OK, let’s break this step by step:
The funds were converted into hryvnia (UAH) on 31 December 20X1 at an exchange rate of EUR1.00 = UAH6.70 and used to purchase UAH1,500 million in fixed assets and UAH300 of inventories.
Temporal method + FIFO
300 UAH Inventory / 6,7 = 44, 8 Eur by historical rate , let’s say that is 100 pieces of Inventory, thus 3 UAH each.
Sales : example 80 pieces of inventory by 6 UAH each for 480 UAH.
COGS: 80 x 3 = 240 UAH
GP = 480 - 240 UAH = 240 UAH
If LIFO had been applied instead of FIFO, inflation would impact COGS thus, COGS will be 3 (1+ Inflation rate) so GP will be lower (assuming inflation expense is already contained in margin of 3 UAH (3+3=6 selling price). This is straightforward.
Let’ say that on balance date f.ex 1 EUR is 7,4 UAH and average periodical rate was 7,0 UAH for 1 EUR.
Under temporal method, COGS will be remeasured by historical rate, thus
240 UAH / 6,70 = 35,82 EUR
Sales will be remeasured by average rate 480 /7,0 = 68, 57 EUR
GP under temporal method is 68,57 - 35,82 = 32,75 EUR
under current rate method
COGS and Sales will be translated by average rate.
COGS: 240 UAH / 7,00 = 34,29 EUR
Sales: 480 /7,0 = 68, 57 EUR
GP under current rate method is 68,57 - 34,29 = 34,28 EUR
Since COGS are lower under local currency depreciation, thus combination of target currency appreciation(local depreciation) and accelerating inflation would favorize FIFO + CRM in translation process.