TOYOTA Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words

TOYOTA - Research Paper Example Introduction Toyota Motor Corporation was started in 1933 in Japan. It is a business dealer in automobile as well as finance services and housing deals. The company stands as the leader in the automobile industry followed by general motors and other car manufacturing industries (Jeffrey, 2004). The company has its wings spread all over the world supplying cars. It makes about 40% of all vehicles in the world selling half in its domestic market and the rest international. It has 511 subsidiaries and 217 associate companies by the end of March, 2011. It has been argued that the company sells its merchandise at very high cost leading to abnormal profits (Bill, 2011). The credit rating of Toyota has gone down from AA to AA minus accordingly to the scores rates. RATIO ANALYSIS FOR TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATIONS Liquidity Ratios Current Ratio = Total Current Assets/ Total Current Liabilities 1.02 1.03 1.08 Acid Test = Total quick assets/ Total current liabilities 0.89 0.90 0.95 (Total quick ass et = total current assets minus inventory) 9937715.00 9816617.00 10226262.00 Activity Ratios Inventory turnover= cost of goods/ inventory 11.33 11.67 13.34 Day sales outstanding = receivables/ sales/360 109.35 104.12 96.44 Total ASSET Turnover (TAT)= total assets/ inventory 19.62 19.86 21.16 Leveraged ratios Equity ratio = total owners’ equity/ total assets 0.35 0.35 0.35 Debt ratio/Debt to asset Ratio= total liabilities/ total assets 0.65 0.65 0.65 Debt to Equity Ratio = Total Liabilities / Owners Equity or Net Worth 1.87 1.83 1.86 Profit Ratios Gross Profit Margins (GPM) = (Net gross Profit / Net Sales) x 100 12.52 11.96 10.10 Net Profit Margin (NPM)= (Net profit/net sales)*100 2.15 1.11 -2.13 Return on capital invested (ROCI) 0.05 0.03 -0.05 Return on Assets (ROA) = (Net Profit / Total Assets) x 100 1.42 0.74 -1.49 Return on Equity= (Net Profit / Net Worth or Owners Equity) x 100 (Wilbert, 2007) 4.07 2.09 -4.27 Shareholders return ratios Dividend yield = dividend per share / market price 0.62 0.56 2.46 Price earnings ratio= market per share/ earnings per share 0.62 1.21 -0.29 Income statements FOR TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATIONS 2011 2010 2009 Revenue 18993688.00 18950973.00 20529570.00 cost of revenue 16615326.00 16683797.00 18455800.00 Gross profit 2378362.00 2267176.00 2073770.00 Total selling/general/ administrative expenses 1910083.00 2119660.00 2534781.00 other operating expenses 0.00 0.00 0.00 operating income 468279.00 147516.00 -461011.00 less other non-operating expenses 19253.00 30886.00 -189140.00 income before tax 563290.00 291468.00 -560381.00 less income tax 312821.00 92664.00 -56442.00 net income before extra-ordinary items 250469.00 198804.00 -503939.00 MI -57302.00 -34756.00 24278.00 equity in affiliates 215016.00 45408.00 42724.00 net Income 408183.00 209456.00 -436937.00 dividend paid (figures in millions) 156791.00 141120.00 313551.00 number of shares (figure in millions) 3135.91 3135.99 3140.42 dividend per share 50.00 45.00 99.84 earn ings per share 130.17 66.79 -139.13 market price 80.54 80.54 40.51 Balance sheet FOR TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION 2011 2010 2009 total receivables 5,769,135.00 5,481,099.00 5,499,378.00 Total inventory 1465876 1429363 1383782 Total current assets 11403591 11245980 11610044 Total assets 28761679.00 28387556.00 29284861.00 Total current liabilities 11173520.00 10932580.00 10787814.00 total liabilities 18737812.00 18371123.00 19043857.00 total equity 10023867.00 10016433.00

Legislative Issues Paper-reimbursement for Nurse Practitioners Research Paper

Legislative Issues -reimbursement for Nurse Practitioners - Research Paper Example According to Frakes and Evans (2006), in 2003, the federal government spent 13% of its budget on Medicare services. This means that the federal government spent as much as $271 billion on providing health care services to the needy citizens (Frakes and Evans, 2006). As a result of the increasing allocation on health care programs and policies, the federal government has put significant interest in managing and controlling its costs on implementing these health care programs. In doing so, the federal government has used the legislation to control health care costs by creating a regulatory structure that will regulate resultant costs and prevent fraud within the health industry (Frakes and Evans, 2006). Because of these regulatory policies and programs, health care providers in both patient care and practice are affected (Frakes and Evans, 2006). Of the health care providers that are very much affected of the regulatory efforts set by the federal government, the advanced practice nurse s (APN) are among them. Nurse practitioners (NPs) and clinical nurse specialists (CNSs) make up APNs (Frakes and Evans, 2006). According to (Hamric, Spross, and Hanson, 2009), the roles of APNs include nurse practitioners (NPs), certified registered nurse anesthetists (CRNAs), clinical nurse specialists (CNSs), and ), certified nurse-midwives (CNMs). ... uently, health providers such as physicians and registered nurses are reimbursed under the Current Procedural Terminology system which is created by the American Medical Association (Frakes and Evans, 2006). In this system, which was developed in 1966, reimbursements for a service are determined through the individual provider’s relative value scale (Frakes and Evans, 2006). Subsequently, the value scale, according to Richmond, Thompson, & Sullivan-Marx (2000), is thereby established based on the professional liability insurance cost, practice expense, and work done of the provider, and then multiplied by a geographic expense adjustment modifier. Incidentally, under the reimbursement system, APNs can receive reimbursements from the government’s Medicare and Medicaid programs, commercial insurers, self-insured institutions, and managed care organizations for the services they provide (Frakes and Evans, 2006). With the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Acts of 1989 and 1990, APNs are able to receive reimbursements; however, Richmond, Thompson, & Sullivan-Marx (2000) maintain that the limitation of this Act is that reimbursements are confined to those who practice inside skilled nursing facilities and rural areas. Another restriction to the reimbursement rights of APNs is that APNS can reimburse only for services billed as â€Å"incident to† a physician’s care but requires that the APN be employed or contracted with the physician (Frakes and Evans, 2006). Through this set-up, physicians enjoy reimbursements at 100% of their rates. Clearly, the disparity between APNs and physicians is manifested through these reimbursement policies. In a study of Ruchlin, Levey, and Muller (1975), they define the function of reimbursement programs. In their study, they utilize the