Real costs are usually semi-variable, so in order to study cost behavior using a linear function, they need to be divided into variable and fixed components.

There are three main methods of cost differentiation:

1. method of maximum and minimum points (mini-maxi);

2. least squares method;

3. graphic method.

Example. Identify the variable and constant components of RSEO in the production of product “A”.

Initial data

Month	Volume, pcs. "A"	RSEO, thousand rubles.
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
VII
VIII
IX
X
XI
XII
Total
Average for the year	20,5 (246: 12)	500,75 (6009: 12)

Mini-maxi method is as follows:

– two periods are selected: with the largest and smallest volume (V) of production (max=24; min=17);

– the difference in production volumes and costs for these volumes is determined and it is assumed that the constant part of the costs does not change, and changes in costs are caused only by changes variable costs

Dcost = 507 – 493 = 14,

D volumes = 24 – 17 = 7;

– the rate (value) of variable costs per 1 unit of volume is calculated

,

– then fixed costs can be found in two ways: through min and max points.

Fixed expenses = General – variable =

General – variables per 1 unit. ´ number of units;

Fixed costs = 507(max) – 2 ´ 24 = 459 or 493(min) – 17 ´ × 2 = 459, i.e. the calculations are the same.

Let's summarize the solution in a table.

The method will be correct if the costs for this factor are taken only in the area of ​​relevance. In particular, if the minimum volume is caused by random reasons (lack of raw materials, breakdown, etc.), then the picture will be distorted.

More accurate is "least square method". Its essence is the sum of squared deviations actual values function of the values ​​found from the regression equation should be the smallest. We apply the equation to the average annual value:

In our case, the regression equation is:

The volume deviation for the month is determined by the difference between the actual costs and their average annual level for the month:

DV = V fact. – V Wed.

Volume deviation for the year:

SDV = S(V actual – V average) = 0.

The monthly cost variance is similar:

DZ = 3 fact. - Z av..

Cost variance for the year:

To get rid of the zero denominator in Eq. per year, take the square of deviations in production volumes, then

3 2"
.

We present the calculations for January in the table.

A similar calculation should be made for all months. Let's summarize the data in a table.

Month	Volume, pcs.	Volume deviation	Costs, thousand rubles	Cost deviation, thousand rubles.	Square deviations by volume	Estimated value
Designation	V	D.V.	Z	DZ	DV 2	DV´ DЗ
I		-0,5		-0,75	+0,25	0,375
II		1,5		+11,25	+2,25	16,875
III		0,5		+5,25	+0,25	2,625
IV		-0,5		-10,75	+0,25	5,375
V		-1,5		-8,75	+2,25	13,125
VI		-1,5		-5,75	+2,25	8,625
VII		-2,5		-3,75	+6,25	9,375
VIII		-3,5		-7,75	+12,25	27,125
IX		+0,5		+4,25	+0,25	2,125
X		+3,5		+6,25	+12,25	21,875
XI		+2,5		+4,25	+6,25	10,625
XII		+1,5		+6,25	+2,25	9,375
Total					47,0	127,5
Average for the year	20,5		500,75

