MGO CPA | Tax, Audit, and Consulting Services

Topic: GAAP

How to Master Cost Management for Your Winery

Key Takeaways:

  • Effective cost management involves proper inventory costing methods, accurate accounting of tasting room operations, and appropriate financial reporting practices.
  • Wineries of different sizes face unique challenges, from implementing GAAP-based inventory costing for small wineries to comprehensive risk management strategies for large wineries.
  • Understanding production costs, distribution expenses, and potential risks helps wineries make informed financial decisions and achieve sustainable growth.

~

As a winery owner, mastering cost management is crucial for profitability. Understanding your expenditures and employing the right strategies can improve your financial health and boost your operational efficiency.

Whether you are a small, medium, or large winery, here are some key factors to keep in mind:

Inventory Costing Methods

For small wineries — which make up 49% of the market — U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) inventory costing methods are invaluable. These methods enable you to assign a monetary value to your inventory, providing the exact cost data capture you need to manage production and distribution expenses effectively. If you are a medium-sized (or larger) winery, you can benefit from more comprehensive financial models and robust accounting systems.

Tasting Room Operations

For wineries of all sizes, accurately accounting for tasting room activities is critical. This includes tracking your inventory, managing sample losses, and accounting for both owner and employee samples. Proper financial controls and expense categorization will provide you clear insights into profitability. Understanding these challenges, you should consider comprehensive solutions like inventory costing, financial modeling, and tax preparation to enhance your operational efficiency and profitability.

Audit Versus Review

As your winery grows, the need for independent Certified Public Accountant (CPA) audits or reviews becomes more important. This decision hinges on the level of assurance needed and the specific needs of lenders, investors, or creditors. While audits offer the highest level of assurance and can enhance credibility with stakeholders, they are also more costly. Reviews, on the other hand, are less expensive but provide more limited assurance. Tailored audit and review services can help meet the unique requirements of your winery, supporting accuracy and compliance in financial reporting.

Tax Return Considerations

Proper inventory valuation and tracking of production activities are essential for correct tax preparation. Formal inventory valuation methods — such as those adhering to U.S. GAAP — can aid in exact tax reporting and provide a reliable template for management. This appropriately accounts for all production costs, helping to minimize tax liabilities and avoid potential issues with tax authorities. Specialized tax preparation services tailored to the unique needs of your winery can help you meet compliance requirements and improve financial outcomes.

Small Wineries: Accurate Inventory Accounting

If your winery produces fewer than 1,000 cases annually and lacks extensive accounting resources, you may choose to keep books on a tax basis. However, implementing U.S. GAAP-based inventory costing — even if not needed — can offer valuable insights into your production costs and help you secure debt or equity financing. Accurate cost tracking allows you to make informed decisions about your operational efficiency and financial management, giving you a competitive edge in the crowded market.

Medium Wineries: Proactive Risk Management

For medium-sized wineries, effective risk management is crucial to safeguarding financial stability. Finding potential risks such as climate impacts or market fluctuations requires a proactive approach, including investing in insurance and strategic planning. Although these measures involve upfront costs, they can prevent substantial financial losses overall. Implementing robust risk management practices will help your winery keep consistent production quality and protect your financial health against unforeseen challenges, ultimately supporting sustainable growth and operational resilience.

Large Wineries: Strategic Risk Mitigation

Large wineries, with extensive operations and market reach, face significant risks from climate change and volatile market conditions. Investing in comprehensive risk management strategies, including climate-resilient infrastructure, diversified revenue streams, and market analysis tools, is essential. Upfront costs for insurance and strategic planning are necessary to mitigate these risks. By addressing potential vulnerabilities proactively, your winery can protect its substantial investments, maintain market stability, and set the table for long-term profitability despite external uncertainties. This approach will help you preserve your reputation and sustain growth in a competitive industry.

Distribution and Growth Considerations

For small wineries, distributing wine introduces challenges that require a clear understanding of both production and distribution costs. Increased production often involves significant investments in equipment and facilities, affecting the cost per case until production volumes grow sufficiently. Before entering any distribution channel, it is crucial to understand the full cost of production, develop a solid pricing strategy, and account for the costs involved in various sales channels to support profitability and growth.

