| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 8.1 | TPAS Trip notes from GAO | AWARD::MAGNI | EWIS - APPIX/FMAP in MSO2 | Wed Sep 16 1992 13:35 | 119 |
| From: AYRPLN::ROSENE "MARGARET ROSENE EWIS RFRNC 223-9847 MSO2-2/A19
15-Sep-1992 2112" 15-SEP-1992 21:13:38.81
To: mts$"gao::mike o'shaughnessy",mts$"gao::brian o'kane",mts$"gao::mary
deely",mts$"gao::tom o'sullivan",mts$"gao::gilbert hayes",mts$"gao::joe
mooney",mts$"gao::mike connellan",mts$"gao::john maloney",mts$"gao::colm
ruane",golf::fahy
CC: mts$"GEO::miller donaldson",rosene
Subj: GAO Action Items 8/31-9/1
TPAS - GALWAY GAO (Hardware) Meetings
A wee bit late...but here are the notes I took. If you have additional items,
corrections, etc., let me know.
Margaret
Participants:
HARDWARE (GAL): Finance: Mike O'Shaughnessy, Brian O'Kane (Costing),
Mary Deely (Customs)
IM&T: Tom O'Sullivan, Gilbert Hayes, Joe Mooney
SOFTWARE (ILO): Mike Connellan
IRELAND FINANCE: John Maloney, Colm Ruane
TPAS: Eamonn Fahy, Margaret Rosene
Action Items:
* indicates updates/answers where available
1. Mike O'S & Mike C: Review respective I/O's to determine whether all GAO's
ship to and ship from stockrooms and sites are accounted for in TPAS
2. Brian: GAL team to define currrent process and issues relative to adding
part numbers to APPIX. (working with Bob Haines among others...)
3. Brian: work with Bob Haines Haines to outline issues relative to missing
GAL missing BOMS and BOM intergity issues relative to APPIX
4. MR: followup on outcome of Brian O'K's part and BOM work with appropriate
corporate groups, e.g. CEO for "add a part" issues....
4. Mike O'S, EF, MR, Brian: evaluate impact, disconnects and alternative
reconciliation approaches of using frozen local files for site
operations versus AMPS2 for TPAS.
5. MR and Brian: compare GAO masterparts file to APPIX to determine
disconnects. (Similar process previously requested to APPIX--
contact MaryAnne Bigwood for details) Match GAO parts to APPIX,
create file showing part not on APPIX, file with GAO parts on APPIX
with no APPIX major supplier listed. (for use in sizing inpact of
going to AMPS2 versus local file processing.
*Brian do you also want to see separate files for GAO parts which
different MLP's and/or different Standard Cost than you local files?
6. EF: work with John Mitchell regarding requirements for customs notification
timing, requirements, etc.
7. EF, Mike C, Mike O'S: evaluate GAO current pricing and discount rules to
determine how to tablize them ala TPAS style.
8. Brian, MR: Brian to give Margaret list of 20ish part numbers which DECSTD12N
parser was unable to deal with. MR to see if new parser release deals
with these or not.
*Brian: please forward these part numbers directly to Dave Crowley at
MILPND::Crowley, with a short description of the problem and ask
him if the new parser will deal with these numbers. Dave "owns" the
parser and can give you an even faster answer than me.
9. MR: System implementation issues:
Can local TPAS tables be accessed in a multiple cluster environment?
*Yes per conversation between Lois Magni (TPAS WW M&L IM&T Tech Proj
Leader) and and Tom.
Will TPAS provide common services, e.g., when error code XYZ returned
would TPAS also provide code which all sites could opt to embed in
their local applications to ensure that each handles error processing
in the same fashion.
*No common services will be provided for this release, but WWM&L is
open to working with sites to see if this might be an option for
a subsequent release of TPAS#1.
Are the TPAS tables RMS or RDB
*Pricing, Discount, Stockroom, Transfer Area are RDB
AMPS2 is RMS
10. Mike O'S: work the common Euro Strategy for MIFBOM/EMPRS/AMPS2 during
the Euro Cost Forum Meeting.
11. MR: work same with Part and Product (EPIC) Reference group this week.
12. MR: outline final Eur backup support agreement and ensure coverage is
7x24.
13. Mike O'S & Tom: develop first pass for TPAS site implementation
14. MR: Plants need to be able to reconcile their operational reference
with TPAS reference so that any discrepancies due to update disconnects
can be easily identified and accounted for in site reconciliation
processes. In the discussion example, stock intransit stock might
be calculated using a monthly updated local reference file on the
inbound (credit) side but recalculated on the outbound (debit) side
using a TPAS reference element which had been updated during the
month the while local file was "frozen" The result would be an
artifically out-of-balance account.
One way to do identify and account for the descrepancy would
be through the creation of a change history file sorted by part number
and change date. This change history would track any changes in
standard cost (this could be extended to MLP as well). Sites
would then have the data available to to pass against their part number
transaction files and reconcile any out-of-balance accounts at the part
number detail level.
Margaret to the action item to determine whether or not AMPS2 carried
a standard cost change date and an MLP change date to make it possible
to create this kind of a reference.