We described individuals who rated high and low public good, who pay the same tax T per unit of public good in different tax jurisdictions. Now let's look at how this tax is formed. A public good is available at a price P, which represents the marginal cost of supplying a public good. To obtain personal tax T, the price is divided by the number of taxpayers. If there are n taxpayers in the jurisdiction, then
uOU "."SI
t= R/p. (2.35)
reAs we noted in section. 2.1, pure public goods are natural monopolies because they provide utility to an additional number of people without increasing costs. After all, a pure public good is a public good that can be used by all people, and the utility of a given good for each person does not depend on the number of people using it.
Due to the fact that this public good has the features natural monopoly, to effectively allocate costs, it is necessary that all people benefiting from a given benefit live in the same taxing jurisdiction. The ideal solution would be the Lindahl solution, namely: all people live in one jurisdiction where they pay a share of the costs of a public good according to the marginal utility they receive from using that good and according to the amount of production of the public good that each approves of (the agreed upon Lindahl quantity). However, for Lindahl's solution it must be possible to differentiate people according to the utility they receive from the public good in order to distribute the costs among them according to their needs. Such information tends to be asymmetrical: individuals themselves know what utility they receive from a public good, while the government does not know who belongs to what type. In the absence of information about individual utility, it is reasonable to establish a uniform tax for everyone. In this case, unlike the Lindahl consensus, there will be disagreement among people about the quantity of a public good produced if people with different valuations of the public good live in the same jurisdiction, as shown in Fig. 2.12.
Suppose that out of n people living in one jurisdiction, nL value the public good for themselves low at marginal utility MBL, and nn value the public good for themselves highly at marginal utility MBL. No one, including the state, knows about this division. If they formed their own jurisdiction, the unit tax that finances the public good would be:
¦g - n / .БНУКН ИГ7Ч и и U /-. its
L/L" ....^.^D2-36)
If people who value the public good n„ highly for themselves form their own jurisdiction, then the individual tax (per unit tax) will be as follows:
Tn= R/mon. Fzodmed* (2.37)
Formulas (2.36) and (2.37) are incompatible with formula (2.35), according to which all n people share equally the costs of the public good.) ? t^
When is it necessary to form a separate tax jurisdiction?
Suppose that the decision on the quantity (or quality) of a public good is made by majority vote. If all n people live in the same jurisdiction and the majority highly values ​​the public good (i.e., if nH>nL), then (^public good (Figure 2.12) People who value the public good poorly will have to decide whether to stay in that jurisdiction or form their own.In their own jurisdiction, they will be able to choose the amount of the public good that they need.
It is not to the advantage of those who value the public good highly that those who value it low should form their own jurisdiction. If the latter leave, then the cost of the public good for the former increases: instead of the tax given by formula (2.35), they will now have to pay more high tax, given by formula (2.37). They cannot compensate people who value the public good low to force them to stay and share the costs of the public good. Within a jurisdiction itself, it is impossible to distinguish people who value the public good highly from people who value it low. Therefore, the former would pretend that they too value the public good low in order to receive such compensation. The only action that proves that a person truly places a low value on the public good is when he moves to another jurisdiction.
And vice versa, if the majority are people who value the public good low, then as a result of voting a decision will be made on the production of the quantity of public good GL (Figure 2.12). Menshin-
A government that values ​​the public good must then decide whether moving to another taxing jurisdiction that produces more of the public good justifies the higher tax given by (2.37). People who value the public good low do not want the minority who value the public good highly to leave, because larger population jurisdiction, the lower the value of the public good for each of its members.
Quantity
public
benefits
The quantities Gn and Gm will be the efficient supply of the public good in two separate jurisdictions. If in the jurisdiction, I rate it low -
Let's consider the case when the number of both is the same. Then in two separate jurisdictions the tax will be equal (because the same number of people in each of them shares the costs of the public good). Fig. 2.13 T is a tax that finances a public good given by formula (2.35), when the entire population is in the same tax jurisdiction. If the population is divided into two groups, taxes in them will be given by formulas (2.36) and (2.37) and will be equal to 2 T, as shown in Fig. 2.13 (which is twice as much as in a single jurisdiction). In a particular jurisdiction, a group comes to an agreement (because everyone in the group has the same preferences) on the issue of government spending, imposing a tax 2T equal to the total marginal utility in that jurisdiction. Thus, a jurisdiction where people value the public good low chooses the amount C[l at point E, and a jurisdiction where people value the public good high chooses the amount Gm at point D.
our public good, the amount of public good GLX is produced FOR LI people, the condition is met:
"L
(2.38)
?MBL =ms.
}=і
Accordingly, if the amount of Gm is offered to a person in a particular jurisdiction, then
(2.39)
j=i
Thus, the people themselves, distributed among different tax jurisdictions according to their assessment of the public good, solve the problem of information that prevents the establishment of an effective level of spending on the public good.
