Hmcost3e SM Ch19

CHAPTER 19
CAPITAL INVESTMENT
DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
1. Independent projects are such that the provides the correct signal most of the time,
acceptance of one does not preclude the and managers are accustomed to working
acceptance of another. With mutually with rates of return.
exclusive projects, however, acceptance of
one precludes the acceptance of others. 10. NPV analysis is only as good as the
accuracy of the cash flows. If cash flows are
2. The timing and quantity of cash flows not accurate, then incorrect investment
determine the present value of a project. decisions can be made.
The present value is critical for assessing
whether or not a project is acceptable. 11. Gains and losses on the sale of existing
assets should be considered.
3. By ignoring the time value of money, good
projects can be rejected and bad projects 12. MACRS provides higher depreciation (a
accepted. non-cash expense) in earlier years than
straight-line does. Depreciation expense
4. The payback period is the time required to provides a cash inflow from the tax savings
recover the initial investment. It is used for it produces. As a consequence, the present
three reasons: (a) A measure of risk. value of the shielding benefit is greater for
Roughly, projects with shorter paybacks are MACRS.
less risky. (b) Obsolescence. If the risk of
obsolescence is high, firms will want to 13. Intangible and indirect benefits are
recover funds quickly. (c) Self-interest. important factors—more important in the
Managers want quick paybacks so that advanced manufacturing and P2
short-run performance measures are environments. Greater quality, more
affected positively, enhancing chances for reliability, reduced lead times, improved
bonuses and promotion. delivery, and the ability to maintain or
increase market share are examples of
5. The accounting rate of return is the average
income divided by investment. intangible benefits. Reductions in support
labor in such areas as scheduling and stores
6. The cost of capital is the cost of investment are indirect benefits.
funds and is usually viewed as the weighted
average of the costs of funds from all 14. A postaudit is a follow-up analysis of an
sources. In capital budgeting, the cost of investment decision. It compares the
capital is the rate used to discount future cash projected costs and benefits with the actual
flows. costs and benefits. It is especially valuable
for advanced technology investments since
7. Disagree. Only if the funds received each it reveals intangible and indirect benefits
period from the investment are reinvested that can be considered in similar
to earn the IRR will the IRR be the actual investments in the future.
rate of return.
15. Sensitivity analysis involves changing
8. If NPV  0, then the investment is assumptions to see how the changes affect
acceptable. If NPV < 0, then the investment the original outcome. In capital investment
should be rejected. decisions, sensitivity analysis can be used to
9. NPV signals which investment maximizes help assess the risk of a project. Uncertainty
firm value; IRR may provide misleading in forecasted cash flows can be dealt with by
signals. IRR may be popular because it altering projections to see how sensitive the
decision is to errors in estimates.
19-1
© 2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly
accessible website, in whole or in part.
CORNERSTONE EXERCISES
Cornerstone Exercise 19.1

1. Even cash flows:
Payback period = Original investment/Annual cash flow
= $360,000/$120,000
= 3.0 years
2. Uneven cash flows:

Unrecovered Investment Annual Time Needed
Year (beginning of year) Cash Flow for Payback
1................... $360,000 $112,500 1.0 year
2................... 247,500 142,500 1.0 year
3................... 105,000 60,000 1.0 year
4................... 45,000 120,000 0.375 year*
*At the beginning of the year, an additional $45,000 is needed to recover the
investment. Since a net cash flow of $120,000 is expected, only 0.375 year
($45,000/$120,000) is needed to recover the remaining $45,000, assuming a
uniform cash flow throughout the year.
The storage facility has a shorter payback period and thus seems less risky
and would have less impact on liquidity.
3. The payback for the laundry facility is 2.4 years ($360,000/150,000). The
laundry facility has the better payback and also has more cash flow over its
life and thus would have a more favorable impact on liquidity.

1. Yearly depreciation expense: ($170,000 – $0)/5 = $34,000
Year 1 net income = $68,000 – $34,000 = $34,000
Year 2 net income = $68,000 – $34,000 = $34,000
Year 3 net income = $85,000 – $34,000 = $51,000
Year 4 net income = $85,000 – $34,000 = $51,000
Year 5 net income = $102,000 – $34,000 = $68,000
2. Total net income (five years) = $238,000

Average net income = $238,000/5 = $47,600
Accounting rate of return = $47,600/$170,000 = 0.28
19-1
Cornerstone Exercise 19.2 (Concluded)
3. Average net income = $221,000/5 = $44,200. Thus, ARR =
$44,200/$170,000 = 0.26, which is less than the ARR of the
echocardiogram. The second project has a lower accounting rate
of return; thus, the metric would say to invest in the
echocardiogram. However, in reality, the second project would be
preferred even though it provides a lower ARR and less total cash
because it returns larger amounts of cash sooner than the first
project. It is possible that the time value of money may shift the
choice to the second project.
Cornerstone Exercise 19–3

1. Year Item Cash Flow
0 Equipment $(800,000)
Working capital (100,000)
Total $(900,000)
1–4 Revenues $ 750,000
Operating expenses (450,000)
Total $ 300,000
5 Revenues $ 750,000
Operating expenses (450,000)
Salvage 100,000
Recovery of working capital 100,000
Total $ 500,000
2. Year Cash Flow Discount Factor* Present Value

0.................................. $(900,000) 1.000 $(900,000)
1–4................................ 300,000 3.312 993,600
5.................................. 500,000 0.681 340,500
Net present value....................................................................... $ 434,100
*Years 1–4 from Exhibit 19B-2; Year 5 from Exhibit 19B-1.
3. Correcting for the overestimation error of $150,000 would cause the product
to be rejected.
Year Cash Flow Discount Factor** Present Value
0.................................. $(900,000) 1.000 $(900,000)
1–4................................ 150,000 3.312 496,800
5.................................. 350,000 0.681 238,350
Net present value....................................................................... $(164,850)
**Years 1–4 from Exhibit 19B-2; Year 5 from Exhibit 19B-1.
19-2
1. df = $900,000/$300,000 = 3.000. Since the life of the investment is four years,
we must find the fourth row in Exhibit 19B-2 and move across this row until
we encounter 3.000. The interest rate corresponding to 3.000 is between 12
and 14 percent, which is the IRR. Since IRR > 0.08, the investment is
acceptable.
2. To find the IRR, we must find i by trial and error such that $775,000 =
$400,000/(1 + i) + $500,000/(1 + i)2. Using i = 0.12 as the first guess, Exhibit
19B-1 yields discount factors of 0.893 and 0.797 and thus the following
present value for the two cash inflows:
P = (0.893 × $400,000) + (0.797 × $500,000)
= $755,700
Since P < $775,000, a lower interest rate is needed. Letting i = 10 percent, we
obtain:
P = (0.909 × $400,000) + (0.826 × $500,000)
= $776,600
Since $775,000 is between $755,700 and $776,600, we can say that IRR is
between 10 percent and 12 percent. Since IRR > 0.08, the investment is
acceptable.
3. df = $900,000/$250,000 = 3.600. Using Exhibit 19B-2, this discount factor now

corresponds to an IRR of about 4 percent, which is less than the cost of
capital (unacceptable investment).

