Answer: Finite loading approach
Explanation: In a finite loading approach, the work centers are scheduled to load up to a predetermined capacity amount. This is a type of approach that is used in manufacturing process that are heavily dependent on a single cost center.
Thus, we can conclude that the right answer for the given case is finite loading approach.
There is a violation of antitrust laws that happens that unreasonably restricts competition and functions against the public interest. This is just one of the three parameters that apply to a business and how they may violate antitrust laws. An Antitrust law is a state and federal recognized law that is in place so that there can be adequate business competition.
Answer: $200,000
Explanation:
The cost will be allocated to customer Y, if a cause-effect relationship cannot be established with any cost driver will be calculated thus:
Total sales = $600,000 + $400,000 + $200,000 = $1,200,000
The percentage of Y on total sales will be:
= $400,000/$1,200,000 × 100
= 1/3 × 100
= 33.33%
Therefore, the cost that's allocated to Y will then be:
= $600,000 × 33.33%
= $600,000 × 0.3333
= $200,000
Therefore, the correct answer is $200,000
Answer:
Instructions are listed below.
Explanation:
Giving the following information:
A machine costing $251,800 was purchased May 1. The machine should be obsolete after three years and, therefore, no longer useful to the company. The estimated salvage value is $3,400.
A) Straight-line:
Annual depreciation= (original cost - salvage value)/estimated life (years)
Annual depreciation= (251,800 - 3,400)/3= $82,800
B) Double declining balance:
Annual depreciation= 2*[(original cost - residual value)/estimated life (years)]
Year 1= (248,400/3)*2= 165,600
Year 2= 55,200
Year 3= 18,400
Answer:
b. not protected by the First Amendment
Explanation:
Based on the information provided within the question it can be said that the Julia's website is not protected by the First Amendment. This is because the Supreme Court has never interpreted freedom of speech to allow the inclusion of obscenities. Which "threatening posts about celebrities" would fall under the category of obscenity and not be protected under the First Amendment.