*It does.
end
|
| 8.2 | TPAS Trip notes from ILO | AWARD::MAGNI | EWIS - APPIX/FMAP in MSO2 | Wed Sep 16 1992 13:36 | 58 |
| From: AYRPLN::ROSENE "MARGARET ROSENE EWIS RFRNC 223-9847 MSO2-2/A19
15-Sep-1992 2126" 15-SEP-1992 21:26:49.52
To: mts$"ilo::mike gallaher",mts$"ilo::maire fitzmaurice",mts$"ilo::mike
connellan",mts$"ilo::denis kiley",mts$"geo::miller donaldson",golf::fahy
CC: rosene
Subj: TPAS ILO Meeting Action Items
Hi Folks -
By now, I'll bet your action items are well on the way to completion, so you can
just use these notes Miller was good enough to take as a check list. Let me
know if you have any additions or correction.
Cordially,
Margaret
PS Mike Connellan, would you be good enough to forward these notes to Denis?
I can't find him on ELF, so I suspect I've botched his name. Sorry, Denis.
9/1 Meeting GALWAY SOFTWARE (ILO) TPAS MEETING
Participants:
IM&T: Denis Kiley
Finance: Mike Gallaher, Maire Fitzmaurice, Mike Connellan
TPAS: Eamonn Fahy, Miller Donaldson, Margaret Rosene
Actions (per Miller Donaldson)
=======
1. Mike Connellan to give Eamonn the pricing table for ESSB. Denis to
supply the logic rules.
2. Margaret to investigate a solution to the version numbering problems
and propose a process for updating Appix in a timely fashion with the
current part number version and standard cost.
3. Margaret will facilitate an exchange of ideas (with GIA initially) on
the problem of translating Ship to/from locations to stock
room/mnemonic codes.
4. Denis to complete a high level assessment of the impact of TPAs on ESSB
systems by 11 September.
5. Margaret to investigate a process to integrate IIF and TPAS table
updates.
6. Miller to facilitate an ESSB TPAS project commit/de-commit by mid
September.
end
|
| 8.3 | TPAS Trip notes from AYO | AWARD::MAGNI | EWIS - APPIX/FMAP in MSO2 | Wed Sep 16 1992 13:37 | 82 |
| From: IAMOK::IAMOK::MRGATE::"PKOMTS::EHQMTS::GVA02A1::DONALDSON" 7-SEP-1992
05:53:05.00
To: AYRPLN::ROSENE
CC:
Subj: A:Action items from AYO 2-3 Sept.
From: NAME: Miller DONALDSON @GEO
FUNC: MIS
TEL: 821-4533 <DONALDSON AT GVA02A1 @EHQMTS
@GEO>
To: JOSEPHINE MCDOWALL @AYO,
CHRISTINE MCLAUGHLAN @AYO,
ALAN MARTIN @AYO,
margaret rosene @MSO,
eamonn fahy @nro
Here are the actions items from our meetings in Ayr on 2nd and 3rd
September in Ayr.
These notes although in summary form will be the top level place
holders for action.
* Alan has the responsibility for ensuring that the top level Ayr plan
is posted in the public area AWARD::TPAS$PUBLIC:.
* Christine to assess the client server facilities offered by APPIX and
recommend whether or not AMPS should be used.
* Margaret to review and ensure that questions posed in the notes file
are given timely responses.
* Eamonn to gather the European Customs position on TPAS; and feedback
to Corporate TAX, with a view to developing a common position on
implementation strategy
* Eamonn to talk to GIA Finance, Tax and Customs and evolve a policy on
timing and a method for standardising pricing algorithms. (ref. high
volume of TIGER new parts)
* Eamonn to feedback on progress towards common approach to the use of
Interplant transactions. (ref Far East manual processes and
Shrewsbury exception process.)
* By 15 September Barbara Wilfand is due to define a process for the
control and change of the TPAS system rules and tables.
The sites will respond with any issues within two weeks of Barbara's
report being published.
* Alan Martin to work with SCO staff to produce a statement on the
impact and use of TPAS by Ayr VLSI and SQF.
* Alan to supply Eamonn with the current pricing tables and algorithms.
* Christine to supply an updated systems impact chart.
* Alan to check availability of Ayr IM&T resources to support Ayr as
the European test site.
* Alan Martin to determine when and if TPAS can be used for positive
stock adjustments.
* Ayr to invite Galway, Finance and IM&T, to participate in the test of
TPAS.
* Josephine to review receiving process needs with Mary Lane and Tony
McFeely and attempt to standardise or simplify the process.
* Alan to investigate if Duty Manager will need to hold transfer price.
* AYO expect to be ready to pull TPAS Software by October 13.
* Alan to produce a specification of error handling for use by
applications using TPAS.
* Alan to review and update as necessary the TPAS distribution list for
Ayr.
----0----
|
| 8.4 | Other European Issues | AWARD::MAGNI | EWIS - APPIX/FMAP in MSO2 | Wed Sep 16 1992 13:45 | 22 |
|
We had a brief review of TPAS in Europe by telephone today
Three issues were raised. These are major issues!!
* VAT '93 project is grabbing resources and priority from us.
(This means we may be asked to pay for subcontract - not sized yet)
* Common reference development is a prerequisite to TPAS
implementation. APPIX must equal MIFBOM and the common scheduling of
releases must be bought into before implementing TPAS. WE
instinctively knew this anyway, it is just that the team expressed it
more explicitly Puts a lot of pressure on Margaret's reference action
items.
