All categories

1 year ago

Who benefits from deducting the amount paid in state income tax from their income for purposes of computing federal income tax?

1 answer:

3 0

The person that benefits from deducting the amount paid in state income tax from their income for purposes of computing federal income tax is option a: Everyone who must pay state income tax.

<h3 /><h3>What are Income tax in the United States?</h3>

Income taxes in the United States is known to be a kind of a tax that is often imposed by the federal government, as well as a lot of states.

Note that the income taxes are said to be set by applying a tax rate as income increases, and as such,

Therefore, The person that benefits from deducting the amount paid in state income tax from their income for purposes of computing federal income tax is option a: Everyone who must pay state income tax.

Learn more about federal income tax from

brainly.com/question/1601662

#SPJ1

You might be interested in

Many theme parks charge an entrance fee and a per-ride fee equal to zero. This is an example of

nataly862011 [7]

Answer:

two part pricing

Explanation:

A Two-part tariff (TPT) is a type of price gouging in which the price of a good or service consists of 2 sections-a rub-sum of the per-unit fee. Such a selling strategy generally occurs except in part or entirely monopolistic industries. It is built to allow the company to absorb more surplus value in a non-discriminatory pricing framework than it ever has before.

Two-part tariffs in open markets can also occur when customers are unsure regarding their final requirement. Consumers of fitness centers, for instance, may be unsure regarding their degree of potential dedication to an exercise routine.

6 0

3 years ago

RuthAnn is 28 years old and is retiring at the age of 65. When she retires, she estimates that she will need an annual income of

inessss [21]

Answer:

Yes

Explanation:

From her current age of 28 to her retirement age of 65, RuthAnn has (65 - 28 =) 37 more years to work.

If she saves 11% of her annual income of $36,278.13 into a 401(k), she will be setting aside (11% * 36,278.13 =) $3,990.59 into the 401(k) account annually.

At 7.1% compounding rate, in 37 years, RuthAnn would have set aside an amount estimated by the future value of an annuity formula.

$FV = \frac{A(1+r)^{n} - 1}{r}$

where FV is the future value, the amount that would have been set aside,

A = is the annual savings,

r = is the compounding rate, and

n = is the number of years.

Therefore, the total amount that would be saved up after 37 years =

$FV = \frac{3,990.59(1+0.071)^{37} - 1}{0.071}$

= (3,990.59 * 11.6535)/0.071

= $654,990.31.

By spending $32,523 annually from an account earning 7.1% compound interest rate for 30 years, the present value of the total amount needed by RuthAnn today that will be sufficient for her retirement spending can be estimated using the present value of an annuity formula.

$PV = \frac{A(1 - (1+r)^{-n}}{r}$

= $PV = \frac{32,523(1 - (1.071)^{-30}}{0.071}$

= (32523 * 0.8723)/0.071

= $399,574.83.

Since the amount saved up ($654,990.31) is more than the total amount required for RuthAnn's retirement ($399,574.83), RuthAnn has more than sufficient to meet her Retirement goal.

Specifically, the amount she has saved up can support a maximum annual spending which can be estimated from the present value of an annuity formula.

$PV = \frac{A(1 - (1+r)^{-n}}{r}$

where PV = the amount saved up, $654,990.31,

A = the annual spending which we are estimating,

r = the 7.1% compound interest rate,

n = the number of years to retirement.

$654,990.31 = \frac{A(1 - (1.071)^{-30}}{0.071}$

= 654,990.31 = (A * 0.8723)/0.071

= A = 654,990.31/0.8723 * 0.071

= A = 53,312.29

Thus, the amount saved up can support a maximum retirement spending of $53,312.29, which is higher than the $32,523 annual income needed by RuthAnn for her retirement.

6 0

3 years ago

Both seashells and corn have been used as money in the past. Which do you think is a better choice? Explain your answer by refer

Katarina [22]

Answer:

Seashells were better than corn.

Explanation:

I think shells were the better choice. They were also used as ornaments. The shells were very easy to use and durable. Payments were made using shells. The shells are considered as the oldest form of currency and they originated in ancient China.

It helped in a growing trade. Shells were the part of commodity money.Sea shells were used as a whole or partial. Shells were used either in the shape of beads or artificially shaped.

5 0

3 years ago

Neon Light Company of Kansas City ships lamps and lighting appliances throughout the country. Ms. Neon has determined that throu

FromTheMoon [43]

Answer:

A. $7,275,000

B. $436,500

C. YES

Explanation:

A. Calculation for how many dollars will the cash management system free up

First step is to calculate for Additional collections

Using this formula

Additional collections=Daily collections× Numbers of days to speed up

Let plug in the formula

Additional collections= $2,250,000 million per day × 3 days speed up

Additional collections=$6,750,000

Second step is to calculate for delayed disbursements using this formula

Delayed disbursements= Daily disbursement × Numbers of Days for slow down

Let plug in the formula

Delayed disbursements= $1,050,000 million per day ×0.5

Delayed disbursements= 525,000

Last step is to calculate for the freed up fund using this formula

Freed up fund=Additional collections+Delayed disbursements

Let plug in the formula

Freed up fund=$6,750,000 + 525,000

Freed up fund=$7,275,000

Therefore the amount of dollars that the cash management system will free up is $7,275,000

B. Calculation for how much will the income be using this formula

Income =Freed up fund× Interest rate

Let plug in the formula

Income=$7,275,000×6%

Income=$436,500

Therefore the income amount will be $436,500

C. YES it should be implemented reason be that the income amount of $436,500 is $36,500 ($435,600- $400,000) higher than New system total cost of the amount of $400,000

3 0

3 years ago

A survey by the National Restaurant Association found that 70% of consumers say that they are more likely to visit restaurants t

LekaFEV [45]

To determine the number of consumers which might prefer eating locally produced food, we simply multiply the metropolitan population by the decimal equivalent of the percentage given. That is,
= (1,773,120)(0.70)
= 1,241,184
Thus, 1,241,184 will most likely prefer the locally produced food.

3 0

3 years ago