Answer:
$433,900
Explanation:
The computation of the capitalized cost of the land is shown below:-
Capitalized cost of the land = Purchase price + Demolition of building + Title insurance + Attorney fee + Property taxes covered during the period - Scrap value from the building
= $420,000 + $12,000 + $900 + ($3,000 - $500) - $1,500
= $420,000 + $12,000 + $900 + $2,500 - $1,500
= $435,400 - $1,500
= $433,900
Answer:
E. $25,000 unfavorable
Explanation:
The labor efficiency variance shall be calculated using the following formulas:
Labor efficiency variance=((Standard labor hours used to make the actual production
)- (Actual labor hours used to make the actual production))* standard rate per hour
Standard labor hours used to make the actual production=15,000
Actual labor hours used to make the actual production=17,500
standard rate per hour=$10 per hour
Labour efficiency variance=(15,000-17,500)*10
=25,000 unfavourable
So based on the above discussion, the answer shall be E. $25,000 unfavorable
Answer:
Explanation:
Make Buy Net income
Variable manufacturing costs $54,000 $0 $54,000
Fixed manufacturing costs $27,000 $27,000 $0
Purchase price $0 $67,500 -$67,500
Total annual cost $81,000 $94,500 -$13,500
Conclusion: Manson Industries should make the part as making part save cost than buying it.
<u>Workings</u>
Make Buy
Variable manufacturing costs 13500*4 0
Fixed manufacturing costs 13500*2 13500*2
Purchase price 0 13500*5
Answer:
The investment of Joan Osborne is expected to produce a rate of return less that 10%.
Explanation:
This implies that the expected rate of return on the investment will the minimum rate of return.
An investment with a positive NPV would produce produce an expected rate of return higher than the minimum rate of return and vice versa.
The investment of Joan Osborne is expected to produce a rate of return less that 10%.
Answer:
Judgment will be for Larson. Although a decision by the majority of the partners in a partnership will control in matters concerning the ordinary operations of the firm business, such a decision is not binding if it contravenes the partnership agreement. In this case, the agreement provided that the partners would share profits equally. The decision by Rundles and Kreiger is therefore not effective, since is not based on the unanimous consent of all partners.