* We need to have the full support of the European Cost forum. Alan
Martin will sponsor a working session to investigate specific
EDC/Supply site pricing disconnects in advance of the Cost Forum
(23-24Sept.) in order to better position the TPAS input to the forum.
Regards, Miller.
|
| 8.5 | Nijmegen Trip Notes 8/31 | AYRPLN::ROSENE | | Mon Sep 21 1992 15:51 | 111 |
| From: IAMOK::IAMOK::MRGATE::"PKOMTS::EHQMTS::GVA02A1::DONALDSON" 31-AUG-1992 12:54:25.68
To: AYRPLN::ROSENE
CC:
Subj: I:Updated notes on TPAS: EDC
From: NAME: Miller DONALDSON @GEO
FUNC: MIS
TEL: 821-4533 <DONALDSON AT GVA02A1 @EHQMTS @GEO>
To: joop lodder @fgo,
ron klaasse @jgo,
eric hendriks @jgo,
eamonn fahy @nro,
margaret rosene @MSO
Agreements
==========
* Within Nijmegen only EDC will be part of TPAS phase 1.
* Far East will be part of TPAS phase 1.
* EDC will use MIFBOM as the Reference source for TPAS.
* AYO to sign off on each module of TPAS before EDC can start build
phase.
Actions
=======
* By 15 September Barbara Wilfand to define a process for control and
change of the TPAS system rules and tables.
The sites will be expected to respond with any issues within two
weeks of Barbara's report being published.
* Eamonn to ensure that ILO are part of TPAS phase 1 by 1 Sept.
* Eamonn to keep European sites informed on Far East (and all GIA
sites) plans, solutions and schedules fro TPAS.
* Joop to investigate and document impact of pricing rules, today and
under TPAS, for Japan Procurement Centre.
* Joop to supply Eamonn with an I/O by location.
* Margaret to publish a draft of the new stockroom table, with notes to
identify exceptions by 11 Sept.
* MIFBOM's role as a common reference to be discussed in a European
conference call (8 Sept).
* Margaret to make it easier to check updates to documents by mailing a
change notice, and by providing a change summary and adding change
bars.
* Margaret to define process, timing, technology for stockroom table
distribution.
* Margaret to leave a copy of the current development schedule with
Nijmegen.
* Margaret to provide a target date for specification freeze. (i.e.
after KAO and AYO tests are complete and changes incorporated.)
* Margaret to distribute the planning template and keep the
consolidated plan in the public area.
* Barbara Wilfand to define the default pricing logic and how the use
of defaults will be tracked.
* Miller to seek a TPAS II co-ordinator from Europe to participate in
the definition of the project.
* Joop to analyse how the vendor parts can be integrated into the TPAS
tables.
* Eric to estimate the effort required to have an override available if
the vendor parts cannot be integrated into TPAs tables.
* Eamonn to compare EDC pricing rules by part type and to suggest a
common standard for Europe.
* EDC to develop a plan for error handling and the subsequent use of
defaults.
* Joop to RE-check the EDC business need for defaults.
* Eamonn to inform Joop of other site processes for defaults.
* Margaret to pass the GIA rounding rules to EDC. ( 3 decimal AMPS to 2
decimals DMS).
* Margaret to work "European" parts/MLP/Standards into APPIX.
- create a souring route for MLP's.
- check out ILO parts.
- investigate the use of EMPRS precedence logic use within APPIX.
* Miller to get Robert Barr to co-ordinate APPIX update issues (Euro
parts & MLP) through Doug smith and Margaret.
* Joop to work with Murray to formulate a request to Corporate Tax for
a statement to local customs which can be used in support of TPAS.
* Margaret to let Eric know the source of the save set for the test
version of TPAS.
* Eric to post summary plan in TPAS public area.
* Margaret to define European technical support route.
|
| 8.6 | Kaufbeuren Trip Notes 8/28 | AYRPLN::ROSENE | | Mon Sep 21 1992 15:56 | 90 |
| From: IAMOK::IAMOK::MRGATE::"PKOMTS::EHQMTS::GVA02A1::DONALDSON" 28-AUG-1992 06:00:09.58
To: AYRPLN::ROSENE
CC:
Subj: I:TPAS - updated agreements/actions. KBO
From: NAME: Miller DONALDSON @GEO
FUNC: MIS
TEL: 821-4533 <DONALDSON AT GVA02A1 @EHQMTS @GEO>
To: See Below
Agreements
==========
* Changes to discount tables will not be used to apply retroactive
changes through TPAS. Note : Standard Cost can only be will only be changed at month end.
* SID implementation will resolve MLP disconnect issues between 190 and
fiscal transactions.
* TPAS operating with daily AMPS updates will also minimise the number
of disconnects by the removal of the need to re-calculate billings at
end of period. The operational system (MAXCIM) may require to stay on
monthly updates depending on the result of the discussion on Cost
accounting.
* TPAS phase 1 will not cover CBG ships to external customers.
* KBO do not have to apply TPAS to receiving.
Actions
=======
* Shrewsbury misc. flows (e.g. Hong Kong vendors to KBO)
Eamonn to highlight such exceptions in TPAS management reports to
Finance and Corporate Tax.
