Answer:
C) $120,000
Explanation:
Since Copper corporation owns 65% of Bronze Corporation, its dividends received deduction (DRD) is 80% of the dividends received.
- stake at another corporation is less than 20%, DRD = 70%
- stake at another corporation is between 20% to 80%, DRD = 80% (Copper's case)
- stake at another corporation is higher than 80%, DRD = 100%
Therefore, if Copper received $150,000 in dividends from Bronze, it can deduct 80% of that amount = 80% x $150,000 = $120,000
Answer:
d.9.34%
Explanation:
The formula for the weighted average cost of capital is provided below as a starting point for solving this question:
WACC=(weight of equity*cost of equity)+(weight of debt*after-tax cost of debt)
weight of equity=1-debt %=1-50%=50%
weight of debt=50%
cost of equity=13.6%
after-tax cost of debt=7.8%*(1-35%)
after-tax cost of debt=5.07%
WACC=(50%*13.6%)+(50%*5.07%)
WACC=9.34%
The discount rate is computed based on the target or preferred capital structure
Answer:
The option (b) 2.4 is correct.
Explanation:
We can find price elasticity of demand by using the formula shown in the attachment attached with.
Since we know the quantities of product associated with the market price of the product, by putting values in the equation we have:
Price elasticity of Demand =
= [(6000 - 4000) / (6000 + 4000)/2] / [(13 - 11) / (13+11)/2]
Price elasticity of Demand = 2.4
So this is how we can find the price elasticity of supply which says that the producers will respond to prices drop by producing lower quantity of product.
Answer:
truth of lending act
Explanation:
laid the foundation for consumer protection
Answer: Law of diminishing marginal utility
Explanation: In simple words, law of diminishing marginal utility states that as a consumer consume more of a good or service then the marginal benefit he or she receives from the additional consumption keeps on decreasing.
In the given case, Jenny's excitement keeps on decreasing with every chocolate she receives after a certain point of time.
Hence we can conclude that the given case illustrates law of diminishing marginal utility.