1. Clearlook System: NPV Analysis
Year Cash Flow Discount Factor* Present Value
0.................................. $(900,000) 1.000 $ (900,000)
1–5................................ 275,000 3.993 1,098,075
Net present value.................................................................... $ 198,075
*From Exhibit 19B-2
19-3
Cornerstone Exercise 19.5 (Concluded)
2. Goodview System: NPV Analysis
Year Cash Flow Discount Factor* Present Value
0.................................. $(800,000) 1.000 $(800,000)
1–5................................ 245,000 3.993 978,285
Net present value.................................................................... $ 178,285
*From Exhibit 19B-2.
The Clearlook System has the higher NPV and would be chosen.
3. IRR Analysis:
Clearlook: Discount factor = Initial investment/Annual cash flow
= $900,000/$275,000
= 3.273*
Goodview: Discount factor = Initial investment/Annual cash flow
= $800,000/$245,000
= 3.265**
*From Exhibit 19B-2, df = 3.273 implies that IRR ≈ 16 percent
**From Exhibit 19B-2, df = 3.265 implies that IRR is slightly greater than
16 percent.
IRR is a relative measure of profits and when comparing two competing
projects it will not reveal the absolute dollar contributions of the projects and
thus will not necessarily lead to choosing the project that maximizes wealth.
The IRR is slightly better for the Goodview MRI System yet the Clearview MRI
System is clearly superior as it increases the value of the firm more than the
other system.

1. CF = NI + NC = $54,000 + $120,000 = $174,000
2. (1 – t) × Revenue = (1 – 0.40) × $360,000 = $216,000
(1 – t) × Cash expenses = (1 – 0.40) × $(150,000) = (90,000)
t × Depreciation = 0.40 × $120,000 = 48,000
Operating cash flow $174,000
3. Year (1 – t)Ra –(1 – t)Cb tNCc CF
1.......................................... $216,000 $(90,000) $48,000 $174,000
2.......................................... 216,000 (90,000) 48,000 174,000
3.......................................... 216,000 (90,000) 48,000 174,000
4.......................................... 216,000 (90,000) 48,000 174,000
a
R = Revenue.
b
C = Cash operating expenses.
c
NC = Noncash operating expenses.
19-4
EXERCISES
Exercise 19.7
1. Payback period = $93,750/$31,250 = 3.00 years
2. ARR = ($108,000 – $36,000)/$360,000

= 0.20
3. Payback period:
Cash Flow Unrecovered Investment
Year 1.................................... $42,000 $294,000
Year 2.................................... 58,800 235,200
Year 3.................................... 84,000 151,200
Year 4.................................... 84,000 67,200
Year 5.................................... 84,000* —
*Only $67,200 is needed to finish recovery; thus, payback is 4.8 years.
Average cash flows = $772,800/10 = $77,280 [Total cash flows = $42,000 +
$58,800 + (8 × $84,000) = $772,800]
Annual depreciation = $336,000/10 = $33,600
ARR = ($77,280 – $33,600)/$336,000 = 0.13
Exercise 19.8
1. F = $5,000(1.03)2 = $5,304.50
2. 4%: P = $80,000 × 0.790 = $63,200

6%: P = $80,000 × 0.705 = $56,400
8%: P = $80,000 × 0.636= $50,880
3. CF(df) = $500,000 (where CF = Annual cash flow; df = Discount factor)

CF(4.623) = $500,000
CF = $500,000/4.623
= $108,155
19-5
Exercise 19.9
1. NPV = P – I
= (5.335 × $800,000) – $4,000,000
= $268,000
The system should be purchased.
2. df = Investment/Annual cash flow

= $270,000/$43,470
= 6.211
IRR = 0.06
The decision is good. The outcome covers the cost of capital.
Exercise 19.10
1. Payback period = Original investment/Annual cash inflow
= $2,293,200/($2,981,160 – $2,293,200)
= $2,293,200/$687,960
= 3.33 years
2. Yearly depreciation expense: ($2,293,200 – $0)/5 = $458,640

Accounting rate of return = Average income/Investment
= ($687,960 – $458,640)/$2,293,200
= 10%
3. Year Cash Flow Discount Factor Present Value

0............................ $(2,293,200) 1.000 $(2,293,200)
1–5.......................... 687,960 3.791 2,608,056
NPV........................................................................................ $ 314,856
4. P = CF(df) = I for the IRR, thus,

