Answer:
<u><em>But where do we go from here? </em></u>
It depends on the result of more government intervention on quality life standards.
<u><em>Do we need less or more government involvement? </em></u>
It depends on the problems that need to be addressed. For example, to address problems such inequality it is mandatory that the government gets involve and create laws to prevent it. But surely for more movement of capitals there is no need of higher government involvement.
<u><em>Is it a question of the quality of that involvement? </em></u>
Yes. If government has an effective involvement there is even desirable to have its intervention but if it complicates everything then is repeled.
<u><em>Could it be smarter rather than just less? </em></u>
Yes, because it is proved that the economy acts in an effective way to good policy making.
<u><em>How can the cost of government involvement decrease?</em></u>
In this aspect it is important to mention the environmental issues in nowadasy economy. If the measurement of what is defined as "cost" is understand in the long run as conservation and balance between nature and economic explotation of resources.
Answer:
The advertising spend would reduce income taxes by $2.8 million
Explanation:
The advertising expense since it is allowable expense from profits made in the year would reduce income taxes next year by $2.8 million ($8 million *35%)
This means that because of its tax deductibility,it would make a business sense to incur the advertising cost of $8 million coupled with the fact the it has the potential to increase sales revenue over and above the current level of $280 million
Answer:
Explanation:
In my opinion, I would like to say that Clean Machines Company is correct. If you look at it this way, you'd see that there actually isn't any contract between Clean Machines Company and Dealer. When it came to about offers, the person offering is able to revoke an offer before the offer is even accepted. And he won't be held responsible unless of course, the offer is irrevocable. Then, to make the offer to be irrevocable, the Dealer then would have needed to prove that an option was present, or prove that the offer is was not able to be revoked due to UCC provision.
15,900 is my because thats how much only sandra will pay.
Answer: $7,740
Explanation:
Given, At December 31, Accounts receivable = $238,000
Allowance for uncollectible accounts = 3% of (accounts receivable)
∴ Allowance for uncollectible accounts = 3% of ($238,000 )
=$(0.03 ×238,000) [3% = 0.03]
= $ (7140)
= $7,140
Allowance for uncollectible accounts (credit) before any adjustments= $600
The amount of the adjustment for uncollectible accounts = Allowance for uncollectible accounts + $600
= $7,140 + $600
= $7,740
Hence, The amount of the adjustment for uncollectible accounts would be: <u>$7,740.</u>
