Answer: c. $1,650 unfavorable
Explanation:
The direct labor rate variance shows the difference between the cost of direct labor that the company thought it would incur vs what it actually incurs for the period.
Formula is:
Direct labor rate variance = Actual cost of direct labor - Standard cost of actual hours of direct labor
= Actual hours * (Actual cost - Standard cost)
= 5,500 * (24 - 23.70)
= $1,650 unfavorable
Unfavorable because the actual cost incurred was more than the cost anticipated.
Answer:
B.Her actions are inconsistent with the advice being given to her clients and this must be disclosed
Explanation:
A registered investment adviser often recommends real estate limited partnership investments to her wealthy clients. The RIA's personal financial statement and income are consistent with those of her wealthy clients, yet she never buys limited partnership units for her personal account. Which statement is TRUE
A real estate limited partnership (RELP) is a group of investors who pool their financial resources to invest in property purchasing, development, or leasing. Under its limited partnership status, This form of partnership has a general partner who bears full liability and limited partners who are predispose only up to the amount they contribute
The registered investment adviser does not practice what she teaches. She might just be in the profession for the money. She might also understand the risk associated with the real estate limited partnership investments and hence would want to be risk averse herself. she should let her clients know the nitty gritty of the partnership and put a disclaimer across to them
Answer:
Vehicle registration
Explanation:
Vehicle registration reoccurs annually, the other costs are one time.
Answer:
a)use an ice paddle. it is the most suitable way
Answer:
d, all states, as no state requires at least two members to create an LLC
Explanation:
The requisite of two members to create an LLC was removed from all states in the USA. Now, all states allow a single-member LLC. Massachussets was the last one to eliminate that requisite in 2003.
Maybe this change in laws was because owners cheated on that requisite by placing as the two members (owners) a man and his wife, or a woman and her husband, or some other person (in direct relation with the owner) which was just placing the name but the company actually belonged to only one member.
