
F |
Consultancy fee |
3850 |
3125 |
725.446 |
F |
7701 |
6250 |
1450.8929 |
F |
Advertising |
6854 |
5131 |
1723.41 |
F |
12475 |
9619 |
2856.4464 |
F |
Wages |
19638 |
17400 |
2237.89 |
F |
38504 |
33419 |
5085.4643 |
F |
Total expenses |
74932 |
65573 |
9358.54 |
F |
143776 |
122117 |
21659.286 |
F |
(Gesimba, Alvar & Mante, 2014)
If a variance is favourable then it simply means that the variance of the company is in the favour of the organization and explains that the cost of the company is even lesser than the expected cost. Such as in above calculation, budgeted cost of goods sold of the company is 35,424 whereas the actual cost of the company is 31,938 which explains about a favourable variances as well as it explains that the cost of the company is lesser than the expected cost (Mohamed, Kerosi & Tirimba, 2016).
It is highly recommended to David Trading limited to prepare a flexible budget as a flexible budget enables the administration to evaluate the deviation of expected output from actual output. On the basis of flexible budget, management could compare the actual cost of the company with the actual volume along with the budgeted volume and the budgeted cost. Flexible budget would also make it easier for the company to compare the actual and expected cost for an actual activity of the company. Thus, it is recommended to David Trading limited to prepare a flexible budget.
Accounts receivable cash schedule |
||||||
For the year 2017 |
||||||
|
Jan |
Feb |
March |
April |
May |
June |
Total sales |
96000 |
102000 |
108000 |
$ 1,26,000 |
$ 1,32,000 |
$ 1,32,000 |
Cash received 70% |
$ 75,600 |
$ 88,200 |
$ 92,400 |
|||
Cash received 15% |
$ 15,300 |
$ 16,200 |
$ 18,900 |
|||
Cash received 10% |
$ 9,600 |
$ 10,200 |
$ 10,800 |
|||
Total cash received |
|
|
|
$ 1,00,500 |
$ 1,14,600 |
$ 1,22,100 |
|
April |
May |
June |
Total purchase |
$ 27,300 |
$ 28,600 |
$ 1,32,000 |
Cash paid 90% |
$ 21,060 |
$ 24,570 |
$ 25,740 |
Total cash received |
$ 21,060 |
$ 24,570 |
$ 25,740 |
(Hassan, 2015)
Cash budget |
|||
For the year 2017 |
|||
|
April |
May |
June |
Begining cash balance |
$ -10,000 |
-47860 |
-87730 |
Add: sales |
$ 1,00,500 |
$ 1,14,600 |
$ 1,22,100 |
Add: Loan |
$ 1,50,000 |
||
Total cash available for use |
$ 2,40,500 |
$ 66,740 |
$ 34,370 |
Less: cash disbursements |
|||
Purchasse |
$ 21,060 |
$ 24,570 |
$ 25,740 |
Wages |
$ 49,500 |
$ 51,500 |
$ 51,500 |
Other expenses |
$ 17,800 |
$ 18,400 |
$ 18,100 |
Dividend payment |
$ 10,000 |
||
Purchase of equipment |
$ 1,50,000 |
||
Loan |
$ 50,000 |
$ 50,000 |
$ 50,000 |
Total disbursements |
$ 2,88,360 |
$ 1,54,470 |
$ 1,45,340 |
Cash surplus |
$ -47,860 |
$ -87,730 |
$ -1,10,970 |
budgetd ending cash balance |
$ -47,860 |
$ -87,730 |
$ -1,10,970 |
(Hama, Romle & Ezzat, 2015)
According to the calculations of cash budget and the equipment purchase, it is recommended to the company to pay the loan into more EMIs rather than 3 EMIs as it has impacted the cash flow of the company at a huge level. Though, it has also been found that the June cash position of the company is quite better than the March cash position when the bank balance of the comapny was on overdraft. It explains that the loan EMIs amount should be lesser and EMI must be paid by the company in 6 months.
