Answer: The expected loss is $2.3
Explanation:
Total number of tickets to be sold = 100 tickets
one $450 prize, the expected gain = 450 x (1/100) = $4.5
two $110 prizes, the expected gain = 110 x (2/100) = $2.2
four $25 prizes. the expected gain = 25 x (4/100) = $1
Expected gain (loss) = Total expected gain - Cost of the ticket
= (4.5 + 2.2 + 1 ) - 10
= (2.3)
The expected loss is $2.3
Answer:
See below
Explanation:
The below shows the calculation of variance
Budgeted direct labor (per unit) 0.60
Units 2,000
Budgeted direct total labor (hrs) 1,200
Actual hours 1,160
Standard rate $17
Direct labor efficiency variance
The direct labor efficiency variance
= (Budgeted hours - Actual hours) × Standard rate
= (1,200 - 1,160) × $18
= $720 favourable
Answer:
The right approach is Option a (Bargaining power of suppliers).
Explanation:
- The concept is such an industry influences the buyer's business climate and determines the potential including its buyer to attain profitability.
- The meaning is basically how very much jurisdiction a single provider has. By supplier, I represent the industries that create the manufactured goods that even the sellers refine into the finished product to something like the sellers throughout the business. If there are several suppliers during the sector because each supplier is indeed very poor.
Answer:
option (d) $1.40 taxable income rather than $1.00 tax-exempt income
Explanation:
The taxpayer would prefer option (d) $1.40 taxable income rather than $1.00 tax-exempt income
The above statement will be chosen because in this case the after tax income will be greater than the tax exempt according to the condition given in the question
Given:
Marginal Tax bracket = 25%
thus,
Taxable income = $1.40
Tax = $1.40 × 0.25 = $0.35
Therefore,
The net income = Taxable income - Tax = $1.40 - $0.35 = $1.05
and,
$1.05 > $1.00
Answer:
If we made the assumption that both countries had a per capita of $15,000 in 1960, country A, which entered an era of political stability, and applied liberal reforms, growing at a rate of 5%, would double its GDP per capita by 1975, reaching a GDP per capita of $31,183.92.
On the contrary, country B, which continued to grow by 1% per year, would only double its GDP per capita by 2030, reaching a figure of $30,101.45.
Therefore, it would take 55 years more for country B to double its per capita GDP level compared to country A.
