Answer:
8.66%
Explanation:
The computation of the rate of return for the investor in the fund is as follows:
= (Net assets at the end + dividend per share - nav at the beginning of the year) ÷ (nav at the beginning of the year)
where,
Net assets at the end is
= $203 million + $203 million × 7% - ($217.21 million × 0.75%)
= $203 million + $14.21 million - $1.6291 million
= $217.21 million - $1.6291 million
= $215.58093 million
Dividend per share is
= $5 million ÷ 10 million shares
= 0.5
Nav at the beginning of the year is
= $203 million ÷ 10 million shares
= $20.3
Now the rate of return is
= ($215,.58093 + 0.5 - $20.3) ÷ ($20.3)
= 8.66%
The answer is true.
hope this helped :)
Answer:
C, the board of directors of IFS
Explanation:
The board of the IFS is ultimately responsible for the corporate climate that resulted in the use of substandard ingredients in the meals meant for the troops.
This is because the directors are the ones at the helm of affairs and they decide what happens in the IFS. This means that at least one of the directors is aware of the use of substandard ingredients . It can be said that if one knows, all other know. This phrase convieniently indicts the directors.
Cheers.
<span>To keep the tulips from bending as they often do, you tie them with raffia, a technique known as B. skeletonizing
This type of technique helps the flowers be tied together. The raffia is used like a skeleton for the flowers to stand straight. It supports the tulips, preventing them from bending. </span>
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.
