Answer:
a. Gordon made a gift when the real estate was purchased of <u>$450,000</u> to Fawn.
Since Gordon gave 50% of the real estate to his sister as a gift when he purchased it, the gift must be valued at the time it happened ($900,000 x 50%)
b. Gordon's estate must include <u>$2,900,000</u> as to the property.
Gordon purchased all the real estate by himself, so his estate must include the value of the whole property.
c. How would the estate tax consequences change if it was Fawn (not Gordon) who died?
Fawn's estate would include <u>$0</u> as to the property.
Since Fawn didn't buy the property, her estate cannot include any amount of it.
Answer:
$1,103.56
Explanation:
In this question, we use the PMT formula that is shown in the attachment. Kindly find it below:
Provided that
NPER = (82 - 66) × 12 = 192
Present value = $136,000
Future value = $0
Rate of interest = 6% ÷ 12 months = 0.5%
The formula is shown below:
= PMT(Rate;NPER;-PV;FV;type)
The present value come in negative
So, after solving this, the monthly payment is $1,103.56
Answer:
Selling price= $79.17
Explanation:
Giving the following information:
Direct materials cost $43
Direct labor cost $11.30
Variable overhead cost $ 5.30
Fixed overhead cost $ 1.30
Target markup 30 %
<u>The absorption costing method includes all costs related to production, both fixed and variable.</u> The unit product cost is calculated using direct material, direct labor, and total unitary manufacturing overhead.
Unit product cost= 43 + 11.3 + 5.3 + 1.3= $60.9
<u>Now, the selling price:</u>
Selling price= 60.9*1.3
Selling price= $79.17
Answer:
minimum transfer price $12
Explanation:
The minimum transfer price should be the cost to produce the additional units to transfer. AKA <em>marginal cost</em>
In this case, the division faces $12 of variable cost to produce a single unit.
As long as the units to transfer are within the relevant range of the current capacity the fixed cost are irrelevant for the transfer price as these are sunk cost (already incurred)
Answer:
B. economic efficiency and economic equity.
Explanation:
These two systems economic efficiency and economic equity are particularly been seen or used as a criteria that required in system of allocation. Efficiency here are known to be trade off which are particularly affected by a lot different policies. An example is seen between equity and efficiency can be explained with government environmental policy. Whoever benefits most in natural resources exploitation and at the cost, is a policy question that needs to be answered. The effect from these exploitation fall on the masses directly when carefully observed.