Annual Net cash flow of Project X |
||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year 0 |
Year 1 |
Year 2 |
Year 3 |
Year 4 |
Year 5 |
Machinery cost |
$ 1,20,000 |
|||||
Installment cost |
$ 15,000 |
|||||
Varibale cost |
$ 5,000 |
$ 6,000 |
$ 7,000 |
$ 8,000 |
$ 9,000 |
|
Fixed cost |
$ 5,000 |
$ 5,000 |
$ 5,000 |
$ 5,000 |
$ 5,000 |
|
Total cash outflow |
$ 1,20,000 |
$ 25,000 |
$ 11,000 |
$ 12,000 |
$ 13,000 |
$ 14,000 |
Total cash inflow |
$ – |
$ 50,000 |
$ 60,000 |
$ 70,000 |
$ 80,000 |
$ 90,000 |
Profit |
$ -1,20,000 |
$ 25,000 |
$ 49,000 |
$ 58,000 |
$ 67,000 |
$ 76,000 |
(Mukherjee, Al Rahahleh & Lane, 2016)
Calculation of Net present value |
|||||
Year |
Cash outflow |
Cash inflow |
Net cash flow |
PV Factor |
Present value |
0 |
$ -1,20,000 |
$ -1,20,000 |
1.000 |
$ -1,20,000 |
|
1 |
$ -25,000 |
$ 50,000 |
$ 25,000 |
0.909 |
$ 22,727 |
2 |
$ -11,000 |
$ 60,000 |
$ 49,000 |
0.826 |
$ 40,496 |
3 |
$ -12,000 |
$ 70,000 |
$ 58,000 |
0.751 |
$ 43,576 |
4 |
$ -13,000 |
$ 80,000 |
$ 67,000 |
0.683 |
$ 45,762 |
5 |
$ -14,000 |
$ 90,000 |
$ 76,000 |
0.621 |
$ 47,190 |
Net present value = cash inflow – cash outflow |
$ 79,751 |
Calcculation of payback period |
||||
Year |
Cash outflow |
Cash inflow |
Net cash flow |
CF |
$ – |
$-1,20,000 |
$ -1,20,000 |
$ -1,20,000 |
|
$ 1 |
$ -25,000 |
$ 50,000 |
$ 25,000 |
$ -95,000 |
$ 2 |
$ -11,000 |
$ 60,000 |
$ 49,000 |
$ -46,000 |
$ 3 |
$ -12,000 |
$ 70,000 |
$ 58,000 |
$ 12,000 |
$ 4 |
$ -13,000 |
$ 80,000 |
$ 67,000 |
$ 79,000 |
$ 5 |
$ -14,000 |
$ 90,000 |
$ 76,000 |
$ 1,55,000 |
Payback period |
2.79 |
Calcculation of payback period |
||||||
Year |
Cash outflow |
Cash inflow |
Net cash flow |
PV Factor |
Present Value |
CF |
0 |
$ -1,20,000 |
$ -1,20,000 |
1.000 |
$ -1,20,000 |
$ -1,20,000 |
|
1 |
$ -25,000 |
$ 50,000 |
$ 25,000 |
0.909 |
$ 22,727 |
$ -97,273 |
2 |
$ -11,000 |
$ 60,000 |
$ 49,000 |
0.826 |
$ 40,496 |
$ -56,777 |
3 |
$ -12,000 |
$ 70,000 |
$ 58,000 |
0.751 |
$ 43,576 |
$ -13,201 |
4 |
$ -13,000 |
$ 80,000 |
$ 67,000 |
0.683 |
$ 45,762 |
$ 32,561 |
5 |
$ -14,000 |
$ 90,000 |
$ 76,000 |
0.621 |
$ 47,190 |
$ 79,751 |
Payback period |
3.29 |
(Andor, Mohanty & Toth, 2015)
Annual Net cash flow of Project Y |
||||
|
|
Year 1 |
Year 2 |
Year 3 |
Machinery cost |
$ 1,20,000 |
|||
Installment cost |
$ 10,000 |
|||
Varibale cost |
$ 5,000 |
$ 8,000 |
$ 10,000 |
|
Fixed cost |
$ 5,000 |
$ 5,000 |
$ 5,000 |
|
Total cash outflow |
$ 1,20,000 |
$ 20,000 |
$ 13,000 |
$ 15,000 |
Total cash inflow |
$ – |
$ 50,000 |
$ 80,000 |
$ 1,00,000 |
Profit |
$ -1,20,000 |
$ 30,000 |
$ 67,000 |
$ 85,000 |
(Rossi, 2015)
Calculation of Net present value |
|||||
Year |
Cash outflow |
Cash inflow |
Net cash flow |
PV Factor |
Present value |
0 |
$ -1,20,000 |
$ -1,20,000 |
1.000 |
$ -1,20,000 |
|
1 |
$ -20,000 |
$ 50,000 |
$ 30,000 |
0.909 |
$ 27,273 |
2 |
$ -13,000 |
$ 80,000 |
$ 67,000 |
0.826 |
$ 55,372 |
3 |
$ -15,000 |
$1,00,000 |
$ 85,000 |
0.751 |
$ 63,862 |
Net present value = cash inflow – cash outflow |
$ 26,506 |
Calcculation of payback period |
||||
Year |
Cash outflow |
Cash inflow |
Net cash flow |
CF |
$ – |
$-1,20,000 |
$ -1,20,000 |
$ -1,20,000 |
|
$ 1 |
$ -20,000 |
$ 50,000 |
$ 30,000 |
$ -90,000 |
$ 2 |
$ -13,000 |
$ 80,000 |
$ 67,000 |
$ -23,000 |
$ 3 |
$ -15,000 |
$ 1,00,000 |
$ 85,000 |
$ 62,000 |
Payback period |
2.27 |
Calcculation of payback period |
||||||
Year |
Cash outflow |
Cash inflow |
Net cash flow |
PV Factor |
Present Value |
CF |
0 |
$ -1,20,000 |
$ – |
$ -1,20,000 |
1.000 |
$ -1,20,000 |
$ -1,20,000 |
1 |
$ -20,000 |
$ 50,000 |
$ 30,000 |
0.909 |
$ 27,273 |
$ -92,727 |
2 |
$ -13,000 |
$ 80,000 |
$ 67,000 |
0.826 |
$ 55,372 |
$ -37,355 |
3 |
$ -15,000 |
$ 1,00,000 |
$ 85,000 |
0.751 |
$ 63,862 |
$ 26,506 |
Payback period |
2.58 |
(Meyer & Kiymaz, 2015)
According to the above evaluation, it has been found that the Umang trading limited should accept the Project X as this project would offer higher return to the company in comparison with project Y. Net present value of project X is way higher than the project Y. Though, it has also been found that the discounted payback period and payback period of project X is lower than project Y but at the same time, the total life of project X is higher than project Y.
