GLOSSARY ENTRY (DERIVED FROM QUESTION BELOW) | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
12:16 Apr 21, 2007 |
German to English translations [PRO] Bus/Financial - Accounting | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||
| Selected response from: RobinB United States Local time: 09:28 | ||||||
Grading comment
|
Summary of answers provided | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
4 +4 | (inventory) obsolescence write-down, write-down for (inventory) obsolescence |
| ||
4 | reduction in value of spare parts on account of age |
| ||
3 +1 | depreciation |
| ||
4 -1 | deduction for wear and tear |
| ||
3 | a deduction of X% for depreciation |
|
Discussion entries: 1 | |
---|---|
reduction in value of spare parts on account of age Explanation: * |
| |
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade) |
deduction for wear and tear Explanation: I think the "wear&tear" concept, which is also in a legal sense as well, should fit nicely. Depreciation would probably not be used here, although it's the proper technical term. |
| |
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade) |
a deduction of X% for depreciation Explanation: I think that this phrase brings neatly together the two previous suggestions...although I personally think that you could get away with using depreciation on its own. |
| |
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade) |
(inventory) obsolescence write-down, write-down for (inventory) obsolescence Explanation: This can't be depreciation, because spare and replacement parts and similar items aren't fixed/non-current assets, but rather inventories, which are always classified as current assets. And current assets are of course never depreciated, but only ever written down for a number of reasons, mainly: - (technical) obsolescence (as is the case here) - reduced marketability/slow-moving stock http://www.secinfo.com/dut49.6K1.c.htm http://ce.seekingalpha.com/article/6886 http://sec.edgar-online.com/2006/05/12/0000950134-06-009737/... http://google.brand.edgar-online.com/EFX_dll/EDGARpro.dll?Fe... -------------------------------------------------- Note added at 5 hrs (2007-04-21 17:30:46 GMT) -------------------------------------------------- Incidentally, applying a flat-rate write-down (or "valuation allowance") of only 5% to inventories of spare parts older than 3 years looks pretty low. You'd normally expect a much higher write-down, because the situation depicted would indicate that the company is holding an unnecessary level of inventory here. The above sentence also reminds me that "obsolescence valuation allowance" would be another acceptable term here. |
| |
Grading comment
| ||