Answer:
Explanation:
Cash flow statement should include items that are either received or paid for in cash. In the given case, the following items have been incorrectly reported
Issuance of Note for Truck is a non-cash transaction as well as Purchase of Truck with a Note. There is no cash involved with either transaction. Depreciation is listed in the sources of cash however depreciation is a non-cash operating expense and should not be included. The organization of the statement of cash flows presented in the question is not correct as well. Once organized in the correct manner and adjusted for the depreciation correctly the result is net increase in cash at 119,000 not 109,000. This shows that the Cash flow from operating activities provides a net income of -33,000 which is a loss
Answer:
$1,779.90
Explanation:
Formula for finding the amount he has to save, this formula would be used :
Amount = FV / annuity factor
Annuity factor = [(1 + r)^n - 1 / r]
FV = Future value = $5920
n = number of years = 3
i = interest rate = 10.5
Annuity factor = (1.105^3 - 1 ) / 0.105 = 3.326025
$5920 / 3.326025 = $1,779.90
Consumption efficiency (Ec) is defined as a ratio, expressed as a percentage: a final output's effectual value divided by its potential value
"All employees must be at their work stations and ready to work by the time the buzzer sounds." this is an example of rule. Rules are a must in order to manage employees in the workplace effectively . If rules are <span>correctly implemented and executed both sides (the business/company and the employees ) will be satisfied and successful. </span>
Answer: The correct answer is True.
Explanation: This is a case of employer liability - employers are liable to their employees' act, whether it was due to the employer's intention or not, or whether the employer means to cause harm or not, provided the employees still act within the scope of their employment. The same applies if the employees had carried out good deeds within the scope of their employment, the employers share the good news - just the same way an employer profits from employee's labor, the employer is legally liable when the employee commits harm.
Employers are <em>vicariously liable</em> under doctrine of "respondeat superior" for the negligence or omissions caused by their employees during the course of their employment with the company. The doctrine of "respondeat superior" according to Law dictionary means a doctrine in tort law that makes a master liable for the wrong of a servant. There was a particular scenario I witnessed: a colleague of mine while working late at work had a visitor at the Reception and opted to see him. Unfortunately for her, an accident happended - a car broke into the office and she sustained a lot of injuries. The employer paid for all her reimbursable expenses during her treatment, paid her mum a certain amount for taking care of her, including buying her a new phone because the old one got damaged during the accident although insurance took care of some of the health bills. Because the employer knew it was binding in the court of law, she could not be forced to resume. She eventually resumed after 6 months!
