Answer:
Case summary:
D is a college alum gets trapped in a blizzard on his way home. He was furnished with nourishment and haven by an old couple and he returned home once the climate was clear. D's dad F guaranteed the couple to pay $500 recorded as a hard copy for their assistance and the couple acknowledged. In any case, as D and F had contrasts later, F denied paying that sum.
Case investigation:
Thought: Consideration is the advantage or worth got by the gathering for satisfaction of their guarantee. On the off chance that there is no thought, the agreement isn't enforceable. Following are the components of thought:
-
Lawfully adequate worth: The thought ought to have some an incentive under the lawful arrangements.
-
Dealt trade: The thought ought to give the chance to deal between the gatherings. It implies one gathering should return something of significant worth to the next gathering for execution of that party.
For instance, an individual A guarantees B that he would pay $1,000 for driving him to chip away at that day. Here. An is paying $1,000 for B as an arrival for driving him to work (execution).
A guarantees him to give him a vehicle as he was graduated. It isn't thought since B didn't vow to perform anything. It is only a present for B from A.
Past Consideration: The guarantees which were made by a gathering for the presentation of activities in past by another gathering are unenforceable. As there is no anticipated trade component, it is no thought.
Right now, old couple gave haven to D. They neither guarantee D to give cover nor bartered that he ought to give them something to return.
F guaranteed them to pay $500 as a demonstration of thankfulness for their assistance yet it is a present for their assistance in past. In this way, it isn't past thought.
Consequently, the couple can't hold F at risk for making the installment for giving haven to his child.
Working capital is calculated by subtracting current liabilities from current assets shown on a company's balance sheet. Current assets include cash, accounts receivable and inventories. Current liabilities include accounts payable, taxes, wages and accrued interest.
Working capital is calculated by subtracting current assets from a company's current liabilities. For example, if a company has current assets of $100,000 and current liabilities of $80,000, its working capital is $20,000.
To calculate the working capital requirement, the following formula can be used: Working Capital (WC) = Current Assets (CA) – Current Assets (CL).
Learn more about working capital here:brainly.com/question/19804046
#SPJ4
Answer: Ethical Obligations and Decision-Making in Accounting-The Heading is devoted to helping students cultivate the ethical commitment needed to ensure that their work meets the highest standards of integrity, independence, and objectivity.
* This program is designed to provide instructors with the flexibility and pedagogical effectiveness, and includes numerous features designed to make both learning and teaching easier.
Explanation: The first, addressed in Part I, is the administrative cost of deregulation, which has grown substantially under the Telecommunications Act of 1996.Part II addresses the consequences of the FCC's use of a competitor-welfare standard when formulating its policies for local competition, rather than a consumer-welfare standard. I evaluate the reported features of the FCC's decision in its Triennial Review. Press releases and statements concerning that decision suggest that the FCC may have finally embraced a consumer-welfare approach to mandatory unbundling at TELRIC prices. The haphazard administrative process surrounding the FCC's decision, however, increases the likelihood of reversal on appeal.Beginning in Part III, I address at greater length the WorldCom fraud and bankruptcy. I offer an early assessment of the harm to the telecommunications industry from WorldCom's fraud and bankruptcy. I explain how WorldCom's misconduct caused collateral damage to other telecommunications firms, government, workers, and the capital markets. WorldCom's false Internet traffic reports and accounting fraud encouraged overinvestment in long-distance capacity and Internet backbone capacity. Because Internet traffic data are proprietary and WorldCom dominated Internet backbone services, and because WorldCom was subject to regulatory oversight, it was reasonable for rival carriers to believe WorldCom's misrepresentation of Internet traffic growth. Event study analysis suggests that the harm to rival carriers and telecommunications equipment manufacturers from WorldCom's restatement of earnings was $7.8 billion. WorldCom's false or fraudulent statements also supplied state and federal governments with incorrect information essential to the formulation of telecommunication policy. State and federal governments, courts, and regulatory commissions would thus be justified in applying extreme skepticism to future representations made by WorldCom.Part IV explains how WorldCom's fraud and bankruptcy may have been intended to harm competition, and in the future may do so, by inducing exit (or forfeiture of market share) by the company's rivals. WorldCom repeatedly deceived investors, competitors, and regulators with false statements about its Internet traffic projections and financial performance. At a minimum, WorldCom's fraudulent or false
Answer:
<h2>NOT FROM NEPAL BUT FROM INDIA .........</h2>
Answer:
The cash (net) realizable value of the accounts receivable is accounts receivable less the ending balance in the Allowance for Doubtful Accounts.
800,000 - 65,000
This brings the total to $735,000.
