Answer:
The journal entry should be:
November 1, 2013, six months of rent paid in advance
Dr Prepaid rent 4,260
Cr Cash 4,260
Assets = liabilities + equity
cash prepaid rent
-$4,260 $4,260 $0 $0
Revenues - Expenses = Net income
$0 $0 $0
This operation represents an operating cash flow activity.
Answer:
With respect to the employment-at-will doctrine, this is "An exception based on public policy"
Explanation:
Under the public-policy exception to employment at will, an employee is wrongfully discharged when the termination violates an explicit, well-established public policy of the state. For example, in most states, an employer can't terminate an employee for filing a workers' compensation claim after being injured on the job, or for refusing to engage in illegal activity at the request of an employer.
Public policy may be found in a state constitution, statute, administrative rule, or other state policy. The public-policy exception is the most commonly accepted exception, recognized in the vast majority of states.
Answer:
Take a minority equity interest in the operation.
Explanation:
Multiple Choice
a) Sell competitive advantage to competitors.
b) Agree to import another product from the Asian market.
c) Take a minority equity interest in the operation.
d) Withhold vital process technology from the local firm.
e) Establish a franchise operation.
A turnkey strategy is a market entry position where the project is built from the ground up and turned over to the client ready to go – turn the key and the plant is operational. This is a very good way to enter foreign markets as the client is normally a government. While when one takes a minority equity interest they do not have the votes to control the operations and finances of the the company’s business.
Kaylee, the Chief Financial Officer for a metal refinery, Kaylee reasons that the company doesn't have longterm interest in the Asian market advises to take a minority equity interest in the operation in order not to lose financially.
Answer:
The answer is B. Ethan has more experience than Karen.
Explanation:
Now, lets take each Answer option separately and see why only B is correct.
Option A is no longer legally accepted or ethical. Perhaps during the era of segregation back in 1960s' this option could have been acceptable. But today it is illegal and is considered as a violation of basic human rights.
Option C is not correct as well because although people with special needs and physical requirements are entitled to receive certain special treatments, paying them more solely based on their disability is not considered suitable nor ethical.
Option D is unacceptable. No one can assume that men have more stamina than women. There are competent, strong and qualified women who can do their jobs much better than men. So we cannot accept this as an answer.
Option E is incorrect as well. Although a person could be an immigrant, once that person has lawfully taken the citizenship of a country, that "immigrant" is considered as a "citizen" of that country (this is not applicable for illegal immigrants!).
However, we can take option B as the answer. This is because when comparing a new employee with a more experienced employee, we can't see any problem in paying the experienced employee more.