Elevate Your Winery’s Profit Potential

Effective cost management is vital for wineries of all sizes to navigate the complexities of the market and achieve sustainable growth. By implementing robust financial practices, correct cost tracking, and comprehensive risk management strategies, your winery can enhance its operational efficiency and profitability.

How MGO Can Help

MGO’s tailored solutions can help you meet these challenges and thrive in this competitive industry. Reach out to our Vineyards and Wineries team today to learn how we can support you.

How to Account for the Employee Retention Credit

Executive summary

  • There is still uncertainty about how to account for the refundable Employee Retention Credit in your books, because you can’t account for it the same way you can account for the Paycheck Protection Program loan.
  • The standards you can choose from are FASB ASC 958-605, International Accounting Standard (IAS) 20, FASB ASC 450-30, and FASB ASC 832.
  • Depending on the standard you choose, you might have to consider the timing of recognition, the presentation of a grant income line, and financial ratios.

The Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) and the Employee Retention Credit (ERC) were powerful economic stimulus programs instituted during the COVID-19 pandemic to provide financial relief to struggling businesses. Both programs were the first initiatives of their kind, and as a result, there remains some uncertainty about what standards apply when accounting for them in your financial statements and records. 

If you’re wondering how to distinguish the two, as well as determine the standard you should be utilizing, Angel Naval, a leader in our Client Accounting Solutions practice, breaks it down.  

The PPP versus the ERC

Created to aid businesses facing financial challenges through the pandemic, there are several key differences between the PPP and the ERC.  

The PPP is a loan and was created for small businesses with less than 500 employees in mind, giving them the funds needed to cover payroll and other eligible expenses. This includes hiring back employees who were laid off and covering applicable overhead. The loans are forgiven if the proper criteria are met (I.e., maintaining payroll and keeping consistent employee numbers).  

A subset of the PPP loan, the ERC is a refundable tax credit that allows businesses to reduce their tax liability based on the qualified wages they’ve paid to their employees during the pandemic. It was created for businesses of all sizes to capitalize on in order to avoid layoffs. They can claim up to $5,000 per employee in 2020 and $7,000 per employee per quarter in 2021.  

Determining the appropriate accounting standard for ERCs 

If you took advantage of the ERC, currently, there is no straightforward way of accounting for it. Put simply, the ERC is a gray area because it’s so new, and there isn’t a straightforward way of accounting for it. Plus, ERCs are payroll credits, not income tax credits — and while FASB has extensive guidance for accounting for income taxes in ASC 740, it doesn’t for payroll taxes. Even the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) has suggested different standards, so it’s up to you to apply your best judgement based on the facts and circumstances of your business. Some things to consider:  

  • The timing of recognition, 
  • The financial ratios important to you, and 
  • Whether you want to present a grant income line. 

For income statement presentation, according to AICPA’s December 2022 report, more public entities are crediting the associated expense rather than recognizing the amounts on a separate line item.  

For example, you may think you can account for the ERC the same way you can for the PPP, but you can’t. As we differentiated above, the PPP is a loan and the ERC is a payroll credit, therefore the PPP is subject to debt and liability standards and the ERC is not. While the PPP did come first, those companies that have paid payroll taxes but still qualified for the ERC are still able to retroactively claim the credit.  

For prospective applications, for-profit entities can adhere to guidance in one of the following. 

FASB ASC 958-605 

If you’re applying the revenue recognition model under ASC 958-605, ERCs are treated as conditional contributions. In this case, companies must have met the program’s eligibility conditions to record revenue (and no amounts can be recorded until all criteria are evaluated and “substantially” met according to regulations). Given the conditions are met, a refund receivable and income should be recognized in the period the entity determines the conditions have been substantially met. This standard requires that gross revenue be recorded, and it doesn’t permit any netting of revenue against related expenses.  

