Answer:
C
Explanation:
Firstly, we consider if the expenses is limited or not limited within the framework of the section 179.
Considering the framework, it can be seen that the expenses of $500,000 is not limited under section 179
The maximum depreciation expenses can be calculated as follows;
(600,000-500,000) * 0.1429 = 14,290
We then add the expenses of section 179 = 500,000
The value of the maximum depreciation expenses is thus 500,000 + 14,290 = 514,290
Answer:
a. a depreciation of the home currency
Explanation:
Floating exchange rate system is a system in which the exchange rates of any currency depends upon the forex market, basically the supply and demand force of the country in international trade.
Depreciation in home currency will make it cheaper for the country top export, as less payment need to be made for same goods by other country if the home country exports.
Imports will turn expensive, which shall decline imports.
Accordingly receipts will increase and payments will decrease, which shall result in re framing current account and the deficit shall be decreased and might be reversed into surplus.
When we buy something it becomes our property after purchase but not in the case of lease agreement. Thus, the correct option is "I would like to walk out of the deal with something to show for the money I put in,"
<h3>What exactly is a lease?</h3>
A lease is a legal agreement in which a user agrees to pay the owner for the use of an item.
This differs from buying, in this the property turns into the users' assets after purchase; nonetheless, those who "would want to walk out of the deal with something to show for the money I put in" can choose to buy rather than lease.
Thus, Option D is the correct answer.
To learn more about lease, refer to the link:
brainly.com/question/24460932
This is an exit strategy when an entrepreneur sells his or her company to its managers a management buyout. Management buyout, MBO, is defined as a transaction where a company's management team will purchase assets and operations within the business that they manage. The can purchase from within their organization or from other parent company's. This technique gives the person/company a shortcut to having more financial freedom.
Answer:
Yes, any intentional misrepresentations by the applicant should be enough to permit the insurer to deny coverage for a loss even if the misrepresented fact had no relationship to the loss
Explanation:
This is because in case of any intentional misrepresentations the insurer gets a right of recession that is based upon fraud.
In this case the misrepresentation by Hamza voids the policy ab-initio (i.e. at its inception). This is because the misrepresentations by Hamza in this case were with regards to material facts related to the property and this misrepresentation may have induced the insurer to act and thus insure the property. Here the misrepresentations were that the property had a sprinkler system and always had a guard on duty. These two material misrepresentations led the insurer to make an incorrect risk assessment with regards to property and this incorrect and lower assessment of risk profile of the building led the insurer to provide insurance coverage.
Thus, we can conclude that even though the misrepresentations made by Hamza had no relationship to the loss but still the insurer can deny coverage in this case.