Answer:
Stuart Manufacturing Company
Assets = $107,200
Explanation:
a) Data and Calculations:
Cash Account
Common stock $89,000
Furniture (32,000)
Equipment (40,000)
Salaries (12,000)
Wages (21,000)
Raw materials (26,000)
Sales 72,000
Cash balance $30,000
Inventory:
Cost = $26,000
Units produced = 10,000 units
Cost per unit = $2.60 ($26,000/10,000)
Cost of goods sold = 8,000 * $2.60 = $20,800
Ending inventory = 2,000 * $2.60 = $5,200
Sales Revenue = 8,000 * $9 = $72,000
Assets:
Cash $30,000
Ending inventory 5,200
Furniture 32,000
Equipment 40,000
Total $107,200
b) An asset is something that brings in future cash flows to the business entity. It is made up of Cash and Cash Equivalents, Inventories, Property, Plant, Equipment, and other business investments. Assets are funded from finance provided by creditors and the equity owners, and they generate economic values.
Answer:
1. I feel like Pat's new strategy isn't ethical. Pat doesn't pay for the suits; he just buys them and then returns them. Pat benefits, but the store he gets the suits from doesn't. In fact, they are harmed from this transaction because they are unable to have the suit for others to buy while Pat has it. There could be consequences with this strategy. For example, the suit might be damaged, and Pat won't be able to return it. Another problem is that others might find out about Pat's strategy, and they might view them as unprofessional. This is a problem for Pat since the reason Pat wore those suits was to look professional.
2. The stores are harmed from this transaction. They are unable to sell the suits to other buyers. The stores lose potential customers, so the stores lose potential money.
3. The companies should record that Pat had bought the suit only to return it the next day, so that they can act accordingly when Pat or someone else comes back to "buy" a suit.
Explanation:
Answer:
45%
Explanation:
The market for good x is initially in equilibrium at $5. the government then places a per-unit tax on good x, as shown by the shift of s1 to s2.
As a result of the shift in the supply curve a new equilibrium price is established at $6.25
That implies that the share of the burden that consumers will bear is $1.25 (which represents 55% portion of the tax) - the difference between the previous and new equilibrium prices.
The other 45% portion of the tax will be borne by the producers
According to the case, the use of Ph.D. on the ads for hair care products by John Smith is considered an example of the fallacy of inappropriate expertise.
The provided statement is true.
<h3>What is a fallacy?</h3>
A fallacy is an unlawful statement that is used by someone in stating any reasoning or argument which can even be harmful to society.
In the given case, John is having Ph.D. degree in the archaeology field, and his attempt to use the word Ph.D. on the haircare goods marketed by him would be a fallacy in respect of inappropriate expertise. The fallacy could be the use of the Ph.D. word on ads and the inappropriate expertise is that he doesn't have any knowledge regarding skincare and dermatology area.
Therefore, this may create a harmful effect on the individuals who are buying them as it is not authorized by a dermatologist.
Learn more about the fallacy in the related link:
brainly.com/question/2516239
#SPJ1
All economic questions and problems arise from <span>C. scarcity. scarcity is defined as the lack of resources and is the opposite of abundance. If scarcity such as famine is experienced by a country or nation, there arise questions why such state happened</span>