The best result for the group described by formula (2.38) or (2.39) in individual jurisdictions can be obtained if they merge into one jurisdiction, but the first group chooses government spending according to its preferences, and the second shares the costs with the first. In Fig. 2.13 people who value the public good low will benefit if they can choose GL, and people who value the public good highly will share the costs with them. Then the tax will be equal to T. After subtracting the tax, the utility K/7" of a person who values ​​the public good low will be greater than the after-tax utility VEY when people who value the public good low form a separate jurisdiction. People who value the public good highly would also benefit if those who value the public good low finance a preferred amount of GH in the overall jurisdiction, then the after-tax utility of people who value the public good highly will be RZT relative to the RDY utility they have in the individual jurisdiction In each case, the group that determines government spending in the general jurisdiction will benefit from imposing its positions on another group that prefers different government spending.
If the preferences of both groups are sufficiently similar, neither group has an incentive to form a separate jurisdiction, even if the other group determines government spending.
But when preferences differ seriously, incentives arise to form a separate jurisdiction. Then, if people who value the public good are in the majority and determine the proposal in a common jurisdiction, it is in the interests of people who value the public good low to form their own jurisdiction. Similarly, people who value the public good highly, given sufficiently different preferences, will benefit in a particular jurisdiction if people who value the public good low determine the supply of the public good in the general jurisdiction. Of course, for division to occur, only one group needs to form its own jurisdiction.
If people who both highly value and low value a public good remain in the same jurisdiction, the latter help the former pay for the public good and can also enjoy the public good that the former will produce in any case. Let's return to the lighthouse example. A large lighthouse can serve people who have a low regard for the public good, even if they want a smaller lighthouse. That is, they have small boats that do not sail so far from the shore that they need the light of a large lighthouse, but a large lighthouse serves them too. Two separate jurisdictions would have to build two lighthouses side by side, one large for people who value the public good highly, the other small for people who value it poorly.
As another example, consider two groups of people who own cars and trucks. We need to build a road for both. Let the road not be an overload, but a pure public good. Truck owners benefit from having a road built that can handle heavy trucks. Owners of trucks and cars could finance the construction of two different roads, which, however, is uneconomical since cars can drive on roads intended for trucks. Car owners have no incentive to increase their costs by participating in the construction of a road suitable for trucks.
h i;
Truck owners can offer car owners to pay for a road suitable for cars, and they will pay to upgrade it for trucks. Car owners have the right to say: “You are going to build a road for trucks, so why don’t you let us use this road for free?” In these proposals, the per-unit tax would be different for both. Both groups try to shift costs onto each other. If truck owners try to shift too much of the cost to car owners, the latter will have an incentive to build their own road. If car owners try to become free riders and don't share the cost of building a road, arguing that any road suitable for trucks will also work for them, the truck owners will simply finance the construction of their road and prevent other cars from driving there.
If both motorists share the costs, their joint effective costs will lead to the construction of a better quality road than if they build separately. Figure 2.14 shows the effective supply GLi and Gm, which are respectively determined by formulas (2.38) and (2.39) in separate groups of people who value the public good highly and who value it low. In contrast, Lindahl's efficient solution leaves everyone in the same group and determines the effective quantity by consensus G", where the common marginal utilities of the entire population are equal to the price P(=MC)\ costs are divided between people who value the public good low and pay TL per unit, and people who value the public good highly and pay THAl. Namely: in our example, there is an agreement on the amount G of one road that everyone will use, and car owners pay a smaller share of the costs than truck owners. The quantity or quality of G is higher than if each group produced the good for itself in different jurisdictions.
In the road example, people can be divided into low and high valuers of the public good depending on the type of transport they own, so in in this case it is possible to achieve the Lindahl solution. However, in addition to roads, public goods can be police patrols, a museum, a diplomatic mission, defense, etc., and in these cases it is impossible to distinguish those who value the public good low from those who value it highly. People who value a public good highly will want higher social costs for it, others will want lower costs. The problem of information about the public good interferes with the sharing of costs relative to utility in a single jurisdiction, and division into different jurisdictions will occur if the sharing of costs favors only one group.
Taxes and costs
N
P = MS
With
Therefore, although dividing the population into different groups increases the cost to the taxpayer, the aggregate of the best individual choices encourages people to band together to ensure the kind of government spending that (they all) want. If the effective Lindahl solution in (7 (Fig. 2.14) is unattainable, due to the impossibility of distinguishing from each other people who value the public good high and low in their common jurisdiction, it will be more profitable for those who value it low to finance and receive the amount of Gu in a separate jurisdiction. Exactly the same way for those who value this good highly, it will be more profitable for them to finance and receive the amount of Gm in a separate jurisdiction than to remain in a (general) jurisdiction in which their preferences are not taken into account.