Eamonn to ensure/enable Shrewsbury to use the TPAS Enquiry facility
to set prices.
Juergen to size any issues and pass to Eamonn. DONE
Juergen to escalate any perceived Shrewsbury issues through John
O'Flaherty and Marian O'Leary.
* Eamonn to examine CXO to KBO flow issues and suggest any TPAS action.
* Eamonn to review all KBO flows and pricing rules to identify any
exceptions or omissions. DONE
* By 15 September Barbara Wilfand is due to define a process for the
control and change of the TPAS system rules and tables.
The sites will respond with any issues within two weeks of Barbara's
report being published.
* Miller to push for standard layered product versions to be used in
all S/W releases from World wide L&M.
* Cathy to highlight any problems with the currently requested TPAS
layered product versions.
* Margaret to consider with other sites the advantage of pushing,
rather than pulling, TPAS tables and issue a recommendation.
* Cathy to dump MAXCIM tables to facilitate the investigation of
existing discounting rules.
* Cathy to produce a list of APPIX over-ride parts.
* KBO project team Cathy to produce two project activity plans for
TPAS implementation :
with SID
without SID.
* Eamonn to discuss the impact of daily cost updates with the GAO and
AYO teams and issue a recommendation.
To Distribution List:
juergen bock @KBO,
heike burst @kbo,
sybille himmel @kbo,
rolf strobel-schmidt @kbo,
margaret rosene @MSO,
eamonn fahy @nro,
Cathy Henderson @kbo
|
| 8.7 | TAX Tables | AWARD::MAGNI | IM&T - 223-9837 | Mon Oct 12 1992 09:09 | 604 |
| From: AYRPLN::IAMOK::WILFAND "09-Oct-1992 1658" 9-OCT-1992 16:58:28.91
To: @TPASDIST.DIS
CC: WILFAND
Subj: TPAS #1 TRANSFER PRICING PROPOSAL
TPAS I was set in motion to alleviate the problems the plants were having
due to, among other things, inconsistent application of intercompany
transfer pricing rules between receiving and issuing entities, importation
of the same part from more than one source with different list prices, and
MTP's which are lower than standard cost.
In order to rectify these problems, TPAS will ensure that all plants use
the same base price for intercompany transfer pricing purposes. Attachment
B details the rules being proposed by Corporate Tax to ensure that these
goals are met. We are proposing rules which are as close as possible to
the current rules used by the majority of the plants in order to minimize
the profit shift. (Attachment C provides the rules which are currently in
effect in each plant.)
At this point in time, we are not proposing discount or uplift changes.
However, to the extent that the proposed rules to determine base price
cause unacceptable shifts in profit, Area and Corporate Tax will work with
each plant to determine discount and uplift adjustments which will offset
these shifts.
REQUEST FOR PROFITABILITY FORECAST:
We would like to request that each plant forecast the profit shift, if any,
which would result from implementation of these proposed rules. Each plant
should apply the rules to their inbound shipments as well as to outbound
shipments to the plants identified in Attachment D. For your initial
analysis, please use current intercompany discounts and uplifts.
The analysis should be performed assuming new rules are implemented the
first day of fiscal January FY93 and should be submitted to Area Tax and
myself by 23 October 1992. The Area Tax representatives are Jeremy Munday
@REO for Europe, Anne Nicolson @TRO for Kanata and Randy McClenahan @BXC
for GIA manufacturing. Attachment A outlines the data we are requesting.
Please note that the procurement centers are included in this request. The
proposed use of standard cost for procured parts rather than actual
acquisition cost will be a major change. When we review their
analysis, we will weigh the benefits of this change (reduces the expense
incurred in reconciling the price paid by the receiving plants to the price
indicated by TPAS and minimizes credability issues with customs agents)
against the benefits obtained by transferring the products at actual
acquisition cost.
PROJECT PLAN
The following steps will be taken with regard to implementing consistent
transfer pricing rules under TPAS:
ACTION ITEM RESPONSIBILITY DUE DATE
(1) Corporate Tax will propose consistent Corporate Tax DONE
pricing rules to TPAS working group
(2) Agreement on proposed rules by TPAS TPAS working grp DONE
working group
(3) Proposed rules sent to Area Tax, Area Corporate Tax DONE
Customs and Plants. (See Attachment B)
(4) Plants to report results of analysis Plants 23 October
of the shift in profit resulting
from new rules assuming they will be
implemented day one fiscal January
(27 December 1992). (See Attachment
A for format of analysis).
(5) Plants work with Area Tax to create Plants / Area 6 November
proposals which will offset Tax
unacceptable profit shifts. Initial
sizing of duty impact should
be prepared.
(6) Area Tax will submit proposals to Area Tax 6 November
Corporate Tax
(7) Corporate Tax to do quick review and Corporate Tax 13 November
communicate proposals to Area Customs
(8) Area Customs, along with Plants, Area Customs / 20 November
determine the time frame necessary for Plants
notification to Customs authorities
(if deemed appropriate)
(9) Corporate Tax, Area Tax and Plants Corp Tax / Area 20 November
reach agreement on proposals to be Tax / Plants /
brought to TPAG for approval. Area Customs
Proposed implementation date to
be agreed to by Plants, Area Tax,
Area Customs and Corporate Tax.
