The FAFSA4caster is a free tool which provides an early estimate of your federal student aid eligibility. It analyzes your household income and assets to determine your expected family contribution or EFC.
The Cost of Good Sold is $36,000 lower than it should have been and the net income is $36,000 higher than it should have been.
There are two formulas that are important to know for this question. The first is Beg. Inventory + Purchases - Ending Inventory = COGS. The second formula is Sales - Cost of Good Sold = Gross Profit.
If you reported a higher ending inventory it is going to result in a lower value for Cost of Good Sold. In this case the company had too high of an ending inventory by $36,000, which mean that the COGS is $36,000 lower than actual.
When you have a COGS that is lower than it should be you are going to have a gross profit which is overstated. The Income is overstated by $36,000.
Answer:
$780
Explanation:
Since King agreed to pay Taylor $4,680 for the one-year period which is divisible into 12 months
On the other hand Taylor is confident that King will pay that amount, but payment is not scheduled to occur until 2019, Therefore the amount to be recognized in 2018 will 2 months comprising November and December.
Therefore 2018 revenue = 2 / 12 x $4,680 = $780
Answer:
Rose Marie received $152 in earned income and $25 in transfer payments.
Explanation:
Based on the information provided within the question it can be said that in this scenario Rose Marie received $152 in earned income and $25 in transfer payments. The $152 from her "side hustle" is basically from a service that she provided, which she worked (earned) for. Since the other payment was given to her from her grandmother, it is said to have transferred ownership, thus it is a transfer payment.
Answer:
exculpatory clause
Explanation:
Exculpatory clause in contracts is a clause that protects the person issuing it from liabilities of damages to an asset that may not be in their possession or out of their control. It prevents one party from the holding the other liable for damages to an asset during the execution of a contract. This is what Jack has done to protect himself from the liabilities that may result from any damages during the contract.