Indirect expenses incurred during the reporting period or tax period, reduce the profit of the same period. But direct expenses are taken into account as products, works, and services are sold, in the cost of which they are taken into account, that is, the recognition of these expenses may be delayed. The exception is the provision of services. Service providers have the right to take into account direct costs in the same manner as indirect ones. Consequently, direct expenses in tax accounting, unlike indirect ones, will form not only the cost of sales, but also tax value work in progress, as well as unsold finished products. This forces organizations to take a more careful approach to the issue of justifying the distribution of costs into direct and indirect.

2. What are direct costs?

The distribution of expenses into direct and indirect, as well as the procedure for assigning them to the cost of production, is determined by the company itself based on the characteristics of the business. At the same time, certain principles must be taken into account: for example, the Tax Code defines an approximate list of expenses that are considered direct, for example, the cost of purchasing raw materials or materials, purchasing components; wage and mandatory accrued on it insurance premiums; the amount of accrued depreciation on fixed assets. The inspectors note that Chapter 25 of the Tax Code does not contain direct rules limiting companies in classifying certain expenses as direct or indirect. Having determined the list of direct expenses, the organization should consolidate them in its accounting policies.

3. What are indirect costs?

Indirect costs are costs associated with the production and sale of products, works, and services that companies have the right to include as expenses in the period in which they are incurred. The Ministry of Finance, in a letter dated February 10, 2016 No. 03-03-06/3/6878, recalled that those costs that are not classified as direct in the accounting policy and are not non-operating are recognized as indirect. Thus, officials specified the types of such costs. Let us note that previously there was no clarity on this issue. Now clarifications from financiers allow accountants to correctly evaluate such expenses, and, accordingly, correctly take into account both direct and indirect expenses for tax purposes and the correct financial result.

4. How can organizations divide costs into direct and indirect?

It is more profitable for any company to consider as many expenses as indirect as possible. In this case, you can recognize their entire amount already in the current reporting period. However, tax authorities insist that firms do not have the right to arbitrarily classify expenses as indirect and are obliged to justify why they cannot be considered direct.

note

Are direct or indirect expenses the rent for the building in which the organization's production workshop is located? The referees answered this question Supreme Court. According to them, the costs of rent For tax purposes they are classified as direct expenses. This position was expressed in the Determination of January 12, 2015 No. 305-KG14-7150.

According to the Tax Code, each company has the right to independently establish in its accounting policy which expenses it classifies as direct and which as indirect (paragraph 5, paragraph 1, article 318 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation). At the same time, businesses have virtually no real independence in the distribution of expenses between direct and indirect. The Ministry of Finance in letters dated May 19, 2014 No. 03-03-RZ/23603, dated August 30, 2013 No. 03-03-06/1/35755 indicated the need to justify the established list of direct expenses. The regulatory authorities emphasize that the list of direct expenses, although determined by organizations independently, cannot be arbitrary. Necessary economic justification. This approach is also supported by the courts in the Resolutions of the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated November 2, 2010 No. 8617/10, the Arbitration Court of the West Siberian District dated May 23, 2016 in case No. A27-10958/2015, the Determination of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated May 13, 2010 No. VAS- 5306/10 in case No. A71-8082/2009 and others.

5. What should be considered when approving the list of direct expenses?

This is facilitated by a well-designed accounting policy. For development tax list direct expenses can be used accounting rules cost formation. The Ministry of Finance and the Federal Tax Service recommend including in direct expenses all costs that are included in the cost of products (works, services) in accounting. It should be taken into account that, in comparison with the recommended list of direct expenses from the Tax Code, the accounting cost consists of a much larger number of costs. This means that in this case the company will take into account fewer expenses over the period of their occurrence. At the same time, the positive thing is that there will be no differences with accounting according to PBU 18/02 in this part.

6. What is the economic feasibility of expenses?

The Ministry of Finance in letters dated May 26, 2015 No. 03-03-06/1/30165, dated January 28, 2015 No. 03-03-06/2/2986, dated January 30, 2015 No. 03-03-06/1/3586 explained that the validity of expenses for tax purposes should be assessed taking into account the circumstances indicating the taxpayer’s intentions to obtain an economic effect as a result of a business or other economic activity. A similar position is stated in the Definitions Constitutional Court RF dated June 4, 2007 No. 320-O-P, dated June 4, 2007 No. 366-O-P, dated December 16, 2008 No. 1072-O-O.

7. What will be the consequences if there is no allocation of expenses in the accounting policy?

The absence in the accounting policy of justification for the distribution of expenses into direct and indirect may lead to tax authorities defining the list of expenses differently, recalculating the company’s income tax base, and charging additional taxes, penalties, and possibly a fine.

8. How to recognize expenses for companies providing services?

IN general case Companies take into account direct costs as they sell products, works, and services. There is an exception for companies engaged in the provision of services. Providers of services can take into account direct expenses in the same way as indirect ones, by the period of their occurrence without reference to the date of provision of services, provided that this is enshrined in the accounting policy. Such companies have the right to attribute the amount of direct expenses incurred in the reporting (tax) period to in full to reduce income from production and sales of a given reporting (tax) period without distribution to the balances of work in progress. Despite this, companies providing services must still divide all expenses incurred into direct and indirect, since the Tax Code deals specifically with the special procedure for recognizing direct expenses when providing services, and not with the idea that all expenses of such organizations can be considered indirect. There are no exceptions to this rule of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation. At the same time, service providers may not use the simplified procedure for recognizing direct expenses.

note

The Ministry of Finance does not consider it an error if production organization will state in the accounting policy that all costs associated with the production of goods are direct (letter dated January 11, 2008 No. 03-05-05-01/3).

9. Can companies performing work allocate direct costs in the same way as organizations providing services?

For companies performing the work, this opportunity is not provided. Only organizations that provide services have the right to apply the simplified procedure for recognizing direct expenses.

