<h2>
10 workers would cause the marginal to exceed the marginal benefits.</h2>
Explanation:
- Let us understand the term "Marginal benefits".
- It is the additional amount that the consumer "willing to pay" for an additional goods or a service.
- In terms of producers, the marginal benefit is termed as marginal revenue.
- Here according to the situation given in the question as to how many workers to hire could be answered by the number 10.
- Marginal revenue always falls below marginal cost.
- It is the revenue that the organization receives for selling one additional unit.
Answer:
1. per se application
U.S. Competition Law
This law checks whether certain parts of a contract or agreement have violated US antitrust laws.
2. Misuse of activity
EU Competition Law
This is part of the European Union's competition law that prohibits the use of activity to try to gain unfair advantges.
3. Extraterritoriality
US and EU
This is a provision in both US and EU anti-competition and anti-trust laws that states that the activities of foreign companies fall under the law if these activities influence the people within the jurisdiction of the US or the EU.
4. Trade obstacle, nontariff
France
These are a part of the French system.
5. Strict liability
U.S. Tort Law
A concept in US Tort law that states that a person is liable for an offence they committed and their state of mind or intent when they committed said offence is irrelevant.
6. Punitive damages
U.S. Product Liability Law
A concept in the US that allows for the extra punishment of the party in the wrong to dissuade others from doing so and to reward the party in the right more justly.
$4225 here’s how I got the answer so he purchased 13 shares but each share cost $325 so 13 times 325 is 4225
Answer:
The value of the intangible will remain at $350,000
Explanation:
The reason is that the International Accounting Standard IAS-36 says that once the impairment is recognized for the intangible assets it can not be reversed which means that the amount reported would be $350,000. The reason is that it is very rare that the asset gain its value and specially those which are intangible assets. Most of the management in the 1990s-2000 tried to recognize a gain on impairment which was unjustifiable to increase their profits for the period so the standard specifically didn't permitted gain on a previously impaired asset.
