Answer:
Mark should include in the letter to avoid litigation charges:
Specific facts about the consultant that can be verified.
Explanation:
False information, sentiment-hurting statements, or personal opinions about the consultant's character should never be found in formal letters that are meant to offer constructive criticisms. This means that only specific facts that are verifiable should be included. Formal letters are not avenues for character defamation. They are called "formal" because they must stick to specific and relevant official purposes.
Answer and Explanation:
1. Margie Johnson would be ethically wrong if she grants the boss's favour to not report inventory shrinkage. Also financial statements would not show a true and fair view if she decides to follow what her boss is asking. She should report true inventory value in financial statements.
2. Yes Ryan is being professional since he is out to improve company's sales and income even though he may be putting pressure on employees to work overtime
Answer:
The correct answer is d) neither the long-run Phillips curve nor the Classical dichotomy.
Explanation:
The answer that best suits the situation described is the Phillips curve in the short term but not in the long term.
The Phillips curve starts from the principle that the amount of money circulating (commonly called "money supply") has real effects on the economy in the short term. In this way, an increase in the money supply would have a beneficial effect on aggregate demand, as citizens will spend more when their nominal wages are increased (known as “monetary illusion”) and a more favorable framework for investment and investment will be created. that the prospects of rising prices will improve the expectations of corporate profits. The improvement in aggregate demand would result in greater economic growth, and this in turn in the creation of new jobs. This is how an inverse relationship between inflation and unemployment is established, expressed graphically by a downward curve.
Answer:
EPS of Plan I = $3.19
EPS of Plan II = $2.82
Explanation:
Under Plan I:
Plan I's Earning per share (EPS) = EBIT ÷ Number of shares = $575,000 ÷ 180,000 = $3.19
Under Plan II:
Interest = $2,600,000 × 8% = $208,000
Earning after Interest = EBIT - Interest = $575,000 - $208,000 = $367,000
Plan II's EPS = $367,000 ÷ 130,000 = $2.82
5% of 2265$ is 113,25$
Because 5% is 5/100 so 5 x 2265$ = 11325$
11325$ : 100 = 113,25$
Second year cost is the first year’s plus 5% so
2265$ + 113,25$ = 2378,25$ (second year cost)
