All categories

3 years ago

Which of the following is not a disadvantage to inflation targeting?

Business

1 answer:

Irina18 [472]3 years ago

5 0

Answer:

D is the correct option

Explanation:

Enhancement of transparency and reduction of price variability are the two advantages of the inflation targeting. Inflation targeting allows the central bank to maintain low inflation. Low inflation promotes long term growth. Enhanced financial growth and reduction in relative price availability are other benefits of inflation targeting. With inflation-targeting central banks can set long term inflation objectives. Increasing accountability and transparency in monetary policy are other benefits. It also helps to predict inflation maintain price stability

You might be interested in

As the u.S. Price level rises relative to price levels in other countries. True or False

vovangra [49]

Answer:True,

Explanation:The question is As the u.S. Price level rises relative to price levels in other countries. What will happen in the U.S.?

The answer is that consumption and net exports would decline.

8 0

3 years ago

Cash Acme Company Balance Sheet As of January 5, 2021 (amounts in thousands) 13,700 Accounts Payable 3,200 Debt 5,100 Other Liab

IgorC [24]

Answer:

Acme Company

1. Acme Company

Balance Sheet

As of January 6, 2021 (amounts in thousands)

Cash 13,819

Accounts Receivable 3,188

Inventory 5,100

Property Plant & Equipment 15,445

Other Assets 800

Total Assets 38,352

Liabilities and Equity:

Accounts Payable 2,000

Bank Payable 67

Debt 3,600

Other Liabilities 900

Total Liabilities 6,567

Equity:

Paid-In Capital 7,285

Retained Earnings 24,500

Total Equity 31,785

Total Liabilities & Equity 38,352

2. The final amount in Accounts Payable remains $2,000,000, but the Bank Payable increased from zero to $67,000.

Explanation:

a) Data and Calculations:

Acme Company

Balance Sheet

As of January 5, 2021 (amounts in thousands)

Cash 13,700

Accounts Receivable 3,200

Inventory 5,100

Property Plant & Equipment 15,400

Other Assets 800

Total Assets 38,200

Liabilities and Equity:

Accounts Payable 2,000

Debt 3,600

Other Liabilities 900

Total Liabilities 6,500

Equity:

Paid-In Capital 7,200

Retained Earnings 24,500

Total Equity 31,700

Total Liabilities & Equity 38,200

Transaction Analysis:

1. Cash $12 Accounts receivable $12

2. Equipment $45 Cash $45

3. Cash $85 Paid-in Capital $85

4. Cash $67 Bank payable $67

Cash

Beginning balance 13,700

Accounts receivable 12

2. Equipment (45)

3. Paid-in Capital 85

4. Bank payable 67

Ending balance 13,819

4 0

3 years ago

The following are the income statements of the Hancock Company for two consecutive years. Increases in which expenses contribute

dsp73

Answer:

Increase in Administrative Expense of $3,300 additional led to loss in the year 2016.

Explanation:

As for the provided details:

Particulars 2016 2015

Revenue $30,000 $20,000

Cost of goods sold $17,800 $12,000

Gross margin $12,200 $8,000

Operating Exp

Selling Exp $4,800 $4,600

Admin. Exp $7,800 $3,000

Total operating exp $12,600 $7,600

Net Income ($400) $400

As we see the major difference which is irrelevant is in administration expense, that is because difference in cost of goods sold is somewhere justified as, when it calculated as a percentage of sale that is $12,000/$20,000 = 60%

Thus for year 2016 also the expense shall be $30,000 $\times$ 60% = $18,000

Thus, it is justified but for administrative expense $3,000/$20,000 = 15%

For 2016 = $30,000 $\times$ 15% = $4,500

But since it is very much exaggerated, by $7,800 - $4,500 = $3,300 this is the main reason of loss.

5 0

3 years ago

Kali contracts to sell leony her car for $3,000. this contract will be fullydischarged when kali and leony

Usimov [2.4K]

This deal will be fully discharged when Leony pays Kali the $3000 for the car and Kali hands over her car to Leony so that Kali has the money and Leony has the car which means the transaction has been successfully completed.

4 0

3 years ago

Using the payoff matrix, and assuming no collusion between X and Y, what is the likely pricing outcome? A. Both firms will se

jeka57 [31]

Answer:

A- Both firms will set the price at $35

Explanation:

When there is no collusion,

When Y charges $40, X's best strategy is to charge $35 since payoff is higher ($59 > $57).

When Y charges $35, X's best strategy is to charge $35 since payoff is higher ($55 > $50).

When X charges $40, Y's best strategy is to charge $35 since payoff is higher ($69 > $60).

When X charges $35, Y's best strategy is to charge $35 since payoff is higher ($58 > $59).

Therefore Nash equilibrium is: ($35, $35).

7 0

3 years ago