Some barriers to meeting ASC 958-605’s requirements include the eligibility requirements, like meeting the rules for a decline in gross receipts as well as incurring qualifying expenses (i.e., payroll costs). To file for the ERC, you’ll need to decide whether preparing the related ERC form and filing it with the government presents a barrier you’ll need to overcome. Note administrative and other small stipulations do not represent a barrier. 

IAS 20 

If you’re applying IAS 20, you can’t recognize the ERC until the “reasonable assurance” threshold is met in correlation with ERC’s conditions and receiving the credit. In this case, “reasonable assurance” translates to “probable” under GAAP standards and is easier to satisfy than “substantially met” in Subtopic 958-605. Once you’ve provided reasonable assurance that conditions will be met, the earnings impact of the government grants is recorded over the periods in which you recognize as expenses the related costs that the grants are intended to cover. So, you’ll need to estimate the amount of the credit you expect to keep. 

IAS 20 allows you to record and present either the gross amount as other income or net the credit against other related payroll expenses. For every quarter that a company meets the recognition criteria, it records a receivable and either other income or net expense.  

FASB ASC 450-30 

If you’re interested in applying FASB ASC 450-30, please note amounts related to the ERC wouldn’t be recognized under this model until all uncertainties regarding the disposition of the credit are resolved — and there’s less detail on the disclosure, measurement, and recognition requirements as compared to the other standard models. For this reason, the AICPA doesn’t believe this model to be a preferred accounting policy for the ERC. 

FASB ASC 832 

If you’re applying this model, you must disclose several specifics about transactions with a government within its scope. These entail the nature of the transactions, which includes a description of the transactions as well as the form in which it has been received, whether it’s cash or other assets. You must also detail the accounting policies you used to account for the transactions. Any line items on the balance sheet and income statement that are affected by the transactions must be accounted for too — plus, the amounts applicable to each financial statement line item in the current reporting period.  

How MGO can help 

While there are clear accounting standards for the PPP, there is still some uncertainty surrounding the ERC. Depending on the standard you choose, you may have to consider the timing of recognition, financial ratios, and whether to present a grant income line. Therefore, businesses need to apply their best judgment based on the facts and circumstances of their business when accounting for ERCs. Our Client Accounting Solutions team has extensive experience helping clients navigate complex tax regulations post-pandemic. Contact us to learn more about which standard you should be using for federal relief programs. 

About the author 

Angel Naval oversees our West Coast Financial Advisory Services practice and provides value-added guidance for your corporate finance, financial planning, and business process needs. 

Accounting for Financial Support and Adapting to Changes in Grant Reporting

Financial assistance provided through the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act) and the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) offered necessary support for many organizations during the pandemic. The influx of resources made available to state, local, territorial, and Tribal governments brought with it the continued need for sound accounting practices and financial reporting for grants.

Now is a good time to evaluate and improve your financial reporting process for grants. While grants are subject to many reporting requirements, we will focus on revenue recognition under accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (GAAP) and the schedule of expenditures of federal awards, as required by Uniform Guidance.

Financial reporting in accordance with GAAP

In June 2020, the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) issued Technical Bulletin No. 2020-1, Accounting and Financial Reporting Issues Related to the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act) and Coronavirus Diseases (TB 2020-1). TB 2020-1 helps governments navigate the complexities of accounting for CARES Act funding. It addresses issues such as the type of financial assistance, characterization of loss of revenue, and effect of amendments. While ARPA funds have their own complexities, the principles established in TB 2020-1 for the CARES Act translate well to ARPA, and GASB has not published further guidance for ARPA.

In TB 2020-1, GASB provides guidance that the Coronavirus Relief Fund (CRF) resources are voluntary nonexchange transactions subject to eligibility requirements. The Local Fiscal Recovery Funds in ARPA are like the CRF resources in the CARES Act and should be treated consistently. This means the award should be recognized in the period when all applicable eligibility requirements are met.

When evaluating revenue recognition for voluntary nonexchange revenues, remember that the recipient cannot incur allowable costs until there is an executed grant agreement. For the ARPA funds, this means the recipient has signed all the required documents accepting grant terms and conditions, and that the recipient has received confirmation of the award before the end of its reporting period.

