Answer and Explanation:
The computation of the effective annual rate in each of the following cases are
1.
Effective annual rate = [(1+annual percentage rate ÷ period)^period]- 1
= (1 +0 .09 ÷ 4)^4 - 1
= 9.31%
2.
Effective annual rate = [(1+annual percentage rate ÷ period)^period]- 1
= (1 + 0.16 ÷ 12)^12-1
= 17.23%
3.
Effective annual rate = [(1+annual percentage rate ÷ period)^period]- 1
= (1 + 0.12 ÷ 365)^365-1
= 12.75%
4 .
Effective annual rate = [(e)^Annual percentage rate]-1
e=2.71828
So,
=[(2.71828)^0.11]-1
= 11.63%
Answer: The correct answer is B : a $5,000 decrease in cash, a $15,000 increase in notes payable, and a $20,000 increase in equipment, all entered on the same date.
Explanation: The option B is correct because we are accounting for a purchase of a piece of equipment. The options in the questions show that the purchase was partly through cash and partly through notes payable. Since that is the case, the appropriate entries should record a cash outflow (credit to cash to decrease it), increase in notes payable as a result (credit to notes payable to increase) and subsequently, increase in equipment (debit to equipment). <em>So, the total credits equal the total debit.</em>
<em />
Answer:
Case 1 = $9,420
Case 2 = 0
Explanation:
Determining the amount of impairment loss is given below:-
Case 1
Impairment loss = Amortized cost - Fair value
= $41,640 - $32,220
= $9,420
Case 2
Impairment loss = Amortized cost - Fair value
= 91,800 - $102,220
= 0
Since, the fair value is higher than Amortized cost so the value of Impairment loss in case 2 is 0.
Answer:<em> Option (D) is correct </em>
Explanation:
To weaken the conclusion, the answer will emphasize on why Baurisia will not soon become an importer of grain.
Here, in this case if importing meat is cheaper than importing grain, then Baurisia is likely to satisfy the demand for meat by becoming an importer of meat, weakening the conclusion that Baurisia will soon become an importer of grain.
<em>Therefore , It is more economical for Baurisians to import meat than grain, if true, most seriously weakens the argument.</em>