10. Can an organization consider all costs to be indirect?

Organizations engaged in the production of products, performance of work or provision of services have the right to expand the list of expenses that they classify as direct, but do not have the right to consider all expenses indirect. Such clarifications are given in letters dated January 26, 2006 No. 03-03-04/1/60, dated January 20, 2006 No. 03-03-04/1/53, dated January 16, 2006 No. 03-03-04/4 /5 and dated December 28, 2005 No. 03-03-04/1/464. That is, in the company’s accounting policy it is possible to establish a list of direct expenses different from that proposed by Article 318 of the Tax Code. In particular, they can consider as direct those expenses that, according to Article 318 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, are indirect. Moreover, the Ministry of Finance does not consider it an error if a production organization states in its accounting policy that all costs associated with the production of goods are direct (letter dated January 11, 2008 No. 03-05-05-01/3).

11. What type of expenses are the costs of subcontracting services?

This issue is controversial. The costs of paying for work performed by subcontractors are not included in the approximate list of direct costs specified in Article 318 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation. In this regard, companies have the right to classify such expenses as indirect (paragraphs 3 and 4 of paragraph 1 of Article 318 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation). At the same time, regulatory authorities believe that the costs of subcontracting services are related to the production process and classify them as direct. This is explained in letters of the Federal Tax Service of Russia dated December 28, 2010 No. ШС-37-3/18723@, Federal Tax Service of Russia for Moscow dated September 3, 2012 No. 16-15/082396@, dated January 26, 2011 No. 16-15 /006871 and dated January 24, 2011 No. 16-03/005790@. Some courts take a different position and allow the costs of paying for the services of subcontractors to be taken into account as part of indirect costs(Resolutions of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Volga Region dated January 21, 2014 No. A65-6968/2013, Moscow District dated September 24, 2013 No. A40-99174/12-99-375 and dated October 26, 2012 No. A40-135476/11- 99-580).

The profitability of any economic entity depends on the correct reflection and accounting of costs. Their optimization, control, distribution affect the cost of goods (services) and reduce the risks of sanctions tax authorities. At the initial stage of activity, each company plans and forms a list of costs necessary to implement production processes. An important aspect reflected in the accounting policies are the methods of distribution of general production and

Cost classification

The pricing policy of an enterprise takes into account the market situation regarding a certain type of goods, services or work, while the cost is regulated due to the amount of invested profit or the redistribution of business expenses. Production costs are a constant value that is the sum of actual cost indicators. The selling price (of work, services, goods) includes the cost, business expenses and the amount of profit.

Each organization creates provisions in its accounting policies that regulate the accounting of expenses, methods of their distribution and write-off. Accounting regulations (tax code, PBU) recommends a list and classification of costs included in the cost price. The consumption rate of each item is established internal documents enterprises. Costs are systematized according to various criteria: by economic content, by time of occurrence, by composition, by method of inclusion in the cost, etc. To form a calculation, all costs are divided into indirect and direct. The principle of inclusion in the cost depends on the number of types of products manufactured by the company or services provided. Methods for distributing direct costs (wages, raw materials, depreciation of capital equipment) and indirect (OPR and OHR) are determined in accordance with regulatory documents and internal regulations of the company. It is necessary to dwell in more detail on general and general production expenses, which are included in the cost by the distribution method.

ODA: composition, definition

With a branched production structure aimed at producing several units of products (services, works), the enterprise incurs additional costs that are not directly related to the main type of activity. At the same time, accounting for expenses of this type must be kept and included in the cost price. The structure of the ODA is as follows:

Depreciation, repair, operation of equipment, machinery, intangible assets industrial purposes;

Contributions to funds (FSS, Pension Fund) and wages of personnel servicing the production process;

Utility costs (electricity, heat, water, gas);

Other expenses related directly to the production process and its management (write-off of used inventory, MBP, travel expenses, space rental, services third party organizations, ensuring safe working conditions, maintaining auxiliary units: laboratories, services, departments, leasing payments). Production costs are costs associated with the process of managing the main, service and auxiliary departments; they are included in the cost price as general production costs.

Accounting

Methods for distributing general production and general business expenses are based on the total value of these indicators accumulated during the reporting period. To summarize information on ODA, the chart of accounts provides for a cumulative register No. 25. Its characteristics: active, collectively distributive, has no balance at the beginning of the month and the end (unless otherwise provided accounting policy), analytical accounting is carried out by divisions (shops, departments) or types of products. During a certain period, information on actual expenses incurred is accumulated in the debit of account 25. Typical correspondence includes the following operations.

