This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: projected net income. In the following paragraphs, we
explain how the numbers in the table were calculated.
Monroe’s annual sales are $400 million. Under its current credit policy, 50 percent of those customers who pay do so on Day 10 and take the discount, 40 percent
pay on Day 30, and 10 percent pay late, on Day 40. Thus, Monroe’s days sales outstanding is (0.5)(10)
21 days, and discounts total
The cost of carrying receivables is equal to the average receivables balance times
the variable cost percentage times the cost of money used to carry receivables. The
firm’s variable cost ratio is 70 percent, and its pre-tax cost of capital invested in
receivables is 20 percent. Thus, its annual cost of carrying receivables is $3 million:
(DSO) ° per ¢ ° cost ¢ ° of ¢
(21)($400,000,000/365)(0.70)(0.20) Table 27-4 Cost of carrying receivables
$3,221,918 $3 million. Monroe Manufacturing Company: Analysis of Changing Credit Policy
(Millions of Dollars)
(1) Gross sales
Net sales $400 Effect of
$130 Projected 2005
$530 2 4 6 $398 $126 $524 Production costs, including overhead 280 91 371 Profit before credit costs and taxes $118 $ 35 $153 Cost of carrying receivables 3 2 5 Credit analysis and collection expenses 5 3 2 10 22 32 $100 $ 14 $114 50 7 57 7 $ 57 Credit-related costs: Bad debt losses
Profit before taxes
State-plus-federal taxes (50%)
Net income $ 50 $ Note: The above statements include only those cash flows incremental to the credit policy decision. 27-10 Chapter 27 Providing and Obtaining Credit Only variable costs enter this calculation because this is the only cost element in
receivables that must be financed. We are seeking the cost of carrying receivables,
and variable costs represent the firm’s investment in the cost of goods sold.
Even though Monroe spends $5 million annually to analyze accounts and to collect bad debts, 2.5 percent of sales will never be collected. Bad debt losses therefore
amount to (0.025)($400,000,000) $10,000,000.
Monroe’s new credit policy would be 2/10, net 40 versus the old policy of 1/10,
net 30, so it would call for a larger discount and a longer payment period, as well as
a relaxed collection effort and lower credit standards. The company believes that
these changes will lead to a $130 million increase in sales, to $530 million per year.
Under the new terms, management believes that 60 percent of the customers who pay
will take the 2 percent discount, so discounts will increase to (0.02)($530,000,000)
$6 million. Half of the nondiscount customers will pay on
Day 40, and the remainder on Day 50. The new DSO is thus estimated to be 24 days:
(0.6)(10) (0.2)(40) (0.2)(50) 24 days. Also, the cost of carrying receivables will increase to $5 million:
(24)($530,000,000/365)(0.70)(0.20) $4,878,904 $5 million.4 The company plans to reduce its annual credit analysis and collection expenditures
to $2 million. The reduced credit standards and the relaxed collection effort are
expected to raise bad debt losses to about 6 percent of sales, or to (0.06)
($530,000,000) $31,800,000 $32,000,000, which is an increase of $22 million
from the previous level.
The combined effect of all the changes in credit policy is a projected $7 million
annual increase in net income. There would, of course, be corresponding changes on
the projected balance sheet—the higher sales would necessitate somewhat larger
cash balances, inventories, and, depending on the capacity situation, perhaps more
fixed assets. Accounts receivable would, of course, also increase. Because these asset
increases would have to be financed, certain liabilities and/or equity would have to
The $7 million expected increase in net income is, of course, an estimate, and the
actual effects of the change could be quite different. In the first place, there is uncertainty—perhaps quite a lot—about the projected $130 million increase in sales.
Indeed, if the firm’s competitors matched its changes, sales might not rise at all. Similar uncertainties must be attached to the number of customers who would take discounts, to production costs at higher or lower sales levels, to the costs of carrying
additional receivables, and to bad debt losses. In the final analysis, the decision will
be based on judgment, especially concerning the risks involved, but the type of
quantitative analysis set forth above is essential to the process. 4Since the credit policy change will result in a longer DSO, the firm will have to wait longer to receive its profit on the
goods it sells. Therefore, the firm will incur an opportunity cost due to not having the cash from these profits available
for investment. The dollar amount of this opportunity cost is equal to the old sales per day times the change in DSO
times the contribution margin (1 Variable cost ratio) times the firm’s cost of carrying receivables, or
Opportunity cost (Old sales/365)( DSO)(1
View Full Document