The presumed applicable period is the immediate provider’s fiscal year and begins on the first day of that year, based on the provider’s appropriation to disburse the resources. For the CARES Act, few cities met the threshold for directly awarded metropolitan cities, which subjected them to the state’s provisions rather than as a direct recipient of the federal government. For example, California cities and counties that received pass-through awards from the State of California were unable to recognize grant revenue in fiscal year ended June 30, 2020, because the State of California did not make the appropriations available to governments until July 1, 2020, through passage of its budget act.

The ARPA funds, which were directly distributed to a considerably greater number of recipients, were appropriated immediately by the federal government upon signing ARPA into law. That means the direct recipients of ARPA funds and the non-entitlement units of governments that received their allocations from states that executed the awards before the end of the reporting period, may recognize revenue immediately upon execution of the award, if they met the eligibility criteria.

For those governments that received cash before the end of the reporting period, a liability should be reported for the portion of financial assistance that was not recognized as revenue. For those governments that did not receive cash before the end of the reporting period, a receivable should be reported for the portion of financial assistance that was recognized as revenue.

The possibility of a single audit

While many governments require an annual single audit due to the amount of federal awards received each year, many others are below the threshold for requiring a single audit. Funding related to COVID-19 resources may push more governments over that $750,000 threshold.

For governments unfamiliar with single audits, it is important to prepare. Taking inventory and reading the guidance provided by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and awarding federal agencies will help you understand and equip yourself to submit (and pass) a single audit.

What is the SEFA?

The schedule of expenditures of federal awards (SEFA) acts as a supplemental schedule to the financial statements that an organization produces when it is subject to a single audit requirement. This requirement is triggered when the federal expenditures reported on the SEFA exceed $750,000 or more over the organization’s fiscal year

Preparing the SEFA is no small task. It must be completed in accordance with the Uniform Guidance and include all federal expenditures. In addition to determining the amount of federal expenditures, the Uniform Guidance specifies how the amounts are to be reported. Individual federal programs should be listed by federal agencies, and pass-through entities should be noted as well.

The single audit and ARPA

On March 19, 2021, the OMB released a memo that detailed single audit updates to be aware of in ARPA. The updates give awarding agencies the discretion and the authority to grant some exceptions to recipients who are affected by the pandemic if they are permissible by law. These entities do not necessarily have to be recipients of COVID-19 related financial assistance to receive these exceptions.

The most notable update is the extension of the single audit submission due date. For those recipients who did not file their single audits with the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by March 19, 2021, and had fiscal year-ends through June 30, 2021, the submission of their reporting packages was extended to six months past the normal due date, and no action by the awarding agencies or recipients is necessary. However, the documentation showing the reason for the delay in filing must be retained.

Additional updates include:

  • Awarding agencies may allow some necessary incurred pre-award costs.
  • Awarding agencies may allow extensions of awards, which gives recipients more time to resume projects and expend the funds.
  • Prior approval requirements may be waived.
  • Awarding agencies can grant recipients up to a three-month extension beyond the normal due date to submit financial, performance, and other required reports.
  • The award application deadlines can be flexible.

While it is clear the OMB is attempting to be reasonably flexible, maintaining clear documentation of your grants and expenditures will be helpful as new and changing guidance becomes available.

Understand the current requirements and look for changes

The pandemic threw many organizations into survival mode. However, with federal, state, and local support many have weathered the financial difficulties over the past 18 months as well as can be expected. As organizations move forward, they will have to account for how they survived, where the monetary support came from, and where the money went. The near future will require unprecedented diligence, flexibility, and perhaps most of all, patience.

MGO is here to help

Guidance over grant funding, especially as it relates to CARES Act and ARPA programs, are continuing to develop and evolve. It’s important to stay on top of the latest changes and updates, as utilization of these resources are critical to the financial recovery of your organization and the proper reporting of those resources to stakeholders and the federal agencies charged with oversight. If you need personalized guidance, don’t hesitate to reach out to your MGO contacts.