Answer and Explanation:
The Residential properties are depreciated over 27.5 years
Then:
The total amount of depreciation is $15,635. We assume that the property is sold in 2015.
Therefore, depreciation will be allowed only for 5 years such that the annual depreciation will be $3127 for 5 years.
He saves $781.75 annually (0.25*$3127).
If he holds the property for 5 years and then sells it, his 5 years' worth of depreciation will have saved him $3908.75 and it a $10,000 gain taxed at a maximum of 15%
$10,000 gain taxed at a maximum of 25% (or 33% if the gain pushes the taxpayer into a higher tax bracket).
$10,000 gain taxed at a maximum of 25%
Answer:
$20,000
Explanation:
If the Rubber Division was dropped at the beginning of last year, the financial advantage (disadvantage) to the company for the year would have been: the segment's margin of $20,000
The president considering the elimination of this division is not advisable. As long as none of the allocated common corporate fixed costs could be avoided, If the Rubber Division was dropped at the beginning of last year, the financial disadvantage to the company for the year would have been it's contributed margin that went towards off-setting corporate fixed costs.
Furthermore, if this segment is closed, it would affect the Cork division because it would be reporting a lower net operating income of $90,000 as a result of bearing all the corporate costs alone.
Answer: D. There was a one-way flow of wealth favoring the colonizers.
Explanation:
With the Colonists simply taking resources and not paying the colonies for it, there was a one way flow of wealth which favored them alone. Had the colonists paid for the goods and then processed them for resale (as developed countries do now), there would have been at least some sort of wealth flowing back to the colonies for the resources they possessed. The Colonists were essentially not paying for raw material inputs for production and simply reaped all the benefits after processing.
Answer:
a. Ted gets the hut; Sadie gets the rest.
Explanation:
Since Ted placed a much more higher priority on the hut by assigning it 35 points more than all other items, and Sadie placed a very low priority on the hut by assigning it 10 points when compared to all other items, it shows Ted is ready to let go of other items just to have the hut, and Sadie is ready to let go of the hut to have the other item. Hence, the "Ted gets the hut, Sadie gets the rest" splits is efficient.