(10)Ensure the proposal is submitted to Area Tax / Corp December
TPAG. Tax TPAG
(11)Notify Plants, Area Tax and Customs Corporate Tax December
of TPAG approvals TPAG
(12)Make changes to TPAS tables to reflect Corporate Tax
approved transfer pricing changes
(to be implemented day one of fiscal
month)
(NOTE: To the extent that no Transfer Pricing Adjustment is necessary
as a result of TPAS, it is possible that a plant could go live
before TPAG.)
TABLE OF ATTACHMENTS
ATTACHMENT A: Data needed with regard to results of analysis
ATTACHMENT B: Proposed rules to determine the base for transfer price
ATTACHMENT C: Rules currently in effect to determine the base for transfer
price
ATTACHMENT D: List of plants
ATTACHMENT E: Transfer Price Area Table
ATTACHMENT A
DATA NEEDED WITH REGARD TO RESULTS OF ANALYSIS
(1) In order to understand the impact of the proposed rules, we are
requesting that you provide Area Tax with the following data based on
your Q3 and Q4 FY93 forecast (do not annualize - information should
represent intercompany transactions forecasted to happen during Q3 and
Q4 ONLY). Please keep in mind that TPAS I will affect your inbound
shipments as well as outbound shipments to the plants listed in
Attachment D.
Plant preparing analysis:
------------------------
Raw Material and Parts with APPIX Parts without
Parts with MAJ MLP (except those APPIX MLP
part type with part type of
(see note 1) MAJ
-------------------- -------------------------------- -------------------------
OLD TRANSFER @ OLD PROPOSED OLD PROPOSED
PRICE IF NOT APPIX TRANSFER TRANSFER TRANSFER TRANSFER
@STD STANDARD COST @STD MLP PRICE PRICE @STD PRICE PRICE
----- ------------ ----- ----- -------- -------- ----- -------- -------
Inbound shipments from
(description / tax
area code from
Attachment E)
----------------------
U.S. plants (all)/USA
Galway / GAO
Ayr / AYO
Euro Distrib Ctr/ FGO
Kaufbeuren / KBO
Kanata / KAO
Taiwan / TAO
Hong Kong / HKO
Singapore / ZGO
Mexico / MEX
Shenzen, PRC / PRC
Brazil / PCM
Korea Procur.Ctr/ DEK
India / QRE
Japan and JPC / GYT
Australia / SNL
Outbound shipments to:
----------------------
U.S. plants (all)/USA
Galway / GAO
Ayr / AYO
Euro Distrib Ctr/ FGO
Kaufbeuren / KBO
Kanata / KAO
Taiwan / TAO
Hong Kong / HKO
Singapore / ZGO
Mexico / MEX
People Rep. China / PRC
Korea Procur.Ctr/ DEK
India / QRE
Japan and JPC/ GYT
Australia / SNL
TOTAL
DIFFERENCE - PROFIT
SHIFT DUE TO PROPOSED
RULES
======
Note 1: This is comprised of the following part types : BAD, BRD, ESP, FAB, ICS, IPP, MAJ, OBS, RAW, SPC, TRF.
ATTACHMENT A
(2) Please provide us with shipments at standard cost by part type for Q1
FY93 (actuals). This will help us assess any proposed changes to the
computation of base price for a particular part type.
V.O.S.
@ STD
-----
BAD
BRD
CAB
CHP
CSP
DOC
EXP
FAB
ICS
IPP
JCD
LOG
MAJ
MCU
MEM
MOD
OBS
OPT
PKG
POW
RAW
SER
SFP
SOF
SPC
SPR
SUB
SYS
TPM
TPO
TPS
TRF
TST
WAF
ATTACHMENT B
PROPOSED TRANSFER PRICING RULES FOR TPAS I IMPLEMENTATION BSW 9 OCT 1992
---------------------------------------------------------
Although the program is able to determine the transfer price of a product based on
part class, part basic, part variant, part revision and part type, we will
populate the initial TPAS I tables so that Part Type is the only key used. Given
this, the steps below should be followed to determine the proposed transfer price
of each part:
(1) Determine the part type associated with the part number.
(2) Look at the following chart to determine the Price Type Indicator.
