Answer:
Holly can deduct $145 as business expense.
Explanation:
As per IRS, meals expenses are 50% deductible provided they are incurred for business purpose. Earlier entertainment expenses were also 50% deductible, but as of 2018, they are no more deductible for tax purpose.
Here, Holly closed the deal at dinner. So, 50% of meal expenses are deductible as business expense for tax purpose. So, $145 (50% of 290) can be claimed as deduction by Holly while filing her income tax returns.
Prior to 2018, entertainment expenses were 50% deductible if incurred for business purpose. In this case since the deal was closed at dinner, price of theatre tickets are not considered business expense. Moreover, even if they were qualified business expense, they are not deductible since 2018.
Answer:
direct labor hour 25.72
Explanation:
16.79 + 15% taxes + vacation and HI 6,41
16.79 + 16.79 x 15% + 6.41
16.79 + 2.5185 + 6.41 = 25.7185 = 25.72
<u>Notes:</u>
The assignment state the payroll taxes only apply to the basic direct labor rate, so we should assume the fringe benefit are tax-exempt
The above situation is an example of shoe leather cost of inflation.
A shoe-leather cost is what people pay when they frequently visit the bank to withdraw cash to use to pay for products in the wake of intense inflationary pressure. The term "shoe-leather cost" symbolizes all costs, including time spent, bank fees, brokerage fees and transportation costs.
High inflation discourages people from keeping large sums of cash on hand because the value of money rapidly depreciates during this time. More money is kept in banks by them. Additionally, repeated price increases force people to constantly withdraw money for transactional needs. Due to this, they frequently visit their bank to withdraw cash in order to pay for goods and services. These frequent journeys degrade their shoe leather, resulting in a 'shoe-leather cost.'
To read about hyperinflation see:
brainly.com/question/1297747
#SPJ4
Answer:
The correct answer is option 4.
Explanation:
Rhonda has agreed to invest $16,000 in a partnership with her sister and brother-in-law. she does not plan to work in partnership or invest any of her wealth other than $16,00. But she intends on sharing profits. This implies that Rhonda is a limited partner in the business.
A limited partner is a partial owner of a business. His/her liability to the business's debts is limited to the extent of the amount he/she has invested in the business. Such partners are often called silent partners as they don't have any involvement in the day to day operations.
Answer:
It will increase by 50%
Explanation:
Equity is given as: credit - short market value.
Find attached below table of solution