df = Investment/Annual cash flow
= $2,293,200/$687,960
= 3.333
For five years and a df of 3.333, the IRR is between 14 percent and 16 percent
(approximately 15.3 percent).
19-6
Exercise 19.11
MRI equipment:
Year Cash Flow Discount Factor Present Value
0................ $(425,000) 1.000 $(425,000)
1................ 200,000 0.893 178,600
2................ 100,000 0.797 79,700
3................ 150,000 0.712 106,800
4................ 100,000 0.636 63,600
5................ 50,000 0.567 28,350
NPV............................................................................................. $ 32,050
Biopsy equipment:
0................ $(425,000) 1.000 $(425,000)
1................ 50,000 0.893 44,650
2................ 50,000 0.797 39,850
3................ 100,000 0.712 71,200
4................ 200,000 0.636 127,200
5................ 237,500 0.567 134,663
NPV............................................................................................. $ (7,437)
Exercise 19.12
1. MRI equipment:
Payback period = $200,000 1.00 year
100,000 1.00
125,000 0.83 ($125,000/$150,000)
$425,000 2.83 years
Biopsy equipment:
Payback period = $50,000 1.00 year
50,000 1.00
100,000 1.00
200,000 1.00
25,000 0.11 ($25,000/$237,500)
$425,000 4.11 years
This might be a reasonable strategy because payback is a rough measure of
risk. The assumption is that the longer it takes a project to pay for itself, the
riskier the project is. Other reasons might be that the firm could have
liquidity problems, the cash flows might be risky, or there might be a high
risk of obsolescence.
19-7
Exercise 19.12 (Concluded)
2. MRI equipment:
Average cash flow = ($200,000 + $100,000 + $150,000 + $100,000 +
$50,000)/5
= $120,000
Average depreciation = $425,000/5
= $85,000
Average income = $120,000 – $85,000
= $35,000
Accounting rate of return = $35,000/$425,000
= 0.0824
= 8.24%
Biopsy equipment:
Average cash flow = ($50,000 + $50,000 + $100,000 + $200,000 +
$237,500)/5
= $127,500
Accounting rate of return = ($127,500 – $85,000*)/$425,000
= 0.10
= 10.00%
*Average depreciation.
Exercise 19.13
1. a. Return of the original investment................................................ $600,000
b. Cost of capital ($600,000 × 0.10).................................................. 60,000
c. Profit earned on the investment ($810,000 – $660,000)............ 150,000
2. Present value of profit:

P = Future profit × Discount factor
= $150,000 × 0.909
= $136,350

0............................ $(600,000) 1.000 $(600,000)
1............................ 810,000 0.909 736,290
NPV.............................................................................................. $ 136,290
Net present value gives the present value of future profits. (The slight
difference is due to rounding in the discount factor.)
19-8
Exercise 19.14
1. P =I
= df × CF
2.914* × CF = $120,000
CF = $41,181 (rounded)
*From Exhibit 19B-2, 14 percent for four years.
2. For IRR: (Discount factors from Exhibit 19B-2)

I = df × CF
I = 2.402 × CF (1)
For NPV:
NPV = df × CF – I
= 2.577 × CF – I (2)
Substituting equation (1) into equation (2):

NPV = (2.577 × CF) – (2.402 × CF)
$1,750 = 0.175 × CF
CF = $1,750/0.175
= $10,000 in savings each year
Substituting CF = $10,000 into equation (1):

I = 2.402 × $10,000
= $24,020 original investment
3. For IRR:
I = df × CF
$60,096 = df × $12,000
df = $60,096/$12,000
= 5.008
From Exhibit 19B-2, 18 percent column, the year corresponding to df = 5.008
is 14. Thus, the lathe must last for 14 years.
19-9
4. X = Cash flow in Year 4
Investment = 3X
0............................ (3X) 1.000 $ (3X)
1............................ 15,000 0.909 13,635
2............................ 20,000 0.826 16,520
3............................ 30,000 0.751 22,530
4............................ X 0.683 0.683X
NPV.............................................................................................. $ 6,075
–3X + $13,635 + $16,520 + $22,530 + 0.683X = $6,075
–2.317X + $52,685 = $6,075
–2.317X = $(46,610)
X = $(46,610)/–2.317
X = $20,117
Cash flow in Year 4 = X = $20,117
Cost of project = 3X = $60,351
Exercise 19.15
1. Payback period = Investment/Annual cash flow
= $9,000,000/$1,500,000
= 6.00 years
The system would not be acquired.
2. NPV = P – I
= (5.650 × $1,500,000) – $9,000,000
= $(525,000)
df = $9,000,000/$1,500,000 = 6.00
IRR is between 10 percent and 12 percent (IRR = 10.6 percent).
NPV and IRR also signal rejection of the project.
19-10
3. Payback period = $9,000,000/$1,800,000 = 5.00 years
NPV:
0............................ $(9,000,000) 1.000 $ (9,000,000)
1–10......................... 1,800,000 5.650 10,170,000
10........................... 1,000,000 0.322 322,000
NPV...................................................................................... $ 1,492,000
IRR: df = $9,000,000/$1,800,000 = 5.000
IRR (without salvage value) is now between 14 percent and 16 percent
(approximately 15.13 percent).
Payback, NPV, and IRR all now signal acceptance.
The decrease in salvage value does not change the decision for any of the
three measures. NPV decreases by $161,000 (0.322 × $500,000). For this
company, including salvage value is not critical. The increased cash inflow
for the expanded market share drives the change in decision. The presence
of salvage value, however, increases the attractiveness of the investment and
reduces the uncertainty about the outcome.
Exercise 19.16
1. NPV System I:
0............................ $(120,000) 1.000 $(120,000)
1............................ — — —
2............................ 162,708 0.826 134,397
NPV...................................................................................... $ 14,397
NPV System II:
0............................ $(120,000) 1.000 $(120,000)
1–2.......................... 76,628 1.736 133,026
NPV...................................................................................... $ 13,026
System I should be chosen using NPV.
19-11
IRR System I:
I = df × CF
$120,000 = $162,708/(1 + i)2
(1 + i)2 = $162,708/$120,000
= 1.3559
1 + i = 1.1644
IRR = 0.164
IRR System II:
df = I/CF
= $120,000/$76,628
= 1.566
From Exhibit 19B-2, IRR = 18 percent.
System II should be chosen using IRR.
2. Modified comparison:
Year System I System II
0.................................................... $(120,000) $(120,000)
1.................................................... — —
2.................................................... 162,708 160,919*
*($76,628 × 1.10) + $76,628 = $160,919
Notice that the future value of System I is greater than that of System II and
thus maximizes the value of the firm. NPV signals the correct choice, where-
as IRR would have chosen System II.
Exercise 19.17
Project I:
CF = NI + Noncash expenses
= $54,000 + $45,000
= $99,000
Project II:
CF = [–(1 – t) × (Cash expenses)] + (t × Noncash expenses)
= (–0.6 × $90,000) + (0.4 × $90,000)
= $(54,000) + $36,000
= $(18,000)
19-12
Exercise 19.18
1. Year Depreciation tNC df Present Value
1......................... $3,000 $1,200 0.893 $1,072
2......................... 6,000 2,400 0.797 1,913
3......................... 6,000 2,400 0.712 1,709
4......................... 3,000 1,200 0.636 763
$5,457
2. Year Depreciation* tNC df Present Value