PROPOSED
PRICE
PART TYPE
TYPE INDICATOR DESCRIPTION OF PART TYPE
----------------- --------- -------------------------
BAD S BAD PART NUMBER
BRD S BOARD
CAB M 4 CABLE
CHP M 4 COMPLETED PROPRIETARY SEMICONDUCTORS
CSP M 3 CUSTOMER SPARE PARTS
DOC M 4 DOCUMENTATION
EXP S EXPENDABLE (FOR PURCHASED PARTS ONLY)
FAB S FABRICATED PART
ICS S INTEGRATED CURCUITS
IPP S IN-PROCESS-PART (PART NOT APPROVED - FOR PURCHASED PARTS ONLY)
JCD M 3 JUMPER CABLE
LOG M 3 LOGIC
MAJ S MAJOR PURCHASED COMPONENT (ALLOWED FOR PURCHASED PARTS ONLY)
MCU M 3 MULTI-CHIP UNITS - FEW ON APPIX
MEM M 3 MEMORY
MOD M 4 MODULE
OBS S OBSOLETE PART
OPT M 4 OPTION
PKG M 3 PACKAGING
POW M 4 POWER SUPPLY
RAW S PURCHASED PART
SAL M 3 SERVICES - FEW ON APPIX
SOF M 4 SOFTWARE
SPC S SPECIAL NO COST ITEMS
SPR M 3 CUSTOMER SPARE PART
SUB M 3 SUBASSEMBLY
SYS M 3 SYSTEM
WAF M 4 UNFINISHED PROPRIATETARY SEMICONDUCTORS
SFP M 3 PERSONAL COMPUTER SOFTWARE PARTS
TRF S TRANSFORMER
TST S TESTER
SER M 3 SERVICE - FEW ON APPIX
SFP M 4 PERSONAL COMPUTER SOFTWARE PARTS
STP M 4 SOFTWARE, 3RD PARTY
TPM M 3 3RD PARTY MODULES
TPO M 3 3RD PARTY OPTIONS
TPS M 3 3RD PARTY SYSTEMS
TIGER PRODUCTS M 2.2 WE WILL SET UP A PART TYPE FOR TIGER PRODUCTS
(NOTE: TIGER PRODUCTS TRANSFER AT MLP - 40% TO ALL LOCATIONS)
(3) Calculate base price using the following rules:
If price type Then the base
indicator is: price value is:
------------- ---------------
S standard cost
M 4 APPIX MLP. If APPIX MLP is not available,
use a derived MLP of Standard Cost * 4
M 3 APPIX MLP. If APPIX MLP is not available,
use a derived MLP of Standard Cost * 3
M 2.2 APPIX MLP. If APPIX MLP is not available,
use a derived MLP of Standard Cost * 2.2
(4) Look at Discount / Uplift Table to determine the uplift on standard cost
or discount from MLP to be used in computing the transfer price. NOTE: current
discounts and uplift should be used for the initial sizing of the effect
of the proposed rules.
- If price type indicator was S, transfer price equals Standard Cost
multiplied by [1 plus the Standard Cost Uplift Percent].
- If price type indicator was M, transfer price equals base price
(APPIX MLP or derived MLP) multiplied by [1 minus Discount Percent].
ATTACHMENT C
RULES CURRENTLY IN EFFECT TO DETERMINE BASE PRICE
KAO
PART KAO SYS ZGO
TYPE AYO GAO KBO EDC ESG (US)GIA (US)MOD/BACK(SEE #) HKO (SEE +) TAO
----------------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -------
BAD M * M % M M ^ @ D 4 M ^
BRD M 4 M % M 4 M M 4 @ S S
CAB M 4 M 4 M 4 M M 4 @ D 4 M 4
CHP D 4 D 4 M 4 M M4 @ D 4 M ^
CSP M * S S M 4 @ D 4 M ^
DOC M * M % M 4 M M 4 @ D 4 M ^
EXP S S S S S @ S S S
FAB S S S S S @ S S
ICS S S S S S @ S S
IPP S S S S S @ S S
JCD M * M % M M ^ @ D 4 M ^ M 4
LOG M * M % M 4 M M ^ @ D 4 M ^ M 4
MAJ S S S S S @ S S
MCU M 3.25 D3.25 M 4 S M 3.25 @ D 4 M ^ M 4
MEM M * M % M M ^ @ D 4 M ^ M 4
MOD M 4 M 4 M 4 M M 4 @ D 4 M 4 M 4
OBS M * S S S S @ D 4 M ^ M 4
OPT M 4 M 4 M 4 M M 4 @ D 4 M 4 M = M 4 M ~
PKG M * M % M M ^ @ D 4 M ^ S M 4
POW M 4 M 4 M 4 M M 4 @ D 4 M 4 M 4 M 4
RAW S S S S S @ S S S
SAL M * M % M M ^ @ D 4 M ^ M 4
SOF M * M % M 4 M M 7.5 @ D 4 M ^ M 4
SPC M * M % S S S @ D 4 M ^ M 4
SPR M * M % S M ^ @ D 4 M ^ M 4
SUB M * M % M 4 M M ^ @ D 4 M ^ M = M 4
SYS M * M % M M ^ @ D 4 M ^ M 4
WAF M 4 M % M 4 M M 4 @ D 4 M ^ M 4
SFP M * M % M M 2.2 @ D 2.2 D 2.2 M 4
TRF S S S S S @ S S
TST M * S S M ^ @ D 4 M ^ M 4
MPP M * M % S M ^ @ D 4 M ^ M 4
NAT M * M ^ @ D 4 M ^ M 4
H199(0) TO H300(0)D 3.5 D 3.5 D 3.5
TIGER PRODUCTS M 2.2 M 2.2
NOTES:
BASE PRICE EQUALS:
S : STANDARD COST
D X : USE DERIVED MLP OF STANDARD COST TIME A FACTOR OF X
M X : APPIX MLP IF AVAILABLE. IF NOT AVAILABLE, USE DERIVED MLP OF STANDARD COST TIMES A FACTOR OF X
* IF STANDARD COS 100 , USE STANDARD X 3
IF STANDARD COS OR = 100, BUT < 1000, USE STANDARD X 2.25
IF STANDARD COS OR = 1000, USE STANDARD X 2