Thus, it is concluded and recommended to the Umang trading limited to invest into project X to manage and enhance the return.
References:
Andor, G., Mohanty, S. K., & Toth, T. (2015). Capital budgeting practices: A survey of Central and Eastern European firms. Emerging Markets Review, 23, 148-172.
Arnaboldi, M., Lapsley, I., & Steccolini, I. (2015). Performance management in the public sector: The ultimate challenge. Financial Accountability & Management, 31(1), 1-22.
Dunk, A. S. (2011). Product innovation, budgetary control, and the financial performance of firms. The British Accounting Review, 43(2), 102-111.
Gesimba, P. O., Alvar, M. R., & Mante, R. (2014). Organization Development Interventions on Procurement Practice and Budgetary Control at Nakuru Municipal Council in Kenya, Africa. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 5(4).
Gooneratne, T. N., & Hoque, Z. (2016). Institutions, agency and the institutionalization of budgetary control in a hybrid state-owned entity. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 36, 58-70.
Hama, B., Romle, A. R., & Ezzat, N. S. (2015). Toward a unifying framework for budgetary control and accountability in the public sector. International Journal of Administration and Governance.
Hassan, I. M. (2015). Budgetary control system for University of Karbala Iraq based on adaptive budgetary control framework (Doctoral dissertation, Universiti Utara Malaysia).
Meyer, K. S., & Kiymaz, H. (2015). Sustainability Considerations in Capital Budgeting Decisions: A Survey of Financial Executives. Accounting and Finance Research, 4(2), 1.
Mohamed, I. A., Kerosi, E., & Tirimba, O. I. (2016). Analysis of the Effectiveness of Budgetary Control Techniques on Organizational Performance at DaraSalaam Bank Headquarters in Hargeisa Somaliland.
Mukherjee, T., Al Rahahleh, N., & Lane, W. (2016). The capital budgeting process of healthcare organizations: a review of surveys. Journal of Healthcare Management, 61(1), 58-76.
Otley, D. (2015). in Management Control. Critical Perspectives in Management Control, 27.
Rossi, M. (2015). The use of capital budgeting techniques: an outlook from Italy. International Journal of Management Practice, 8(1), 43-56.
Weygandt, J. J., Kimmel, P. D., & Kieso, D. E. (2015). Managerial accounting. Wiley..
Essay Writing Service Features
Our Experience
No matter how complex your assignment is, we can find the right professional for your specific task. Contact Essay is an essay writing company that hires only the smartest minds to help you with your projects. Our expertise allows us to provide students with high-quality academic writing, editing & proofreading services.Free Features
Free revision policy
$10Free bibliography & reference
$8Free title page
$8Free formatting
$8How Our Essay Writing Service Works
First, you will need to complete an order form. It's not difficult but, in case there is anything you find not to be clear, you may always call us so that we can guide you through it. On the order form, you will need to include some basic information concerning your order: subject, topic, number of pages, etc. We also encourage our clients to upload any relevant information or sources that will help.
Complete the order formOnce we have all the information and instructions that we need, we select the most suitable writer for your assignment. While everything seems to be clear, the writer, who has complete knowledge of the subject, may need clarification from you. It is at that point that you would receive a call or email from us.
Writer’s assignmentAs soon as the writer has finished, it will be delivered both to the website and to your email address so that you will not miss it. If your deadline is close at hand, we will place a call to you to make sure that you receive the paper on time.
Completing the order and download