Answer:
Increase of 130 million
Explanation:
In this question, we are looking to evaluate what has happened to change in deferred tax assets. We proceed as follows;
Firstly, we calculate the current tax.
Mathematically = 40% of 400 million = 40/100 * 400 million = 160 million
Now, as we can see in the question, a decrease in deferred tax asset resulted in an increase in tax expense to a tune of $50 million
This brings the total tax expense to 160 million + 50 million = 210 million
We can see from the question that the company has only recognized a tax expense of $80 million.
This means that the change in deferred tax asset was an increase of 210 million- 80 million = $130 million
Answer:
because answer key you give you answer
Answer:
See answers below
Explanation:
1 The predetermined overhead rate
= Cost of manufacturing overhead / Cost driver.
Where cost driver
= labor cost / labor rate
= $240,192 / $12.51
= 19,200 hours
Expected overhead
= depreciation + supervisor + supplies + property tax
= 56,500 + 140,000 + 46,400 + 27,750
Total overhead = 270,650
Overhead rate = 270,650 / 19,200
= 14.10 per hour
2. The amount t of applied overhead for of 18,500 actual hours were worked on
= 18,500 hours × $14.10
= $260,850
Answer:
The correct answer is True.
Explanation:
When an intoxicated person enters into a contract, the contract can either be enforceable, meaning held to the fullest extent of the law, or voidable by the intoxicated person. The court will look at two criteria that need to be present in order to make the contract voidable:
-
The intoxication was severe enough that the person entering into the contract was incapacitated.
-
The other party was aware of the intoxication at the time.
A voidable contract, in this instance, is one in which the intoxicated party can end the agreement under certain terms. To expand on the criteria above, in order for the intoxicated person to void the contract, there needs to be adequate proof that one of the following occurred:
-
The intoxicated person consumed enough alcohol or drugs to cause impairment in thinking sufficient enough that he could not understand the legal ramifications of entering into the contract.
-
The other party to the contract knew of the intoxication.