% IF STANDARD COS 100 , USE STANDARD X 3
IF STANDARD COS OR = 100, BUT < 1000, USE STANDARD X 2.5
IF STANDARD COS OR = 1000, USE STANDARD X 2
^ IF STANDARD COS 200 , USE STANDARD X 3
IF STANDARD COS OR = 200, BUT < 1000, USE STANDARD X 2.5
IF STANDARD COS OR = 1000, USE STANDARD X 2
# THE FOLLOWING P NUMBERS HAVE APPIX MLP'S MANUALLY OVERRIDDEN:
-RF72 -EA $6000 (NOTE: EQUAL TO CURRENT APPIX MLP)
-RF72E-AA $6000 (NOTE: EQUAL TO CURRENT APPIX MLP)
-RF72E-SA $6000 (NOTE: EQUAL TO CURRENT APPIX MLP)
-RF72E-AF $6000 (NOTE: EQUAL TO CURRENT APPIX MLP)
-RF72E-SF $6000 (NOTE: EQUAL TO CURRENT APPIX MLP)
-RF31E-AA $4000 (NOTE: EQUAL TO CURRENT APPIX MLP)
-450ZN-B9 MLP = STD X 3
-450ZM-B9 MLP = STD X 3
-470ZM-B9 MLP = STD X 3
-680QJ-B9 MLP = STD X 3
-690QJ-B9 MLP = STD X 3
DV-31DS -AA MLP = STD X 2
DV-31DT -AA MLP = STD X 2
DV-31ES -AA MLP = STD X 2
DV-31ET -AA MLP = STD X 2
-RX400-B9 MLP = STD X 2
@ GIA HQ SHIPS TOE GIA PLANTS BASED ON THE MAKE/BUY INDICATOR ON APPIX.
TO : MAKE BUY
---------- ------- -------
HKO M 4 S
TAO M 4 S
ZGO M 4 S
GYT M 7 S
MEX M 4 S
AUS M 4 S
IND - H/W M 4 S
IND - S/W M 7.5 S
KAO KAO PROVIDES THE PRICE FILE
+ IF AN APPIX MLS AVAILABLE, IT IS USED FOR SHIPMENTS TO EUROPE
IF THE PART IS THE US PRICE BOOK, APPIX MLP IS USED FOR SHIPMENTS TO THE US.
= FOR SHIPMENTS EUROPE, DERIVED MLP = 4 TIMES STANDARD
FOR SHIPMENTS US, DERIVED MLP IS BASED ON MAJOR PRODUCT MLP OF PROD FAMILY DIVIDED BY STD
(NOTE: POW TO GOES AT DERIVED MLP OF 4 X STANDARD, EVEN IF APPIX MLP IS AVAILABLE)
~ DERIVED MLP ISSED ON MAJOR PRODUCT MLP OF PRODUCT FAMILY DIVIDED BY STANDARD COST
ATTACHMENT D
IMPLEMENTATION SITES:
REGION SITE CODE AND LOCATION
Europe sites: GAO Galway
AYO Ayr
KBO Kaufbeuren
ESSC Europe Sevice and Supply Center (European Distribution Center only in Phase I)
ILO Galway
GIA Sites : ZGO Singapore
TAO Taiwan
HKO Hong Kong
SZN Shenzen, PRC
DEK Seoul, Korea
KAO Kanata
MEX Mexico
PCM Brazil
GYT Japan
SNA Australia
PAS Parts and Supply
JPC Japan Procurement Cneter
U.S. Sites: AKO Gia
ESG/FMC European Support Group
WMO Westminster
HLO Hudson
ATTACHMENT E
TAX AREA CODE TABLE
09-Oct-1992 10:00 Page 1 of 2
CORPORATE SITE TABLE
PLNT_MNEMNC TRNSFR_PRC_AREA_CD PLNT_NAME
WM USA WESTMINSTER
T1 QRE INDIA
MA USA MAYNARD
WF USA WESTFIELD
SG SGO SAN GERMAN
AB USA ALBUQUERQUE
TQ GYT CSS TOKYO
KA KAO KANATA
RE CSS CSS READING
PA CSS CSS PARIS
MU CSS CSS MUNICH
SN CSS CSS SYDNEY
SO CSS CSS STCKHLM
NI USA EIS SALEM
CK KAO CSS KANATA
GA GAO GALWAY
KR CSS CSS FER MFG
SA USA SESA
SP USA SPRINGFIELD
SH USA SHREWSBURY
PN USA PHOENIX
FS USA FIELD SERV
MR USA MARLBORO
VB VBO VALBONNE
ME USA MSB ENGINEE
TW TAO TAIWAN
HK HKO HONG KONG
CX USA COLO SPRING
VM VBO VALBONE MFG
LG USA LOGAN
NS USA SALEM-NS
AY AYO AYR SCOTLN
TR USA TECH RESOUR
AD USA ANDOVE SCMT
BT USA BURLINGTON
AS USA AUGUSTA
HL USA HUDSON ICM
GY GYT JAPAN MFG
JP GYT JAPAN MFG
GI USA FS-GIA
IP USA US ADM PURC
NQ USA DECDIRECT
ND USA EUROPE LOGI
CO USA CONTOOCOOK
AG SGO AGUADILLA
HE USA USM HEO
DB GAO ERM DUBLIN
QF AYO SQUEENSFERR
09-Oct-1992 10:00 Page 2 of 2
CORPORATE SITE TABLE
PLNT_MNEMNC TRNSFR_PRC_AREA_CD PLNT_NAME
WL USA WILMINGTON
CM USA CORP/MFG
KB KBO KAUFBEUREN
SE USA SEG ENG
JD GYT JAPAN DMS
JJ JGO PSGNIJMEGAN
PW USA PWA
UC USA PALO ALTO
KD KAO KDC DIS CTR
SD SNL AUSTRAL DMS
BO USA BOSTON
MV USA DECWEST ENG
ZG ZGO SINGAPORE
TF USA TEMPE
ZS USA SEATTLE ENG
MO USA FE SUPT GRP
YW USA US AREA
GS USA ***********
CR USA CUST RETURN
HD HKO HONGKONGDMS
ET USA EX PRO TECH
EN USA ENFIELD
LJ USA GIA PWB ERG
AT USA LSI A&T
KC KAO CDN DIS CTR
IL FGO ESSB
FX USA FRANKLIN
NG JGO EBUNIJMEGEN
MX MEX CHIHUAHUA
BK USA ED&TRA LOG
OR FGO OUDENRIJN
T4 PRC PRC MFG
T2 PCM BRAZIL
T3 DEK KOREA PROCU
|
| 8.8 | COST Plus | AWARD::MAGNI | IM&T - 223-9837 | Fri Jul 23 1993 13:13 | 116 |
|
From: NAME: Barbara Wilfand @MSO
FUNC: Corporate Treasury
TEL: DTN 223-7685
