Answer:
He a celebrity. One of his biggest songs are Baby, Love yourself, what do you mean, sorry .
The loss on the disposal of the car is $-16,200.
The first step is to determine the total depreciation on the car.
Depreciation expense = percentage depreciation x cost of the asset
$37,000 x 0.1 = $3700
The second step is to determine the book value of the car = cost of the car - depreciation
$37,000 - $3700 = $33,300.
The book value is greater than the selling price of the car, so there was a loss on the sale. The third step is to determine the gain on the sale.
Loss = $17,100 - $33,300 = $-16,200
A similar question was answered here: brainly.com/question/24357323
Answer:
The person with Absolute advantage is the one that produces more of a good than the other.
<em><u>Dina </u></em><em>has an absolute advantage in the production of alfalfa, and </em><em><u>Charles</u></em><em> has an absolute advantage in the production of barley. </em>
The person with Comparative Advantage is the person who produces something at a lower opportunity cost.
Charles Opportunity Costs
Producing Alfalfa gives 12 bushels per acre instead of 6 bushels for Barley.
Producing 1 Alfalfa means 6/12 = 0.5 bushels Barley is given up
Producing 1 bushel of Barley means 12/6 = 2 bushels Alfalfa is given up.
Dina Opportunity Costs
Producing Alfalfa gives 15 bushels per acre instead of 5 bushels for Barley.
Producing 1 Alfalfa means 5/15 = 0.33 bushels of Barley is given up
Producing 1 bushel of Barley means 15/5 = 3 bushels of Alfalfa is given up.
<em>Charles's opportunity cost of producing 1 bushel of barley is </em><em><u>2</u></em><em> bushels of alfalfa, whereas Dina's opportunity cost of producing 1 bushel of barley is </em><em><u>3</u></em><em> bushels of alfalfa. Because Charles has </em><em><u>lower</u></em><em> a opportunity cost of producing barley than Dina, </em><em><u>Charlie</u></em><em> has a comparative advantage in the production of barley, and </em><em><u>Dina</u></em><em> has a comparative advantage in the production of alfalfa.</em>
Answer:
B) not likely to have jurisdiction over the case because QuickAds is based in Georgia.
Explanation:
US laws do not recognize the legal existence of foreign or out of state companies, a company only exists in the state at which it was chartered. Although the internet has complicated things, since boundaries have faded, but some conditions must be met before a state court can serve a foreign company.
For a foreign company to be served by a state court, it must carry on “continuous and systematic” affiliations with residents of the state which makes them “essentially at home”. The company's operations must be substantial enough to make the company at home, i.e. it must carry a significant amount of business within the states boundaries.
Apparently this is not the case with QuickAds, so Alabama state courts will not have jurisdiction over it.