The answer is A because there is a loss of value of a countries with one or more foreign reference
Answer:
Job 765 Job 766
Direct material $5,670 $8,900
Direct labor $3,500 $4,775
Overhead $5,400 $8,800
(27*200) (44*200)
Total Job cost $14,570 $22,475
b) Cost per unit = Total job cost/unit produced
Job 765 = $14,570/152 units
Job 765 = 95.86
Job 766 = $22,475/250 units
Job 766 = 89.90
Answer:
No, it is not a valid argument for import protection
Explanation:
There are several arguments that are waged in favor of protectionism. One of the most common, that is seen in this question, in the unfair competition argument, in which domestic producers argue that producers from abroad pay unfair wages, or engage in dumping, or do not pay enough for raw materials.
The fact is, what is a substandard wage in the United States, is probably an average, or even higher-than-average wage in Indonesia, because wages are determined by the market conditions in each country. Indonesia, as a low-income country, has wages on average well below the average wage in the United States, a high-income country.
Therefore, domestic producers do not have any valid reason to demand import protection because Indonesian producers pay substantially lower wages than them. These are economic realities given by market conditions.
Answer:
<u>FIFO</u>
total ending inventory 11,080
COGS 10,200
<u>LIFO</u>
ENDING 10,200
COGS 9,480
For taxes reasons it would be better to use FIFO as the COGS is higher then, less income taxes
The higher net income will be with the method of lower COGS which is LIFO
Explanation:
beginning 100 at 78
40 at 80
60 at 82
40 at 94
<em>FIFO </em>
the ending inventory will be the last units: as the first are being sold
40 at 94
60 at 82
30 at 80
<u>total ending inventory 11,080</u>
<u>COGS</u>
100 at 78 and 10 at 80 = 10,200
<em>LIFO</em>
here the ending inveotry are the first unit while the COGS the last:
ending
100 at 78
30 at 80
ENDING 10,200
<u>COGS</u>
40 at 94
60 at 82
10 at 80
total 9,480
