Answer: $2,600
Explanation:
Because Andrew is married, the gift tax on him is split in half between him and his wife. This means that to each of his daughters, the gift tax will be on:
= 20,900 / 2
= $10,450
This amount is less than the gift exclusion limit of $15,000 so Andrew will not be charged taxes on the gifts to his daughters.
On the gift to Brianna's niece, Andrew's gift tax will be based on:
= 35,200 / 2
= $17,600
This is above the gift exclusion limit of $15,000 by:
= 17,600 - 15,000
= $2,600
<em>The above would therefore be Andrew's taxable gift amount. </em>
Answer: Please refer to Explanation.
Explanation:
Your question was incomplete so I attached the missing details.
The Carrying Amount of the Division has to be ascertained to move forward as it is needed in calculating the loss on Impairment. It is calculated by subtracting Goodwill from the Net Assets.
= 496 - 214
= $282 million
Calculating the Loss on impairment is done by the following formula,
= Market Price - Carrying Amount of the Division (net of Goodwill) - carrying value of Goodwill
= 335 - 282 - 214
= -$161 million.
Journal Entry
DR Loss on Impairment $161 million
CR Goodwill $161 million
(To record the loss on Impairment)
February 25th(direct deposit),March 4th(mailed check)
D, thermal contact would just cause a regular burn, not an electrical one.
Answer:
Consider the following explanation
Explanation:
Context
Game theory involves two players. They have more than one option to decide. Pay off from each options adopted by two players are available. They have to select a strategy which will maximize their own return. But for optimizing their decision, they have to consider the action of his rival.
In this problem, two players are firm A and firm B. They have two strategies low output and high output. The strategies of firm a are measured in rows and for firm B in columns. They have to select a strategy which will maximize their payy off. Each cell has two pay offs. First one is for Firm A and second one is for firm B.
1. Dominant strategy is a strategy which will always give higher payoffs in comparison with pay off of other strategies. Consider first strategy of firm 1. If it adopts strategy of low output, then firm 2 can also adopt either strategy of low output or high output. In that case pay off of firm 1 will be 300 or 200.
Alteratively if firm 1 adopts high output then pay offs are 200 or 75. 200 is earned if firm B also go for low productivity. It is 75 if firm B adopts high productivity.
Now compare two payoffs side by side. Note that firm A has higher pay off in low output [300,200] in comparison with the pay off of high output [200,75]. So whatever strategy firm B adopts, Firm A will always go for low production. So low production strategy of firm A dominates high production strategy.
Same result is not observed for firm B. Pay off from low production strategy of firm B is [ 250,75]. Pay off from high production strategy are [100,100]. Now compare the two. If Firm A go for low production, then firm B will select low production. It will give pay off 250. Similarly when firm A decides for high production, then firm will also decide for high production. It will maximize its pay off. Amount is 100. Thus no strategy dominates for firm B.
