What it means
When a business sells on credit, some customers will not pay, and the question for the accounts is when to recognise the loss. The direct write-off method answers: when it happens.
The receivable stays on the books at its full amount until the business concludes, because the customer has failed, disputed the debt successfully, disappeared or simply not paid after every reasonable effort, that the amount is uncollectible. At that point the balance is removed from receivables and charged to bad debt expense.
Until then nothing is recorded, and if a written-off amount is later recovered, the recovery is recorded as income when received. The method's appeal is its simplicity and objectivity: there are no estimates or provisions to calculate, and every entry corresponds to a real event.
For a business with few credit customers, small balances and rare bad debts, the difference from a more sophisticated method is immaterial. Tax authorities in several countries take a similar view, allowing a deduction for a specific debt that has become bad, with evidence, but not for a general provision, because the provision is an estimate that the taxpayer controls.
The method's defect is timing. The sale is recognised as revenue in the period it is made, but the loss is recognised in whatever later period the business gives up on collection, so the first period's profit is overstated, the later period's is understated, and receivables between the two dates are shown at an amount the business does not expect to receive in full.
This breaches the matching principle and gives management discretion over timing, since a bad year can be improved by delaying write-offs and a good year can absorb them. The allowance method solves the timing problem by estimating, at each period end, the portion of receivables that will not be collected, recognising that estimate as an expense in the period of the sales with a matching allowance deducted from receivables.
When a specific debt later proves uncollectible, it is written off against the allowance rather than to expense, so the income statement is not affected twice. The estimate can be based on a percentage of credit sales, on an ageing of receivables with rising percentages for older balances, or on specific review of large accounts, and standards require it wherever bad debts are material.
In practice many small businesses use direct write-off in their day-to-day books and convert to an allowance basis at the year end if the amounts warrant it. The two methods also coexist where tax and financial reporting differ: the accounts carry an allowance, the tax computation deducts only specific write-offs, and the difference gives rise to deferred tax.
Whichever method is used, the business still needs credit control, ageing analysis and timely decisions about bad debts, because the method determines when the loss is recognised, not whether it occurs.
In practice
Real-world examples
Example 1
A one-person consultancy with a dozen clients writes off a $3,000 invoice when the client ceases trading, and records no provision at other times because bad debts are rare and small.
Example 2
A company's tax computation deducts $45,000 of specific debts written off during the year but adds back the $20,000 increase in its general allowance, which is not deductible until specific debts go bad.
Example 3
A distributor that used direct write-off finds that its year-end receivables include $85,000 owed by a customer that failed in January, and its auditor requires an allowance at the year end for the amount not expected to be recovered.
Think of it
Direct write-off waits until a debt goes bad to expense it-no estimation, just write off actual losses.
Formula
Calculation
Direct write-off: when a specific debt is judged uncollectible, debit Bad debt expense and credit Accounts receivable for the amount
Recovery of a written-off debt: debit Cash and credit Bad debt recovered (income) or Bad debt expense
Allowance method (for comparison): Allowance required = Sum over ageing bands of (Balance in band x Expected loss percentage for band); expense for the period = Allowance required minus Existing allowance + Write-offs in the period
Worked example: timing difference. A company makes credit sales of $2,000,000 in year 1. Experience suggests about 1.5% of credit sales will prove uncollectible. In year 2, customers owing $30,000 from year 1 sales are confirmed as bad.
- Direct write-off: year 1 bad debt expense nil; year 2 bad debt expense $30,000 (debit bad debt expense $30,000, credit receivables $30,000). Year 1 profit is overstated by $30,000 and year 2 understated by the same
- Allowance method: year 1 bad debt expense $2,000,000 x 1.5% = $30,000, with an allowance of $30,000 deducted from receivables; year 2 write-off of $30,000 is charged against the allowance (debit allowance, credit receivables) with no further expense. The loss is matched to the year of the sales
Worked example: a specific write-off and recovery. A customer owing $12,000 goes into liquidation. Under direct write-off: debit bad debt expense $12,000; credit accounts receivable $12,000. A year later the liquidator pays a dividend of $2,400 (20 cents in the dollar): debit cash $2,400; credit bad debt recovered $2,400.
Worked example: allowance by ageing (what the business would move to). Receivables of $400,000 are aged: current $300,000 (1% expected loss); 31 to 60 days $60,000 (5%); 61 to 90 days $25,000 (20%); over 90 days $15,000 (50%).
- Allowance required = $3,000 + $3,000 + $5,000 + $7,500 = $18,500
- Receivables shown on the balance sheet at $400,000 minus $18,500 = $381,500
- If the existing allowance is $10,000 and $4,000 was written off in the period, the expense = $18,500 minus $10,000 + $4,000 = $12,500Case study
Seen in the real world
This is a fictional, illustrative scenario. A building materials distributor with credit sales of $6,000,000 and receivables of about $400,000 used the direct write-off method, as it had since the owner started the business. Bad debts had been small and occasional, and the owner regarded a provision as pessimism. The company's bank facility was secured on receivables, and the annual accounts the bank received showed receivables in full and a profit of $220,000.
In the following March a builder owing $85,000 went into administration. The builder had been slow to pay since the previous autumn, the balance had grown past its credit limit because the sales manager valued the account, and by the year end the ageing report, had anyone looked at it, showed $60,000 over 90 days. Under direct write-off, none of this had appeared in the accounts. The $85,000 write-off fell entirely in the new year, wiping out its first-quarter profit, and the bank reduced the facility and asked why the accounts had shown the debt at full value.
The owner's accountant moved the company to the allowance method, with an ageing-based allowance calculated each month: 1% of current balances, 5% of 31 to 60 days, 20% of 61 to 90 days and 50% of anything older, plus specific provisions for accounts known to be in difficulty. On the previous year-end receivables the ageing alone would have given an allowance of about $18,500, and about $60,000 once a specific provision for the builder was included, so the year's profit would have been about $160,000 rather than $220,000, a more honest figure. The monthly review also caught the next credit limit breach early. The owner concluded that direct write-off had not caused the loss, but it had let the company avoid looking at it until too late to reduce it.
Watch out
Common mistakes
- Using direct write-off for financial reporting when bad debts are material, which overstates receivables and profit in the year of sale and breaches the matching principle.
- Delaying write-offs to protect a period's profit, which the method makes possible because the timing of the expense is at management's discretion.
- Treating the accounting method as a substitute for credit control; the method decides when the loss is recognised, and only ageing reviews, credit limits and collection effort reduce the loss itself.
Questions
People also ask
What is the difference between the direct write-off method and the allowance method?
Direct write-off recognises a bad debt only when a specific debt is judged uncollectible; the allowance method estimates expected bad debts at each period end and recognises them in the period of the sales, with specific write-offs charged against the allowance. The allowance method matches losses to revenue; direct write-off does not.
Is the direct write-off method allowed?
For financial reporting under international and United States standards, only where bad debts are immaterial, which in practice means very small businesses. For tax, several jurisdictions allow deductions only for specific debts written off, so the method is used in tax computations even by companies that carry an allowance in their accounts.
How is a recovered bad debt recorded?
As income when received, either as a separate line for bad debts recovered or as a credit to bad debt expense. Under the allowance method, the recovery may instead be credited to the allowance.
Watch