1......................... $5,999 $2,400 0.893 $2,143
2......................... 8,001 3,200 0.797 2,550
3......................... 2,666 1,066 0.712 759
4......................... 1,334 534 0.636 340
$5,792
* Cost Depreciation Rate
18,000 33.33%
18,000 44.45%
18,000 14.81%
18,000 7.41%
3. MACRS increases the present value of tax shielding by increasing the

amount of depreciation in the earlier years.
19-13
CPA-TYPE EXERCISES
Exercises19.19
c. NPV = ($25,000 x 4.355) + (0.564 x $20,000) - $100,000 = $20,155
Exercise 19.20
a. This is simply the definition of the internal rate of return.
Exercise 19.21
c. The weighted-average cost of capital is frequently used as the hurdle rate
within capital budgeting techniques. Investments that provide a return that
exceeds the weighted-average cost of capital should continuously add to the
value of the firm.
Exercise 19.22
c. Net present value is computed as the difference between project inflows and
outflows, discounted to present value as follows.
Inflows:
Years 1 through 5: $420,000 x 3.79 = $1,591,800
Year 6: $100,000 x .56 = $ 56,000
Present value of all inflows $1,647,800
Outflow (today, discount factor of 1.0) ($1,800,000)
Net Present Value ($ 152,200)
Exercise 19.23
c. The formula for calculating the payback period is:
Net Initial Investment / Increase in annual net after-tax cash flow
The payback method computes the years needed to recoup an investment.
The net cash inflows are generally assumed to be constant for each period
during the life of the project. It is often used for risky investments, since it
shows how quickly the initial investment will be recouped.
19-14
PROBLEMS
Problem 19.24
1. Year 0........................................................................................... $(630,000)
Year 1:
Operating costs (0.60 × $52,500)....................................... $ (31,500)
Savings (0.60 × $364,500)................................................... 218,700
Depreciation shield [0.40 × ($630,000/7) × 0.5]................ 18,000
Total................................................................................. $ 205,200
Years 2–7:
Operating costs (0.60 × $52,500)....................................... $ (31,500)
Savings (0.60 × $364,500)................................................... 218,700
Depreciation shield (0.40 × $90,000)................................. 36,000
Total................................................................................. $ 223,200
Year 8:
Operating costs (0.60 × $52,500)....................................... $ (31,500)
Savings (0.60 × $364,500)................................................... 218,700
Depreciation shield (0.40 × $45,000)................................. 18,000
Total................................................................................. $ 205,200
Years 9–10:
Operating costs (0.60 × $52,500)....................................... $ (31,500)
Savings (0.60 × $364,500)................................................... 218,700
Total................................................................................. $ 187,200
2. Payback period:
$205,200 1.00 year
223,200 1.00
201,600 0.90 ($201,600/$223,200)
$630,000 2.90 years

0............................ $(630,000) 1.000 $(630,000)
1............................ 205,200 0.862 176,882
2–7.......................... 223,200 3.176 708,883
8............................ 205,200 0.305 62,586
9............................ 187,200 0.263 49,234
10........................... 187,200 0.227 42,494
NPV....................................................................................... $ 410,079
The NPV is positive and signals the acceptance of the project.
19-15
Problem 19.24 (Concluded)
4. Most of the factors mentioned can be quantified. Furthermore, they should be
included in the analysis. All direct and indirect costs as well as costs of
intangible factors should be included; otherwise, it is possible to miss out on
a very profitable investment. The exclusion of the environmental fine is
especially puzzling—it is easily quantified, and certainly its avoidance is an
important savings. The effect on sales may also be estimated—there is
already some indication that the company is assessing this outcome.
Similarly, it should not be especially hard to get some handle on the potential
litigation costs. There should be ample cases.
Annual cash flows increase by $135,000 (fines and sales effect) [e.g., cash
inflows increase to $340,200 in Year 1 ($205,200 + $135,000) and $358,200 for
Years 2–7 ($223,200 + $135,000)].
Payback:
$340,200 1.00 year
289,800 0.81 ($289,800/$358,200)
$630,000 1.81 years
The payback is reduced by 1.09 years.
NPV is increased by the following amount:
Fines and sales effect ($135,000 × 4.833).................... $652,455
Lawsuit avoidance ($300,000 × 0.641).......................... 192,300
Total increase in NPV.................................................. $844,755
The effect of the omitted factors is greater than the included factors. While
this may not be the normal state, it emphasizes the importance of including
all related factors in the analysis. As mentioned, their exclusion may cause a
company to pass up a profitable investment opportunity.
Problem 19.25
1. Traditional equipment (18% rate):
Year Cash Flow df Present Value
0.......................................... $(1,000,000) 1.000 $(1,000,000)
1.......................................... 600,000 0.847 508,200
2.......................................... 400,000 0.718 287,200
3–10....................................... 200,000 2.928 585,600
NPV........................................................................................... $ 381,000
19-16
Problem 19.25 (Continued)
Contemporary technology:
0.......................................... $(4,000,000) 1.000 $(4,000,000)
1.......................................... 200,000 0.847 169,400
2.......................................... 400,000 0.718 287,200
3.......................................... 600,000 0.609 365,400
4–6........................................ 800,000 1.323 1,058,400
7.......................................... 1,000,000 0.314 314,000
8–10....................................... 2,000,000 0.682 1,364,000
NPV.......................................................................................... $ (441,600)
2. Traditional equipment (14% rate):

