Answer:
The correct answer is 2
Explanation:
The market outcomes are the accounting indicators of the sales as well as profit revenue and the market share which is commonly used outcomes in the measure of the performance for the marketing.
Markets are for organize the economic activity. But the governments sometimes improve the market outcomes, not always So, there is not agreement regarding that the government to improves the market outcomes. The standard of living of company grounded on the ability to produce the goods and services.
Answer:
$34,500
Explanation:
Calculation to determine total revenues for the year
Using this formula
Total revenues=Increase in Assets+Decreased in liabilities+Dividends+Expenses
Let plug in the formula
Total revenues=($11,000-$19,000)+($9,000-$7,500)+$4,000+$21,000
Total revenues=$8,000+$1,500+$4,000+$21,000
Total revenues=$34,500
Therefore total revenues for the year is $34,500
Answer:
Under government bankruptcy laws of the United States, anybody can declare financial insolvency in order to look for help from leasers. In any case, this comes to the detriment of harming one's financial assessments for quite a while (now and then upto a multi year time span) alongside bringing about critical lawful,, procedural and court charges.
That being stated, liquidations are significantly troublesome procedures essentially in light of the fact that loan bosses would not need any account holder to take the easy way off in the event that the indebted person wouldn't like to restitution. This is considerably progressively evident if there should be an occurrence of understudy advances where the borrower (Kay for this situation) needs to demonstrate without sensible uncertainty that he/she would confront "undue hardship" in the event that he/she were to continue with credit reimbursements. The "undue hardship" demonstrating part is available to an assortment of understandings, rounds of questioning and lawful examination by the courtroom. Most courts use the "Brunner Test" to decide an indebted person's qualification for understudy advance release. The key arrangements of the test are set somewhere around the United States Department of Education's, Federal Student Aid Office as given beneath:
(a) The account holder, in view of his/her present pay and costs, can't keep up a better than average "insignificant" way of life for himself/herself and his/her wards in the event that he/she were to proceed with the advance reimbursements.
(b) Additional conditions demonstrate certain the way that this condition will prevail for a larger part of the residency of the advance reimbursement.
(c) The borrower has taken a stab at reimbursing his/her understudy advance in accordance with some basic honesty up until this point.
In this specific situation, Kay would be in an ideal situation in attempting to get the advance deferred, on the off chance that she declares financial insolvency post changing her activity. This is so on the grounds that her present place of employment pays enough to reimburse her understudy advance and consequently don't meet two of the three Brunner Test models. Exchanging over to the non benefit employment would compromise her present way of life (and most likely that of her wards) and adjusts to the fundamental soul of the "Brunner Test". It would off base be upto her legitimate insight to demonstrate this danger (post work change) to her expectation for everyday comforts before the court and addition an understudy advance waiver.
The answer is: Credit with all team members
When the credit for the success of the team only given to one person, it most likely create a situation when other team members felt that they are not being valued for their efforts. Sharing credit with all team members would make team members felt that their presence/effort matters.
Answer:
- Divorce after 2020 = Alimony is $0
- Divorce before 2020 = Alimony is $12,000
Explanation:
If the divorce occurred before 2020 then the spouse paying the alimony can deduct it from their taxes and the person receiving it has to include it in their income. If the divorce of Jake and his spouse was before 2020, he will be able to include the full $12,000 as a deduction.
In 2020, new regulation came into effect that meant that couples divorcing from thence will not be able to deduct alimony so Jake's deduction would be $0 if they divorced in 2020 and onwards.