• Dt 25 Kt 02, 05 - the accrued amount of depreciation of fixed assets and intangible assets is allocated to OPR.
• Dt 25 Kt 21, 10, 41 - goods of own production, materials, inventory are written off as production expenses.
• Dt 25 Kt 70, 69 - salary accrued to the personnel of the operational development department, deductions were made to extra-budgetary funds.
• Dt 25 Kt 76, 84, 60 - invoices issued by counterparties for services rendered, work performed are included in general production expenses, the amount of shortfalls identified based on the results of the inventory is written off.
• The debit turnover of account 25 is equal to the amount actual expenses, which at the end of each reporting period are written off to calculation accounts (23, 29, 20). In this case, the following is compiled accounting entry: Dt 29, 23, 20 Kt 25 - accumulated expenses are written off for auxiliary, main or servicing production.

Distribution

The amount of overhead costs can significantly increase the cost of manufactured products, work performed, and services provided. At large industrial enterprises, pilot projects are planned and the concept of “consumption rate”, deviations are introduced this indicator are carefully studied by the analytical department. In organizations engaged in the creation of one type of product, methods for distributing general production and general business expenses are not developed; the sum of all costs is fully included in the cost price. The presence of several production processes implies the need to include all types of costs in the calculation of each of them. The distribution of general production costs can occur in several ways:

1. Proportional to the selected basic indicator, which optimally corresponds to the combination of ODA and the volume of output (volume of goods produced, wage funds, consumption of raw materials or supplies).
2. Maintaining separate accounting ODA for each type of product (costs are reflected in analytical subaccounts, opened to register No. 25).

In any case, distribution methods indirect costs must be enshrined in the accounting policies of the enterprise and not contradict regulations(PBU 10/99).

OCR, composition, definition

Administrative and economic costs are a significant factor in the cost of goods, work, products, and services. General business expenses are a total reflection of management costs, they include:

Deductions to social funds and remuneration of management personnel;

Communication and Internet services, security, postal, consulting, audit expenses;

Depreciation charges for non-production facilities;

Office, utility bills, information services;

Expenses for personnel training and compliance with industrial safety rules;

Other similar costs.

The maintenance of the management apparatus is necessary for the implementation of production processes and further marketing of products, but the high proportion of this type of expense requires constant accounting and control. For large organizations the use of the standard method of calculating operational and technical expenses is unacceptable, since many types of administrative expenses are variable in nature or, with a one-time payment, are transferred to the cost of production in stages, over a certain period.

Accounting

Account No. 26 is intended to collect information about the company. Its characteristics: active, synthetic, collecting and distributing. Closes monthly at 46.23, 29, 90, 97, depending on what methods of distribution of general production and general business expenses are adopted by the internal regulatory documents of the enterprise. Analytical accounting can be carried out in the context of divisions (departments) or types of products (work performed, services provided). Typical Operations by account:

• Dt 26 Kt 41, 21, 10 - the cost of materials, goods and semi-finished products is written off for maintenance.
• Dt 26 Kt 69, 70 - reflects the calculation of wages for administrative and economic personnel.
• Dt 26 Kt 60, 76, 71 - on general running costs included services of third-party organizations paid to suppliers or through accountable persons.
• Dt 26 Kt 02, 05 - depreciation of non-production objects, intangible assets and fixed assets was accrued.

Direct costs Money(50, 52,51) are usually not taken into account as part of OCR. An exception may be the accrual of interest on loans and borrowings, and this accrual method must be specified in the accounting policy of the enterprise.

Write-off

All general business expenses are collected in monetary terms as a debit turnover of account 26. When closing a period, they are written off to the main, servicing or auxiliary production, may be included in the cost of goods to be sold, charged to future expenses, or partially allocated to the enterprise's loss. In accounting, this process is reflected by the following entries:

• Dt 20, 29, 23 Kt 26 - OCR included in the cost of production of the main, service and auxiliary production.
• Dt 44, 90/2 Kt 26 - general business expenses written off to trading enterprises, on financial results.

Distribution

General business expenses in most cases are written off similarly to general production expenses, i.e., in proportion to the selected base. If this is of a long-term nature, then it is more appropriate to attribute them to future periods. Write-offs will occur in certain parts attributable to cost. Conditionally variable general business expenses can be attributed to or included in the price of goods produced (in trading enterprises or those providing services). The method of distribution is regulated by internal documents.

1C

Currently, accounting for general production and general economic costs is carried out in accounting databases and programs of the 1C group. Distribution methods are regulated by special settings. When calculating the cost of experimental work and industrial maintenance, it is necessary to check the boxes opposite the approved base in the “production” tab. When writing off as deferred expenses, it is necessary to establish the period and amount. To include costs in the financial result, fill in the appropriate tab. When the “period closing” function is launched, general production and general business expenses accumulated in registers 25 and 26 are automatically written off to the debit of the specified accounts. This process forms the cost of the finished product.

When analyzing mixed costs, it is necessary to use methods that allow you to separate the constant and variable parts from them. The simplest of them are considered to be the method of analyzing accounts, the graphical method, and the “highest and lowest points” method. For a more thorough study of cost behavior, statistical and economic-mathematical methods are used (least squares method (regression analysis), correlation method, etc.).