0.......................................... $(1,000,000) 1.000 $(1,000,000)
1.......................................... 600,000 0.877 526,200
2.......................................... 400,000 0.769 307,600
3–10....................................... 200,000 3.571 714,200
NPV.......................................................................................... $ 548,000
Contemporary technology:
0.......................................... $(4,000,000) 1.000 $(4,000,000)
1.......................................... 200,000 0.877 175,400
2.......................................... 400,000 0.769 307,600
3.......................................... 600,000 0.675 405,000
4–6........................................ 800,000 1.567 1,253,600
7.......................................... 1,000,000 0.400 400,000
8–10....................................... 2,000,000 0.929 1,858,000
NPV.......................................................................................... $ 399,600
3. The cost of capital is the rate that should be used—it usually reflects the
opportunity cost of the funds needed to make the investment. A higher rate
will bias against the acceptance of contemporary technology—which usually
has large initial outlays and larger returns later in the life of the project.
Notice how the use of the 14 percent rate moved the NPV of the
contemporary technology alternative from a negative to a positive value. It’s
enough of a movement that qualitative factors could now lead to the
contemporary technology alternative being selected even though the other
alternative still has a larger NPV.
19-17
4. Traditional equipment:
0.......................................... $(1,000,000) 1.000 $(1,000,000)
1.......................................... 600,000 0.877 526,200
2.......................................... 400,000 0.769 307,600
3–10....................................... 100,000 3.571 357,100
NPV.......................................................................................... $ 190,900
The decision reverses; the contemporary technology system is now
preferred. To remain competitive, managers must make good decisions, and
this exercise emphasizes how indirect benefits can affect decisions.
Intangibles such as customer satisfaction and on-time deliveries are
important and can be translated into quantitative effects.
Problem 19.26
1. Scrubbers and treatment facility (expressed in thousands):
Present
Year (1 – t)Ra –(1 – t)Cb tNCc CF df Value
0........ $(50,000) 1.000 $(50,000)
1........ $6,000 $(14,400) $4,000 (4,400) 0.909 (4,000)
2........ 6,000 (14,400) 6,400 (2,000) 0.826 (1,652)
3........ 6,000 (14,400) 3,840 (4,560) 0.751 (3,425)
4........ 6,000 (14,400) 2,304 (6,096) 0.683 (4,164)
5........ 6,000 (14,400) 2,304 (6,096) 0.621 (3,786)
d
6........ 7,200 (14,400) 1,152 (6,048) 0.564 (3,411)
NPV....................................................................................................... $(70,438)
a
0.6 × $10,000,000 = $6,000,000
b
0.6 × $24,000,000 = $14,400,000
c
Year 1: 0.4 × (0.2 × $50,000,000)
Year 2: 0.4 × (0.32 × $50,000,000)
Year 3: 0.4 × (0.192 × $50,000,000)
Years 4 and 5: 0.4 × (0.1152 × $50,000,000)
Year 6: 0.4 × (0.0576 × $50,000,000)
d
Includes salvage value (0.6 × $2,000,000)
19-18
Process redesign (expressed in thousands):
Present
Year (1 – t)Ra –(1 – t)Cb tNCc CF df Value
0........ $(100,000) 1.000 $(100,000)
1........ $18,000 $(6,000) $ 8,000 20,000 0.909 18,180
2........ 18,000 (6,000) 12,800 24,800 0.826 20,485
3........ 18,000 (6,000) 7,680 19,680 0.751 14,780
4........ 18,000 (6,000) 4,608 16,608 0.683 11,343
5........ 18,000 (6,000) 4,608 16,608 0.621 10,314
d
6........ 19,800 (6,000) 2,304 16,104 0.564 9,083
NPV....................................................................................................... $ (15,815)
a
0.6 × $30,000,000 = $18,000,000
b
0.6 × $10,000,000 = $6,000,000
c
Year 1: 0.4 × (0.2 × $100,000,000)
Year 2: 0.4 × (0.32 × $100,000,000)
Year 3: 0.4 × (0.192 × $100,000,000)
Years 4 and 5: 0.4 × (0.1152 × $100,000,000)
Year 6: 0.4 × (0.0576 × $100,000,000)
d
Includes salvage value (0.6 × $3,000,000)
The process redesign option is less costly and should be implemented.
2. The modification will add to the cost of the scrubbers and treatment facility
(present value is 0.751 × $8,000,000 = $6.008 million). Cleaning up the lake
can be viewed as a cost of the first alternative or a benefit of the second. The
present value of the cleanup cost gives an additional cost (benefit) between
$30.04 and $45.06 million to the first (second) alternative (0.751 ×
$40,000,000) and (0.751 × $60,000,000). Adding in the benefit of avoiding the
cleanup cost makes the process redesign alternative profitable (yielding a
positive NPV). Ecoefficiency basically argues that productive efficiency
increases as environmental performance increases and that it is cheaper to
prevent environmental contamination than it is to clean it up once created.
The first alternative is a “cleanup” approach, while the second is a
“prevention” approach.
19-19
Problem 19.27
1. Proposal A:
0........................... $(250,000) 1.000 $(250,000)
1........................... 150,000 0.909 136,350
2........................... 125,000 0.826 103,250
3........................... 75,000 0.751 56,325
4........................... 37,500 0.683 25,613
5........................... 25,000 0.621 15,525
6........................... 12,500 0.564 7,050
NPV...................................................................................... $ 94,113
Proposal B:
0........................... $(312,500) 1.000 $(312,500)
1........................... (37,500) 0.909 (34,088)
2........................... (25,000) 0.826 (20,650)
3........................... (12,500) 0.751 (9,388)
4........................... 212,500 0.683 145,138
5........................... 275,000 0.621 170,775
6........................... 337,500 0.564 190,350
NPV...................................................................................... $ 129,637
2. Proposal A payback period:

First year............................................. 1.00 year $150,000
Second year ($100,000/$125,000)..... 0.80 100,000
1.80 years $250,000
Proposal B payback period:

First year............................................. 1.00 year $ (37,500)
Second year........................................ 1.00 (25,000)
Third year............................................ 1.00 (12,500)
Fourth year......................................... 1.00 212,500
Fifth year ($175,000/$275,000).......... 0.64 175,000
4.64 years $312,500
3. Based on the NPV analysis, both proposals could be accepted as they have
positive NPVs. Proposal B, in fact, has the higher NPV.
19-20
4. Kent Tessman may have accepted only Proposal A because of the fact that
his performance is going to be closely monitored over the next three years.
Proposal B had negative cash flows projected for the first three years. This
would hurt his divisional profits during that time, and he may feel that this
would hurt his chances for promotion to higher management. It is also
possible that he was concerned about the effect the proposal would have on
his bonus payments.
Kent might have rejected Proposal B because of the longer payback period.
He may have felt that this increased the risk associated with the project to an
unacceptable level. It might also be possible that the firm has liquidity
problems and needs projects with quick paybacks. The latter, however, is not
likely given the fact that his division has had high performance ratings over
the past three years.
If Kent’s reasons for rejecting the proposal were based on his concerns
about his promotion and bonuses rather than legitimate economic reasons,
then his behavior is unethical. To consciously subvert the legitimate
objectives of an organization for the pursuit of personal goals is not right. It
might also be noted that perhaps the organization needs to reduce its
emphasis on short-term profit performance.
Problem 19.28
1. df = Investment/Annual cash flow
= $2,250,000/$450,000
= 5.0
The IRR is between 14 percent and 16 percent (approximately 15.13 percent).
The company should acquire the new IT system since the cost of capital is
only 12 percent.
2. Since I = P for the IRR, the minimum cash flow is:

