Answer:
are $270 billion
Explanation:
Change in business inventories in 2012 = -$70 billion
GDP of 2012 = $200 billion
Final sales in 2012 = GDP - Change in inventory
Final sales in 2012 = $200 billion - (- 70 billion )
Final sales in 2012 = $200 Billion + 70 billion
Final sales in 2012 = $270 billion
Hence proved that the correct answer is $270 billion
Answer: the correct answer is $70000
Explanation: the fair value of the shares given plus the fair value of the contingent consideration is the total amount paid by the buyer which is (20000 shares * $10 price per share) = $200000+$10000= $210000.
The gain of the transaction is registered as the net fair value of the acquiree that is $350000-$70000= $280000 less the sum paid by the Acquirer that is $280000-$210000= $70000.
The $15000 in direct acquisition costs are registered as period expenses and not relevant for the calculation of the gain of the transaction.
Answer:
Real purchasing power increase= 2.16%
Explanation:
Giving the following information:
You deposit $1,900 in your savings account that pays an annual interest rate of 3.25%. The inflation rate is 1.09%.
In this example, we have two different and opposite effects. The interest rate increases your purchasing power. If the inflation rate is 0, the purchasing power will increase (in one year) 3.25%.
The inflation rate decreases the purchasing power of nominal income.
Real purchasing power increase= annual interest rate - inflation rate
Real purchasing power increase= 3.25 - 1.09= 2.16%
Answer:
E. None of the above
Explanation:
because the price level is not known, we can not tell definitely that the output is increased or unemployment is decreased or standard of living is increased
.
Therefore, we cannot conclude on anything.
Answer and Explanation:
1. Business implication: if there are no trade barriers, it would enable them get better raw materials for their business and increase customer base
Legal anti trust implication: lobbying is illegal in some countries
2. Business implication: this would attract more manufacturers who were not previously members of the association which would in turn promote the goals of the association in improving trade amongst the manufacturers
Legal anti trust implication: associatio may be exposed to legal examination, example increased regulations
3 business implications:sales territories would invariably create a safe and secure investment for manufacturers such that there is less cost of marketing and campaigning as consumers are guaranteed
Legal implications: this is against anti trust laws and goes against free trade policies and illegal monopoly
4 business implications: boycotting this supplier could create an alternative source of raw materials which wouldn't be as efficient and even cost more
Legal implications: boycotting a large supplier such as this who might have a political backing might bring political retaliations from the supplier's political proxies who might create other regulations in the supplier's favour
