Upload
vanimangalur
View
516
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
GAC case included
Citation preview
General Appliance Corporation
Group members Roll nos.
Swapna Rao 09Salman Khatri 22Vani Mangalur 28
Frenzina Rodrigues
38Sohini Surani 52Aniruddha Tulaskar
57
Monday, March 7, 2011
Transfer Pricing
Definition: The term “transfer price” is the
internal price charged by a selling department, division, or subsidiary of a company for a raw material, component, or finished good or service which is supplied to a buying department, division , or subsidiary of the same company.
Monday, March 7, 2011
Production
Manufacturing
Marketing
Monday, March 7, 2011
Objectives of Transfer Pricing
To provide each business unit relevant information to determine trade-off between company costs & revenues.
To induce goal congruent decisions that will improve business unit profits & company profits
To measure economic performance of individual business unit.
The system must be simple to understand & easy to administer.
Monday, March 7, 2011
• The fundamental principle is that the transfer price should be similar to the price that would be charged if the product was sold to outside customers or purchased from outside vendors.
• Sourcing decision: To produce in-house or outsource
• Transfer Price decision: If produced in-
2 vital questions to be asked
Monday, March 7, 2011
Market based price
• Definition:• The ideal transfer price is based on a
well- established, normal market price for the identical product being transferred—
i.e., a market price reflecting the same conditions (Quantity, Delivery Time & Quality) as the product to which the transfer price applies.
Monday, March 7, 2011
Cost based price
• Definition:• If competitive prices are unavailable
transfer prices may be set on basis of cost + profit although such prices are complex to calculate & results are less satisfactory than market based cost.
• The usual basis is standard cost (budgeted cost), in order to avoid production inefficiencies from being passed to the buying profit center.
How to arrive at cost?
Monday, March 7, 2011
How to arrive at Profit markup?
Percentage of cost
No account taken of capital required
Percentage of investment
Account taken of capital required
Monday, March 7, 2011
Cost based transfer pricing involves
Two Profit
Monday, March 7, 2011
Two step pricing
First step • For each unit sold, a charge is made = Standard (budgeted) Variable cost of production
Second step• Periodic (monthly)charge is made = Fixed Cost associated with facilities reserved for buying unitOne or both of these steps should
include a Profit Margin
Monday, March 7, 2011
• Firstly, the product is transferred to marketing unit at standard variable cost
• After the product is sold the biz unit share the contribution earned . i.e. ,
Selling Price (-) Variable Manufacturing &
Marketing costs
____________________________________ = Contribution
Monday, March 7, 2011
3 ways of Pricing Corporate Services
Biz unit should pay Standard Variable cost of
services
Biz unit should pay Std Variable Cost + Std Fixed Cost
i.e. Full Cost of services
Biz unit should pay Standard Full cost + Profit Margin
for services
Monday, March 7, 2011
Negotiation• Biz units negotiate transfer prices with each other.• Top Mgmt. doesn’t get involved in transfer pricing decisions
Arbitration• 2 parties involved in a dispute submit a written case to a Third person known as Arbitrator for resolution• Mainly performed by Single Executive or a
Conflict Resolution• 4 ways to resolve conflicts namely Forcing, Smoothing, Bargaining & Problem Solving.
Monday, March 7, 2011
Board of Directors
President
Finance EngineeringManufacturing IndustrialRelations staff
Purchasingstaff
Marketing staff
Group vice presidentManufacturing divisions
Group vice presidentProduct divisions
Chrome Product
GearAnd
Stamping division
ElectricMotor
ElectricStove
division
Laundry Equipment
division
MiscellaneousApplianceRefrigeration
division
Organizational Chart Of
GAC
Monday, March 7, 2011
• The product division designed, engineered, assembled , and sold various home appliances.
• They assembled the appliances from parts purchased either from the manufacturing divisions or from outside vendors.
• The manufacturing divisions made approximately 75 percent of their sales to the product divisions.
Monday, March 7, 2011
• Transfer prices were arrived at by negotiation between the divisions.
• These prices generally were based on the actual prices paid to outside suppliers for the same or comparable parts.
• If the divisions could not agree on a price, they could submit the dispute to the finance staff for arbitration.
Monday, March 7, 2011
Problems in the case
Monday, March 7, 2011
Board of Directors
President
Finance EngineeringManufacturing IndustrialRelations staff
Purchasingstaff
Marketing staff
Group vice presidentManufacturing divisions
Group vice presidentProduct divisions
Chrome Product
GearAnd
Stamping division
ElectricMotor
ElectricStove
division
Laundry Equipment
division
MiscellaneousApplianceRefrigeration
division
Issue no. 1
Monday, March 7, 2011
• Chrome Products Div (CPD) sold to Electric Stove Div(ESD) – chrome plated unit fitted on top of stove: it had to be resistant to corrosion, stain from spilled food.
• Initially outsourced, since 1 Jan 1986, manf by CPD.
• Rise in customer complaints in quality--mid 1986
• Manf VP was asked to improve quality of product.