I = df × CF
$2,250,000 = 5.650* × CF
5.650 × CF = $2,250,000
CF = $2,250,000/5.650
CF = $398,230
*From Exhibit 19B-2, discount factor at 12 percent (cost of capital) for 10
years.
The safety margin is $51,770 ($450,000 – $398,230). This seems to suggest
that there is not much room for error—as the savings are all tied to labor.
19-21
3. For a life of eight years:
df = I/CF
= $2,250,000/$450,000
= 5.0
The IRR is between 10 percent and 12 percent (approximately 11.83 percent).
The system is about at the break-even point (point of indifference).
Minimum cash flow at 12 percent for eight years:
I = df × CF
$2,250,000 = 4.968 × CF
4.968 × CF = $2,250,000
CF = $2,250,000/4.968
CF = $452,899
The less sensitive the decision is to changes in estimates, the safer the
decision. In this case, a two-year difference in project life moves the
investment into a marginal zone. Thus, the company may wish to examine
carefully its assumptions concerning project life.
Problem 19.29
Keep old MRI equipment:

Present
a b c
Year (1 – t)R – (1 – t)C tNC CF df Value
1........... — $(600,000) $320,000 $(280,000) 0.893 $ (250,040)
2........... — (600,000) 320,000 (280,000) 0.797 (223,160)
3........... — (600,000) 160,000 (440,000) 0.712 (313,280)
4........... — (600,000) — (600,000) 0.636 (381,600)
5........... $60,000 (600,000) — (540,000) 0.567 (306,180)
NPV............................................................................................................ $(1,474,260)
a
0.60 × $100,000
b
0.60 × $1,000,000
c
Years 1 and 2: 0.40 × $800,000; Year 3: 0.40 × $400,000. The class life has two
years remaining; thus, there are three years of depreciation to claim, with the
last year being only half. Let X = Annual depreciation. Then X + X + X/2 =
$2,000,000 and X = $800,000.
19-22
Buy new MRI equipment:

Present
Year (1 – t)Ra –(1 – t)Cb tNCc Otherd CF df Value
0.... — $600,000 $(4,500,000) $(3,900,000) 1.000 $(3,900,000)
1.... — $(300,000) 400,000 — 100,000 0.893 89,300
2.... — (300,000) 640,000 — 340,000 0.797 270,980
3.... — (300,000) 384,000 — 84,000 0.712 59,808
4.... — (300,000) 230,400 — (69,600) 0.636 (44,266)
5.... $427,200 (300,000) 230,400 288,000 645,600 0.567 366,055
NPV................................................................................................................ $(3,158,123)
a
0.60 × ($1,000,000 – Book value), where Book value = $5,000,000 – $4,712,000.
b
0.60 × $500,000.
c
Year 0: Tax savings from loss on sale of asset: 0.40 × $1,500,000 [(The loss on
the sale of the old computer is $1,500,000 ($2,000,000 – $500,000.)]
Years 1–5: Tax savings from MACRS depreciation: ($5,000,000 × 0.20) × 0.40;
($5,000,000 × 0.32) × 0.40; ($5,000,000 × 0.192) × 0.40; ($5,000,000 × 0.1152) ×
0.40; ($5,000,000 × 0.1152) × 0.40.
Note: The asset is disposed of at the end of the fifth year—the end of its class
life—so the asset is held for its entire class life, and the full amount of
depreciation can be claimed in Year 5.
d
Purchase cost ($5,000,000) less proceeds from the sale of the old computer
($500,000); recovery of capital from the sale of the machine at the end of Year 5
is simply the book value of $288,000 (original cost less accumulated
depreciation).
The old MRI equipment should be kept since it has a lower cost.
Problem 19.30
1. Old system (dollars in thousands):
Present
Year (1 – t)Ra –(1 – t)Cb tNCc Cash Flow df Value
0......... $ 0 1.000 $ 0
1–9....... $18,000 $(13,440) $240 4,800 4.031 19,349
10........ 18,000 (13,440) — 4,560 0.162 739
NPV....................................................................................................... $20,088
a
100,000 × $300 = $30,000,000 × 0.6 = $18,000,000
b
($80 + $90 + $20 + $34) × 100,000 = $22,400,000 × 0.6 = $13,440
c
$6,000,000/10 = $600,000 × 0.4 = $240,000
19-23
New system (dollars in thousands):
Present
Year (1 – t)R –(1 – t)Ca tNCb Otherc Cash Flow df Value
0......... $ 960 $(51,000) $(50,040) 1.000 $(50,040)
1–10...... $18,000 $(7,740) 2,160 — 12,420 4.192 52,065
NPV............................................................................................................. $ 2,025
a
Direct materials (0.75 × $80)................... $ 60
Direct labor (0.4 × $90)............................ 36
Volume-related overhead ($20 – $4)...... 16
Direct fixed overhead ($34 – $17).......... 17
Unit cost............................................... $129
Total cash expenses = $129 × 100,000 = $12,900,000
After-tax cash expenses = 0.6 × $12,900,000 = $7,740,000
b
Year 0: Tax savings on loss from the sale of the old machine = $6,000,000 –
$600,000 = $5,400,000 – $3,000,000 = $2,400,000 × 0.4 = $960,000
Years 1–10: Depreciation = 0.4 × ($54,000,000/10) = $2,160,000
c
Net outlay = $54,000,000 – $3,000,000 = $51,000,000
The old system should be chosen because it has the higher NPV.
2. Old system (dollars in thousands):

Present
Year (1 – t)R –(1 – t)C tNC CF df Value
0......... $ 0 1.000 $ 0
1–9....... $18,000 $(13,440) $240 4,800 5.328 25,574
10........ 18,000 (13,440) — 4,560 0.322 1,468
NPV....................................................................................................... $27,042
New system (dollars in thousands):