Consequently, the problem of dividing costs into constants and variables can be solved, and modern computer technology and software products are able to provide not only a quick and labor-intensive solution, but also good quality information for making management decisions.

Analysis of the relationship "costs - production volume - profit"

Analysis of the relationship "costs - volume - profit" (break-even analysis, CVP analysis) - analysis of cost behavior, which is based on the relationship between costs, revenue, production volume and profit - is a planning and control tool. These relationships form the basic model financial activities, which allows the manager to use this tool in short-term planning and evaluation of alternatives.

By analyzing the relationship “costs - volume - profit”, the point of equilibrium sales volume is determined - the financial line at which sales revenue exactly corresponds to the value of total costs.

In this case, graphical methods and analytical calculations are used.

To carry out graphical analysis in a rectangular coordinate system, a graph of the dependence of costs and revenue on the number of units of output is constructed.

At the point of critical production volume (break-even point) there is no profit and no loss. To the right of it is the profit area (zone). For each value (number of units of production), net profit is determined as the difference between the amount of marginal income and fixed costs. To the left of the critical point there is an area (zone) of losses formed as a result of the excess of the value of fixed expenses over the value of marginal income.

It should be noted the assumptions used in constructing the cost-volume-profit relationship graphs:

• 1) sales (sales) prices are unchanged, and, thus, the relationship “revenue - production / sales volume” is proportional;
• 2) prices for consumed production resources and the rates of their consumption per unit of production are unchanged, and, thus, the relationship “variable costs - production / sales volume” is proportional;
• 3) fixed costs are those in the considered range of business activity;
• 4) production volume is equal to sales volume.

So, the value of the cost-volume-profit relationship graph lies in the fact that it is a simple and visual means of presenting analytical calculations; with its help, managers can assess the enterprise’s ability to achieve or exceed break-even production volume. However, the graph also has weak sides: when constructing it, many assumptions are made, which is why the analysis results generated with its help are quite conditional.

To analyze the relationship "cost - volume - profit" the formula is used

P = SUM Zper. + Zpost. + Pr, (2.6)

where P is the implementation in in value terms(revenue);

SUM Zper. - total variable costs;

Zpost. - fixed costs;

Pr - profit.

The critical point (break-even point) can also be represented by switching to natural units of measurement. To do this, we introduce additional notation:

q - sales volume in physical terms;

qcrit. - critical sales volume in natural units;

p - unit price;

Zper. - variable costs per unit of production.

Thus, P = p x q; SUM Zper. = Zper. x q.

At the break-even point, profit is zero. That is, formula (2.6) will take the form:

R? q crit. = Z lane ? q crit. + Z post. (2.6.1)

Transforming the previous formula, we have:

q crit. = 3 post. / (p - W lane). (2.7)

Continuing analytical calculations, we can calculate:

critical level of fixed costs, for the calculation of which it is used original formula revenue at zero profit:

P = W post. + SUM Z lane, (2.8)

W constant critical = P - SUM Z per. = pq - SUM Z per. X

x q = q ? (p - W lane); (2.9)

critical selling price, for which the formula is used:

Crit.p = W post. / q + Z lane; (2.10)

The level of minimum marginal income - marginal income is financial indicator, representing the difference between revenue from sales (sales) and the amount of variable costs associated with the amount of sales (or the minimum level of profitability as the ratio of marginal income to revenue), if the amount of fixed costs and the expected amount of revenue are known:

MD in% of revenue = Zpost. / P x 100%. (2.11)

A logical continuation of the process of finding the break-even point is profit planning. To determine the volume of sales at which it is possible to obtain the required profit, the formula is used

q plan. = (W post. + Right plan.) / (r - W lane), (2.12)

where Pr plan. - the profit necessary for the enterprise.

Formula (2.11) can be used to analyze situations when business activity enterprises are difficult or impossible to measure in physical units and must resort to monetary units. Very often this occurs in service organizations that produce fairly diverse work and services. In such cases, the practice is to calculate not the break-even point, but the amount of revenue that needs to be received to cover costs. When making calculations, the assumption is made that all services provided by the organization have average level marginal income - MDsr. (in% of revenue). Based on this, the critical level of revenue is determined:

R crit. = 3 post. / MD avg. (in % of revenue) ? 100%. (2.13)

In Western enterprises there is no single classification of costs; each company has the right to develop its own range of costs depending on the information required by enterprise managers. Distinctive feature such classifications are their simplification, confusion of various grouping characteristics, substitution of one concept for another (for example, indirect, overhead and fixed costs), which can be explained by pragmatism.

