Answer:
The amount of the proceeds would be allocated to paid in capital from preferred stock is $283,636.36.
Explanation:
Fair value of common stock = Common stock fair value per share * Number of common shares issued = $25 * 10,000 = $250,000
Fair value of preferred stock = Preferred stock fair value per share * Number of preferred shares issued = $20 * 15,000 = $300,000
Total fair value = Fair value of common stock + Fair value of preferred stock = $250,000 + $300,000 = $550,000
Amount allocated to preferred stock = (Fair value of preferred stock / Total fair value) * Lump sum proceeds = ($300,000 / $550,000) * $520,000 = $283,636.36
Therefore, the amount of the proceeds would be allocated to paid in capital from preferred stock is $283,636.36.
Answer:
Separate financial statement are adjusted and prepared for parents and subsidiaries.
Explanation:
Answer:
The unit value os $20 which Ross should use
Explanation:
LCM stand for or termed as Lower of Cost or Market approach- This approach is described as the inventory values at the historical cost or lesser than the replacement cost of market.
NRV stands for or termed as Net Realizable Value- This rule or method is defined as the estimated selling price, which the company expects to gather in the cash form from the customer through the sale of the inventory.
Computing the unit value as:
Given,
Cost price per unit is $20
Selling price per unit is $30
Selling cost per unit is $4
Using the NRV method:
NRV = Selling Price - Selling Cost
= $30 - $4
= $26
Using the lower of cost rule:
Cost = Cost of product
Cost = $20
Therefore, the $20 is the unit value which Rose should use.
Answer:
$2,000,000
Explanation:
The computation of the firm total corporate value is shown below:
The firm corporate value is
= Free cash flow for next year ÷ (weighted average cost of capital - growth rate)
= $100,000 ÷ (11.5% - 6.5%)
= $2,000,000
We simply applied the above formula to find out the firm corporate value
And ignored the required rate on equity i.e 14.5%
Answer:
Weak because of proximate cause is difficult to prove in absence of other similarly affected individuals
Explanation:
Since in the question it is mentioned that the 60 year old man have a lung cancer so he sues the asbestos manufacturer also he trust that it is unsafe as her friend who use the alternative material has not have a lung cancer so here the case would be weak as of proximate cause as it is difficult for proving it
Therefore the same is to be considered