<WILFAND.BARBARA AT A1 at IAMOK at PKO>
To: See Below
CC: See Below
As you know, the Transfer Pricing Approval Group (TPAG) has approved moving
to the Cost Plus Method of transfer pricing for shipments between
manufacturing sites as of Day 1 FY94. Under this method, all products
(other than raw material and buyouts) transfer at Standard Cost plus
Uplift. However, due to systems limitations, we are currently utilizing
APPIX MLP less Discount to achieve a cost plus profit level in each of the
sites.
CURRENT SYSTEMS LIMITATIONS:
(1) TPAS 1 currently utilizes the same transfer pricing rules for all
subsidiaries on the interplant system. Unfortunately, some of the
subsidiaries on the interplant system (EIC's, PASO and DEC Parts) are
not considered manufacturing sites for tax purposes. As such, they
should not move to Cost Plus transfer pricing.
As of Day 1 Fiscal September, we are expecting to have TPAS 1 V2.0
installed in all of the plants. This revision will allow us to utilize
different pricing rules for transfers to different subsidiaries. Once
this occurs, TPAS will be able to create Cost Plus transfer prices for
Manufacturing while continuing to create MLP less Discount (MTP)
transfer prices for non-manufacturing.
(2) I have received feedback from the Europe Manufacturers as well as
Ledger 55 in the U.S. stating that a move to Cost Plus transfer pricing
would necessitate local systems changes. In addition, they are
currently unable to apply different discounts from MLP to various
categories of product shipped to a particular entity.
Since the Company is in the process of revamping its systems (Supply
Chain), it would not be cost effective to make changes to the current
systems in order to eliminate (2) above IF another solution is feasible.
PROPOSAL:
I would like to propose the following method of moving to "Cost Plus" which
should not require systems changes but will yield appropriate transfer
prices on a transactional basis:
All products currently transferring at MLP less a discount
will transfer at a DERIVED MLP less a discount. The
resulting transfer price will EQUAL Standard Cost plus the
appropriate uplift.
To the extent that different uplifts are appropriate for
different products transferring to a particular entity, a
different multiple of standard cost will be utilized in
conjunction with a consistent discount to achieve the
appropriate transfer price.
Example :
Given:
a) raw material and buyouts transfer at Standard Cost :
NOT EFFECTED BY THIS PROPOSAL
b) shipments of SYS and SOF transfer at APPIX MLP less 50% to
U.S.:
TRANSFER PRICE = APPIX MLP - 50%
c) shipments of CHP transfers at standard cost:
TRANSFER PRICE = STANDARD COST
d) shipments of all other products transfer at standard cost
plus 30% uplift:
TRANSFER PRICE = DERIVED MLP - 50%
DERIVED MLP = STANDARD COST X 2.6
e) In addition, IF certain products were to ship at Cost Plus
a 20% uplift:
TRANSFER PRICE = DERIVED MLP - 50%
DERIVED MLP = STANDARD COST X 2.4
Although the mechanics are not Cost Plus, the resulting
Transfer price ON A TRANSACTIONAL BASIS is. To the extent we
are targeting the same uplift for each plant, the multiple
and discount for each plant will be the same. This will
eliminate much of the complexity in the current pricing
rules.
I am proposing this as a "short term" fix until new systems are implemented
as part of the Supply Chain Initiative. Under Supply Chain, the systems
should be configured to accept a transfer price equal to Base Price (MLP,
Standard, ICV, IBP...) plus Uplift or Base Price less Discount to allow for
maximum flexibility.
FEEDBACK:
Please review this proposal and provide me with your feedback by 9 August
1993. If I receive positive feedback, I would like to implement this in
conjunction with the implementation of TPAS 1 V2.0 (Day 1 Fiscal
September).
Thank you,
Barbara
|