Present
Year (1 – t)R –(1 – t)C tNC Other CF df Value
0....... $ 960 $(51,000) $(50,040) 1.000 $(50,040)
1–10... $18,000 $(7,740) 2,160 — 12,420 5.650 70,173
NPV.......................................................................................................... $ 20,133
Notice how much more attractive the automated system becomes when the
cost of capital is used as the discount rate.
19-24
3. Old system with declining sales (dollars in thousands):
Present
Year (1 – t)R –(1 – t)C* tNC CF df Value
0......... $ 0 1.000 $ 0
1......... $18,000 $(13,440) $240 4,800 0.893 4,286
2......... 16,200 (12,300) 240 4,140 0.797 3,300
3......... 14,400 (11,160) 240 3,480 0.712 2,478
4......... 12,600 (10,020) 240 2,820 0.636 1,794
5......... 10,800 (8,880) 240 2,160 0.567 1,225
6......... 9,000 (7,740) 240 1,500 0.507 761
7......... 7,200 (6,600) 240 840 0.452 380
8......... 5,400 (5,460) 240 180 0.404 73
9......... 3,600 (4,320) 240 (480) 0.361 (173)
10........ 1,800 (3,180) — (1,380) 0.322 (444)
NPV......................................................................................................... $13,680
*Cash expenses = Fixed + Variable
= [$3,400,000 (Direct fixed) + $190X] × 0.6
X = Units sold
4. For the new system, salvage value would increase after-tax cash flows in
Year 10 by $2,400,000 (0.6 × $4,000,000). Using the discount factor of 0.322,
the NPV of the new system will increase from $20,133,000 to $20,905,800 (an
increase of 0.322 × $2,400,000), making the new investment more attractive.
The NPV analysis for the old system remains unchanged.
5. Requirement 2 illustrates the importance of using the correct discount rate.

The rate of 20 percent made the automated alternative look totally
unappealing. By using the correct rate, the alternative showed a large net
present value, although it was still less than the NPV of the old system. The
old system’s projections of future revenues, however, were overly optimistic.
The old system was not able to produce as fast or at the same level of quality
as the new system, factors that could reduce the competitive position of the
firm and cause sales to decline. When this effect was considered (with the
correct discount rate), the new system dominated the old. Inclusion of
salvage value simply increased this dominance.
19-25
Problem 19.31
1. Schedule of cash flows:
Year Item CF
2014 Equipment $(945,000)
Discount 18,900
Freight (11,000)
Installation (22,900)
Salvage—old (0.6 × $1,500) 900
Working capital reduction 2,500
Total $(956,600)
2015 Operating expenses* $(627,000)
Depreciation tax shield** 127,987
Total $(499,013)
Total $(456,312)
Total $(594,130)
Total $(658,546)
Salvage—new (0.6 × $12,000) 7,200
Total $(679,800)
*Unit cost:
DM........................ $10 × 0.75 $ 7.50
DL......................... 8 × 1.00 8.00
VOH...................... 6 × 0.75 4.50
Total............... $20.00
Year
2015 Variable costs: $20 × 50,000 = $1,000,000 × 0.6 = $600,000
Fixed costs: $45,000 × 0.6 = $ 27,000
$627,000
2016 Variable costs: $20 × 50,000 = $1,000,000 × 0.6 = $600,000
Fixed costs: $45,000 × 0.6 = $ 27,000
$627,000
2017 Variable costs: $20 × 52,000 = $1,040,000 × 0.6 = $624,000
Fixed costs: $45,000 × 0.6 = $ 27,000
$651,000
2018 Variable costs: $20 × 55,000 = $1,100,000 × 0.6 = $660,000
19-26
Fixed costs: $45,000 × 0.6 = $ 27,000
$687,000
2019 Variable costs: $20 × 55,000 = $1,100,000 × 0.6 = $660,000
Fixed costs: $45,000 × 0.6 = $ 27,000
$687,000
**Depreciation tax shield:

Year Value*** Rate Allowance Tax Rate Shield
2015 $960,000 0.3333 $319,968 0.40 $127,987
2016 960,000 0.4445 426,720 0.40 170,688
2017 960,000 0.1481 142,176 0.40 56,870
2018 960,000 0.0741 71,136 0.40 28,454
***$945,000 – $18,900 + $11,000 + $22,900 = $960,000
NPV:
Year CF df Present Value
2014................. $(956,600) 1.000 $ (956,600)
2015................. (499,013) 0.893 (445,619)
2016................. (456,312) 0.797 (363,681)
2017................. (594,130) 0.712 (423,021)
2018................. (658,546) 0.636 (418,835)
2019................. (679,800) 0.567 (385,447)
NPV................................................................ $(2,993,203)
2. Schedule of cash flows:

Year Item CF
2014 Salvage—old (0.6 × $1,500) = $ 900
2015 Purchase cost: $27 × (50,000 × 0.6) = (810,000)
2016 Purchase cost: $27 × (50,000 × 0.6) = (810,000)
2017 Purchase cost: $27 × (52,000 × 0.6) = (842,400)
2018 Purchase cost: $27 × (55,000 × 0.6) = (891,000)
2019 Purchase cost: $27 × (55,000 × 0.6) = (891,000)
NPV:
Year CF df Present Value
2014................. $ 900 1.000 $ 900
2015................. (810,000) 0.893 (723,330)
2016................. (810,000) 0.797 (645,570)
2017................. (842,400) 0.712 (599,789)
2018................. (891,000) 0.636 (566,676)
2019................. (891,000) 0.567 (505,197)
NPV................................................................ $(3,039,662)
19-27
3. The analysis favors internal production because it has a lower cost than
purchasing. Qualitative factors: reliability of supplier, quality of the product,
stability of purchasing price, labor relations, community relations, etc.
Problem 19.32
1. After-tax cash flows:
Manual system:
Year (1 – t)Ra –(1 – t)Cb tNCc Cash Flows
1–10........... $240,000 $(180,000) $8,000 $68,000
a
0.60 × $400,000 (sales)
b
(0.60 × $228,000) + [0.60 × ($92,000 – $20,000)]
c
0.40 × $20,000
Robotic system:
Year (1 – t)Ra –(1 – t)Cb tNCc Otherd Cash Flows
0. . . $64,000 $(480,000) $(416,000)
1. . . $240,000 $(124,320) 29,723 — 145,403
2. . . 270,000 (132,960) 50,939 — 187,979
3. . . 300,000 (141,600) 36,379 — 194,779
4. . . 360,000 (158,880) 25,979 — 227,099
5. . . 360,000 (158,880) 18,574 — 219,694
6. . . 360,000 (158,880) 18,554 — 219,674
7. . . 360,000 (158,880) 18,574 — 219,694
8. . . 360,000 (158,880) 9,277 — 210,397
9. . . 360,000 (158,880) — 201,120
10... 372,000 (158,880) — 213,120
a
Year 1: 0.60 × $400,000; Year 2: 0.60 × $450,000; Year 3: 0.60 × $500,000;
Years 4–9: 0.60 × $600,000; Year 10: 0.60 × $620,000 (includes salvage value
as a gain).
b
After-tax cash expenses:
Fixed:
Direct labor......... $20,000 × 0.60 = $12,000 (one operator)
Other.................... $72,000 × 0.60 = 43,200 (from income statement)
$55,200
19-28
Variable:
Direct materials........ (0.16 × Sales) × 0.75 × 0.60 = 0.0720 × Sales
Variable overhead.... (0.09 × Sales) × 0.6667 × 0.60 = 0.0360 × Sales
Variable selling........ (0.12 × Sales) × 0.90 × 0.60 = 0.0648 × Sales
Total...................... = 0.1728 × Sales
Total after-tax cash expenses = $55,200 + (0.1728 × Sales)
c
Year 0: Tax savings on loss: [($200,000 – $40,000) × 0.40]
Years 1–8: MACRS: 0.1429 × ($520,000 × 0.40) 0.2449 × ($520,000 × 0.40) etc.
d
Net investment:
Purchase costs........................ $520,000
Recovery of capital.................. (40,000)
$480,000
2. Manual system:
0............... $ 0 1.000 $ 0
1–10........... 68,000 5.650 384,200
NPV........................................................................ $384,200
Robotic system:
0............... $(416,000) 1.000 $(416,000)
1............... 145,403 0.893 129,845
2............... 187,979 0.797 149,819
3............... 194,779 0.712 138,683
4............... 227,099 0.636 144,435
5............... 219,694 0.567 124,567
6............... 219,674 0.507 111,375
7............... 219,694 0.452 99,302
8............... 210,397 0.404 85,000
9............... 201,120 0.361 72,604
10.............. 213,120 0.322 68,625
NPV.................................................................... $ 708,255
The company should invest in the robotic system.
19-29
3. Managers may use a higher discount rate as a way to deal with the
uncertainty in future cash flows. The higher rate “protects” the manager from
unpleasant surprises. Since a higher rate favors investments that provide

returns quickly, managers may be motivated by personal short-run
considerations (e.g., bonuses and promotion opportunities).
Using a discount rate of 12%:
0............... $(340,000) 1.000 $(340,000)
1–10........... 80,000 5.650 452,000
NPV.................................................................... $ 112,000
Using a discount rate of 20%:
0............... $(340,000) 1.000 $(340,000)
1–10........... 80,000 4.192 335,360
NPV.................................................................... $ (4,640)
If the 20 percent discount rate is used, the company would not acquire the
robotic system.
Using an excessive discount rate could seriously impair the ability of the firm
to stay competitive. An excessive discount rate may lead a firm to reject new
technology that would increase quality and productivity. As other firms invest
in the new technology, their products will be priced lower and be of higher
quality, features which would likely cause severe difficulty for the more
conservative firm.
CYBER RESEARCH CASE
19.33
Answers will vary.
The Collaborative Learning Exercise Solutions can be found on the

instructor website at http://login.cengage.com.
19-30
The following problems can be assigned within CengageNOW and are auto-
graded. See the last page of each chapter for descriptions of these new
assignments.
 Integrative Exercise—CVP, Break-Even Analysis, Theory of Constraints

(Covers chapters 16, 19, and 20)
 Blueprint Problem—Payback and the Accounting Rate of Return
 Blueprint Problem—Net Present Value and Internal Rate of Return
 Blueprint Problem—Mutually Exclusive Projects, Computing After-Tax Cash
Flows
19-31

Hmcost3e SM Ch19

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Hmcost3e SM Ch19

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Hmcost3e SM Ch19

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CHAPTER 19

Cornerstone Exercise 19.1

2. Uneven cash flows:

Cornerstone Exercise 19.2

2. Total net income (five years) = $238,000

Cornerstone Exercise 19–3

2. Year Cash Flow Discount Factor* Present Value

3. df = $900,000/$250,000 = 3.600. Using Exhibit 19B-2, this discount factor now

Cornerstone Exercise 19.5

Cornerstone Exercise 19.6

2. ARR = ($108,000 – $36,000)/$360,000

2. 4%: P = $80,000 × 0.790 = $63,200

3. CF(df) = $500,000 (where CF = Annual cash flow; df = Discount factor)

2. df = Investment/Annual cash flow

2. Yearly depreciation expense: ($2,293,200 – $0)/5 = $458,640

3. Year Cash Flow Discount Factor Present Value

4. P = CF(df) = I for the IRR, thus,

2. Present value of profit:

3. Year Cash Flow Discount Factor Present Value

2. For IRR: (Discount factors from Exhibit 19B-2)

Substituting equation (1) into equation (2):

Substituting CF = $10,000 into equation (1):

2. Year Depreciation* tNC df Present Value

3. MACRS increases the present value of tax shielding by increasing the

c. NPV = ($25,000 x 4.355) + (0.564 x $20,000) - $100,000 = $20,155

Years 1 through 5: $420,000 x 3.79 = $1,591,800

Year 6: $100,000 x .56 = $ 56,000

Present value of all inflows $1,647,800

Outflow (today, discount factor of 1.0) ($1,800,000)

Net Present Value ($ 152,200)

3. Year Cash Flow Discount Factor Present Value

2. Traditional equipment (14% rate):

2. Proposal A payback period:

Proposal B payback period:

2. Since I = P for the IRR, the minimum cash flow is:

Keep old MRI equipment:

Buy new MRI equipment:

2. Old system (dollars in thousands):

New system (dollars in thousands):

5. Requirement 2 illustrates the importance of using the correct discount rate.

**Depreciation tax shield:

2. Schedule of cash flows:

unpleasant surprises. Since a higher rate favors investments that provide

CYBER RESEARCH CASE

The Collaborative Learning Exercise Solutions can be found on the

 Integrative Exercise—CVP, Break-Even Analysis, Theory of Constraints

You might also like