Answer:
$3,000 and $35,000
Explanation:
The computations are shown below:
The depreciation expense would be
=(Original cost - residual value) ÷ (useful life)
= ($50,000 - $5,000) ÷ (15 years)
= ($45,000) ÷ (15 years)
= $3,000
In this method, the depreciation is same for all the remaining useful life
The book value would be
= (Original cost of equipment) - (depreciation × number of years)
= ($50,000) - ($3,000 × 5 years)
= $50,000 - $15,000
= $35,000
Answer:
Net promoter score.
Explanation:
Net promoter score can be defined as a metric that measures the customers willingness to recommend the clients product and services to others.
In Business management, one of the key metrics that is being used by producers or service providers to measure the efforts of a customer to recommend their products and services to others is the net promoter score. The net promoter score is graded on a scale of -100 to 100 to measure customer satisfaction and the willingness of the customer to recommend such products or services to their peers, families or colleagues.
This ultimately implies that, a net promoter score helps business owners to gather information on how satisfied their customers are and if they would be loyal enough to the brand by recommending their products or services to others.
Answer:
c. None of these
Explanation:
According to the scenario, computation of the given data are as follows,
Company Beta = 1.7
Risk free rate = 5%
Average market return = 16%
Marginal tax rate = 30%
So, we can calculate the after tax cost of equity by using following formula,
Cost of equity = Risk free Rate + company beta × Average market return
Cost of equity = 5% + (1.7 × 16%)
= 5% + 27.2%
= 32.2%
<span>The difference may lie in the project life, sometimes referenced as the planning horizon. A project may have a large internal rate of return (irr), but a very short project life. A second project might have a lower irr, but a much longer life. In that case, the second project will return less per year, but will provide a return for many more years, resulting in a higher pw.</span>
Answer:
1. Recording
2. Authorization
Explanation:
Based on the scenario described above, it can be concluded that the control issue, in this case, arose because the Director had both RECORDING and AUTHORIZING duties.
This is because, for the Director of Information Technology for the city of Tampa, Florida not to have been convicted by a jury regardless of what she did, she must have followed the Segregation of Duties accordingly. This is a means of reducing the errors or fraudulent activities of employees.
And given she has a RECORD of transactions to prove her innocence and at the same time, she has AUTHORIZATION or the approval to supply the software, and hence, she is not guilty of the accusation.