Answer:
22% by creditors and 78% by investors
Explanation:
We just have to focus on the total assets, total liabilities and total stockholders' equity amounts.
As we have known, Assets = Liabilities + Stockholders' Equity
That is $41,000 = $9,000 + $32,000
To get the percent financed by creditors just divide the liabilities by the assets. So $9,000 / $41,000 will give us 0.22 or <u>22% financed by creditors.</u>
<u></u>
Same goes for the percent financed by stockholders, just divide the stockholders' equity by the assets. So $32,000 / $41,000 will give us 0.78 or <u>78% financed by stockholders.</u>
<u></u>
<em>Take note that the total of the 2 percentages should equal to 100%.</em>
<em>To check 22% + 78% = 100%</em>
Government's sources of revenue are taxes it takes from citizens and borriwing money
Answer:
Occurs when a company issues bonds with a contract rate less than the market rate.
Explanation:
As we know that
The premium on bond payable arise when the company issued the amount more than the face value amount this result in high interest rate as compared with the market interest rate
While on the other hand, the discount on note payable arise when the issued amount is less than the face value that results in low interest rate as compared with the market interest rate
Hence, the first option is correct
Answer:
Increase in Price Level and Decrease in Real GDP
Explanation:
An increase in imports is tied to the net-export effect which says that a higher price level is tied to a decrease in the relative price of foreing imports from other countries thus propiciating an increase imports
The Real GDP is the same as the GDP but without taking into account the price changess
This is the equation for the GDP:
GDP: Private consumption (C) + Gross investment (I) + Government spending (G) + (Exports(X) – Imports(M)).
An increase in imports means a decrease in the GDP and in the Real GDP.
Answer:
import tariff
Explanation:
Actually during the 1990s Japanese cars were subject to import quotas and luxury Japanese cars (13 models) were threatened with a 100% import tariff. Since 1981 until the mid 1990s, total Japanese cars imported to teh USA were limited to 1.68 million per year.
The import quotas resulted in Honda building cars in America and later Toyota followed (now Nissan, Mazda, and Subaru have factories in America). We can say that the policy was successful, since at least the cars were built domestically.
The problem with the import tariffs is that they wouldn't help American industries, the companies that would have benefited were BMW and Mercedes Benz. Lexus and Accura are not even similar to Cadillac and Lincoln, so they are not competitors. Japanese luxury cars compete against German luxury cars, and that was something both governments ended up realizing. It was more of a blackmail in order to increase American exports to Japan than actually axing the cars, since the US knew that the tariffs were illegal (the WTO had warned them already) and they also knew they wouldn't benefit American car manufacturers. The problem with American cars in Japan is that they were not adapted to Japanese roads (they drive on the other side of the road) and they were too large. That is the same problem with European roads, that is why currently only Ford sells cars in Europe, GMC sold its European divisions and Chrysler (even though Italian) didn't sell cars there either.