• Solution: Copper plating and buffing
Monday, March 7, 2011
Present price $10Cost of added operation 0.80 centsProfit mark up 0.10 centsNew price $ 10.90
Chrome Products Div Electric Stove Div Finance Staff Review• Added processes to manf. cycle at cost of 80 cents
•Process resulted in improved quality
•The cost of 90 cents was justified since if procured from outside vendor, it would cost the same.
• ESD was not responsible for so called improvement in quality that it neither requested nor approved
•Marketable Features could have been added instead of quality improvement.
•New Product quality level raised to outside vendor’s product quality, hence it
•Engr dept stated proposed cost of 90 cents was reasonable.
•Quality control dept stated new parts were of superior quality as compared to outside vendor.
Situation
Monday, March 7, 2011
Board of Directors
President
Finance EngineeringManufacturing IndustrialRelations staff
Purchasingstaff
Marketing staff
Group vice presidentManufacturing divisions
Group vice presidentProduct divisions
Chrome Product
GearAnd
Stamping division
ElectricMotor
ElectricStove
division
Laundry Equipment
division
MiscellaneousApplianceRefrigeration
division
Issue no. 2
Monday, March 7, 2011
Issue 2: Thermostatic Control • Electric motor Div (EMD) produced
Thermostatic Control units.• Refrigeration Div procured this unit from
outside vendor till 1985.• At request of EMD, Ref Div purchased 25%
from EMD in 1985 & subsequently increased its procurement to 100 % in 1987.
• Supply increased & Demand reduced leading to decline in price level.
• Outside vendor offered to supply the product at a reduced price of $ 2.15. However, EMD refused to reduce its price
Monday, March 7, 2011
SituationElectric Motor Div Refrigeration Div Finance Staff Review
•EMD stated the outside vendor’s price of $ 2.15 was a distress price to save his business, & not valid basis for determining an internal price.
•At $2.15, EMD would never realize profits.
•If forced to accept this price, EMD would shut down its plant & ask outside suppliers
• RD stated they did actually purchase the product for $ 2.15 from outside vendor
•Moreover outside vendor had capacity to produce its full requirement at $ 2.15/unit.
•RD should be allowed to request quotations from outside in the event of major pricing
•Purchasing staff asked to review the outside market situation. They concluded that prices reduced as a result of excess capacity.
•It was concluded that RD could purchase its requirements for next 2 yrs at $2.15/unit.
Monday, March 7, 2011
Board of Directors
President
Finance EngineeringManufacturing IndustrialRelations staff
Purchasingstaff
Marketing staff
Group vice presidentManufacturing divisions
Group vice presidentProduct divisions
Chrome Product
GearAnd
Stamping division
ElectricMotor
ElectricStove
division
Laundry Equipment
division
MiscellaneousApplianceRefrigeration
division
Issue no. 3
Monday, March 7, 2011
Issue 3: Transmission Problem• Laundry Equipment Div(LED) produced
automatic washers. It purchased its transmission from 2 sources: Gear & Transmission Div(GTD) & Thorndike Machining Corp(TMC)-outside vendor.
• Agreement between GAC & TMC, its renewal.• President of TMC proposed a reduction in
price if the agreement was extended from $12 to $10.
• GTD agreed to produce the product in-house at same price & so no question of
Monday, March 7, 2011
SituationLaundry Equipment Div
Gear & Transmission Div
Finance Staff Review• LED stated they could procure from out at $ 11.25. •GTD agreed to produce all transmissions at this price & avoid business with TMC.•Intra-company pricing policy stated buying & selling at competitive prices.
• the $10 quote by TMC was invalid as it was a desperate effort for business sustenance.•It was not a valid basis for determining an internal price.•Project was approved at $12/unit.•LED didn’t comment on proposal on time, hence they could not object later on.
• it was concluded that quote of LED of $ 11.25 was appropriate.•Quote of $12 by GTD was faulty, as they didn’t allow for design elimination, which would reduce costs/unit by 50 cents.•The purchase staff stated that transmissions should be obtained at quoted price level of $ 11.25.
Monday, March 7, 2011
SWOT
Monday, March 7, 2011
Strength
Unit/Division could procure or sell the product at competitive prices because of existence of Intra-company pricing policy.A separate committee called
Finance Staff Review for smooth & quick settlement of intra-
divisional disputes.
Monday, March 7, 2011
Weakness
Product Divisions did not have the autonomy to take sourcing
- make/buy decisions.
Miscommunication between divisions leading to transfer
pricing disputes.
Monday, March 7, 2011
Opportunity
GAC’s Manufacturing division had the opportunity to tap
outside markets.
Scope for GAC to increase production capacity to nullify
the threat from outside vendors.
Monday, March 7, 2011
Threat
Outside vendors supplied similar products at competitive
prices.
Outside vendors had large production capacity installed
thereby giving benefits of economies of scale to GAC.
Monday, March 7, 2011
Recommendati
Need to have a formal channel of
communication for smooth biz
transactions.
In depth scrutiny of projects by top
mgmt & concerned divisions before project approval.
Authority to take sourcing decisions.
Need to devise an accurate
measuring tool for checking
Increase in-house
production capacity as per
Monday, March 7, 2011
Monday, March 7, 2011