Answer:
$4,200 over applied
Explanation:
For computing the over applied overhead, first we have to find out the predetermined overhead rate which is shown below:
Predetermined overhead rate = (Total estimated manufacturing overhead) ÷ (estimated direct labor-hours)
= $327,080 ÷ 14,800 hours
= $22.1
Now we have to find the actual overhead which equal to
= Actual direct labor-hours × predetermined overhead rate
= 13,900 hours × $22.1
= $307,190
So, the overhead over applied would be
= Actual manufacturing overhead - applied overhead
= $302,990 - $307,190
= $4,200 over applied
Answer:
Jones is right in this lawsuit
Explanation:
Arbitration is the process by which disputes are settled between parties. When there is a disagreement between parties an arbitrator comes in to give a fair and unbiased view of the situation.
A solution that is agreed to by all parties is agreed upon to settle.
In this scenario where Jones is filing a lawsuit against BigMoney LLC for violating the Securities Exchange Act by engaging in fraudulent excessive trading, this is a violation of the law and not a dispute between parties.
So the arbitration clause is is not binding and the arbitration clause should be nullified.
Answer:
$ 25
Explanation:
As per the description, the exact amount that is being contributed from the corn bushel to the Gross Domestic Product would be $ 25. The price at which the farmer sold it to the supermarket would not be included in the GDP because it would be considered as an intermediary good because the good purchased for the resale purpose is not included in GDP as it leads to double-counting. Thus, <u>only the price of the final good i.e. $ 25 would be included in GDP as it will now be used for final consumption by the customers</u>.
Answer: All of the Above
Explanation:
The Clayton Act of 1914 was passed to curb unfair business practices as well as to protect the rights of labour.
Some practices that were prohibited when they led to less competition include,
- A firm acquiring a major percentage of the stocks of a competing firm because this could signify an amalgamation of efforts on the part of both firms and they could therefore have some control over Pricing.
-A director from one business sitting on the board of a competing firm because this could lead to cooperating or Corperate espionage.
- A buyer is forced to buy multiple products from a producer in order to get a desired product is expressly forbidden.
