Answer:
Non-controlling interest in net income decreased would have by $6,000
Explanation:
The computation of net income is shown below:-
Profit on Intra-Entity Sales = Revenue - Cost of goods sold
= $200,000 - $140,000
= $60,000
Profit on Intra-Entity Sales × 25% still in Ending Inventory
= $60,000 × 25%
= $15,000
Adjustment to Net Income × 40% for Non-controlling Interest
= $200,000 × 25% × 30% × 40%
= $6,000
Net profits will go decline by $6,000
Based on the national income and income per capita, the population of the country is 10,000 people.
If the population and total income grow, the income per capita is $302.91 but if the country's population does not grow, the income per capita is $312.
<h3>How is income per capita found?</h3>
It is found by the formula:
= Total income / Population
The population is therefore:
= 3,000,000 / 300
= 10,000 people
The income per capita if population grows 3% and total income grows 4% is:
= (3,000,000 x 1.04) / (10,000 x 1.03)
= $302.91
If only the total income grew:
= (3,000,000 x 1.04) / 10,000
= $312
Find out more on income per capita at brainly.com/question/2041857
#SPJ1
Answer:
Yes, any intentional misrepresentations by the applicant should be enough to permit the insurer to deny coverage for a loss even if the misrepresented fact had no relationship to the loss
Explanation:
This is because in case of any intentional misrepresentations the insurer gets a right of recession that is based upon fraud.
In this case the misrepresentation by Hamza voids the policy ab-initio (i.e. at its inception). This is because the misrepresentations by Hamza in this case were with regards to material facts related to the property and this misrepresentation may have induced the insurer to act and thus insure the property. Here the misrepresentations were that the property had a sprinkler system and always had a guard on duty. These two material misrepresentations led the insurer to make an incorrect risk assessment with regards to property and this incorrect and lower assessment of risk profile of the building led the insurer to provide insurance coverage.
Thus, we can conclude that even though the misrepresentations made by Hamza had no relationship to the loss but still the insurer can deny coverage in this case.
Dominique's hotel is a <u>"learning" </u>organization.
A learning organization refers to an organization which is skilled at making, getting, and exchanging information, and at changing its conduct to reflect new learning and bits of knowledge.
In business management, a learning organization is an organization that encourages the learning of its individuals and constantly changes itself.
Answer:
This is an actual court case where the Supreme Court of Rhode Island ruled in favor of Cox Communications in February, 2014.
The court ruled that Ovalles was an employee for M&M, and that M&M had an independent contractor relationship with Cox Communications. Additionally, Ovalles was also an independent contractor for M&M, not an employee. There existed no direct relationnship between Cox and Ovalles.
Even though Ovalles and other independent contractors use both Cox's and M&M's logos on their vans and uniforms, this was done so consumers could identify them. The fact that an identification is needed so customers can determine the function of a technician, doesn't imply that those technicians are actually employees of the firm nor they actually a method of control over the technicians.
Since Cox didn't control the performance of Ovalles and didn't have contact with him, then there was no reason to consider him an employee of Cox.
The plaintiff, Barbara Cayer probably made a mistake when it included Cox in the lawsuit (since it is a large company), and she would have had a better case against M&M because that company did have control over Ovalles's performance and did have contact with him. But since M&M was a much smaller firm, they decided to go after the big fish. Later they tried to include M&M into the lawsuit but it was rejected since the Supreme Court had not made their ruling yet.