Let's consider which classifications used in the West are relevant for organizing management accounting at a Russian enterprise.

As a rule, when classifying costs by element in Western management accounting systems, three aggregated elements of costs are distinguished: direct materials, direct wages and overhead costs. This classification is closest to the traditions of domestic accounting and analysis, since some analogy can be found between it and the classification of costs by item, used in Russian practice.

In relation to a specific responsibility center, costs can be controllable and uncontrollable. Controllability means the manager’s ability to influence the amount of costs (for example, the marketing department can influence the costs of an advertising campaign, the head of a production department can influence the use of direct labor in terms of labor intensity and productivity and loss of working time).

The division of costs into controllable and uncontrollable is purely individual, that is, it is possible only for a specific responsibility center of a particular enterprise. Let us also note that such a division of costs is very conditional (for example, an increase in costs for fuel and lubricants may mean that the driver either uses the car in violation of operating rules, or uses it for personal purposes, but it may also arise due to an unplanned increase in prices for fuel).

It should be noted that not all costs are equivalent for decision making, hence the division of costs into relevant (those that are significant for a particular decision) and irrelevant. The given terms are relatively new to Russian practice management accounting. Relevant costs can be called costs that vary depending on the chosen solution option. Examples of relevant costs could be:

• - variable costs per unit of production, that is, the costs that arise during the production of each additional unit of production. Used, for example, when considering several product design options, comparing the profitability of several types of products;
• - incremental costs (differential cost, incremental cost) - the difference between the costs associated with one option of action and the costs associated with another option of action. This concept is most often used when choosing between two competing investment projects, while costs common to both projects are ignored;
• - opportunity cost or opportunity cost - marginal income lost as a result of choosing one option over another.

The decision-making process taking into account relevant costs includes the following steps:

• - combining all possible costs associated with a specific solution option;
• - exclusion of past costs;
• - elimination of costs common to all options;
• - selection of the best option based on an assessment of relevant costs.

This cost classification must be known and found practical use in the activities of not only management accounting specialists, but also enterprise managers, since it allows in any situation to separate factors that influence and do not influence decision making in order to select the optimal course of action.

We examined the main classifications of costs that occur in both Russian theory both in practice and in Western practice. All of them are, to a certain extent, necessary for setting up a management accounting system; they require study and implementation in management practice at Russian enterprises.

Cost centers are the structural units of an enterprise that cause costs, including the economic processes occurring within them.

The choice of cost centers as accounting objects is caused mainly by:

• · the need to assess the past, control the present and plan future activities structural units of the enterprise;
• · the need to calculate the cost of manufactured products, since only part of the costs incurred can be attributed to products on a direct basis. The remaining costs must first be collected where they arise.

It is customary to distinguish the following principles for identifying cost centers:

• - organizational - in accordance with the internal organizational hierarchy of the enterprise (workshop, site, team, management, department, etc.);
• - business areas - in accordance with the category of products produced;
• - regional - in accordance with territorial isolation;
• - functional - in accordance with participation in the business processes of the enterprise (supply, main production, auxiliary production, sales, research and development, etc.);
• - technological - in accordance with the technological features of production.

In practice, these principles can be found in combined form.

A cost carrier is understood as a product (part of a product, group of products) of varying degrees of readiness (fully finished or only part of it has passed technological operations, redistributions, phases), which in the process of its production and sales causes costs and to which these costs can be directly attributed.

The choice of cost objects as accounting objects is explained:

• · the need for operational production management - the amount of costs caused by carriers is used for planning and control;
• · the need to calculate the cost of manufactured products.

To the principles of grouping in relation to cost objects that are common to all accounting objects, one more specific one should be added: since the allocation of cost objects as accounting objects is also associated with the need to calculate costs, the grouping of cost objects should be coordinated with the objects of calculation. The object of calculation is understood as a product in a broad sense, the cost of which should be calculated.

Cost objects can correspond to costing objects, be narrower (that is, be part of a costing object with several other objects), or wider (include several costing objects). If a cost object includes several costing objects, this inevitably leads to indirect cost allocation, the results of which are always controversial. Therefore, when grouping cost objects, you should strive to ensure that they correspond to or are included in the costing objects.

Among the main features of the classification of cost objects are:

• - economic (material) essence - products, works, services;
• - type (category) of production - main, auxiliary;
• - hierarchical relationship of products - type of products, type of products, version, grade, standard size;
• - degree of readiness - product after sequential technological operations;
• - availability of communication with the buyer - order number.

Methods for organizing cost accounting and a list of materials used for accounting primary documentation are determined by a number of factors. The most important of them include the features technological process and the type of resource used in the production process.

As an example, we will consider possible approaches to organizing accounting for the use of material and labor resources.