Answer:
$844,000
Explanation:
Given that,
Accounts Receivable = $900,000
Credit balance of Allowance for Doubtful Accounts per books before adjustment = $50,000
Expected amount of uncollectible = $56,000
Bad debt expense at the end of the period is determined by subtracting the credit balance of allowance for doubtful accounts from the expected amount of uncollectible.
Bad debt expense:
= Expected amount of uncollectible - Credit balance
= $56,000 - $50,000
= $6,000
At the end of the period, the allowance for doubtful accounts has a balance of $56,000 that are to be uncollectible.
The cash realizable value of the accounts receivable at December 31, after adjustment, is determined by simply subtracting the Allowance for doubtful accounts from the accounts receivable. It is calculated as follows:
= Accounts Receivable - Allowance for doubtful accounts
= $900,000 - $56,000
= $844,000
The investor will show a capital loss of $155.
We gather the following information from this question:
Pop of the fund three years ago : $12
NAV of the fund three years ago : $11.50
Current Pop : $11
Current NAV : $10.45
Number of shares : 100 shares.
We need to calculate capital loss or gain on the 100 shares in the mutual fund.
While taking the cost per unit, <u>we need to consider the public-offer-price (pop) into consideration, since an investor can only buy the shares at pop</u>.
Similarly, while selling the shares, the <u>shareholder can liquidate his position by selling back to the mutual fund at the NAV prevailing at the end of the business day</u> on which he wants to sell.
So, the formula to calculate capital gain or loss is:
Answer:
The amount of paid-in capital $
Common stocks (22,000 x $2) 44,000
Preferred stocks (1,800 x $120) 216,000
Amount of paid-in capital 260,000
The correct answer is C
Explanation:
The amount of paid-in capital is the total of paid-in capital of common stocks and paid-in capital of preferred stocks. The paid-in capital of each stock is computed as number of stock multiplied by par value of each stock.
Answer:
No, Jim is not correct.
Explanation:
Betty will win this case.
Generally, the law encourages marriage as its policy. If there is any contract that prevent or restrict marriage in whatever way, such contract would be considered null and void because it is against the public policy.
Despite the above, contracts will be generally considered valid when they place reasonable restrictions on marriage. In this question, the restriction placed on Betty that she should get married until after her 22nd birthday is reasonable and has to be considered to be valid. Based on this, Betty has to be paid the $25,000 as laid down in the binding contract between the two parties.
Therefore, Jim is not correct.
I think what would fill that blank space would be failure due to the fact that something with his business may have gone wrong or a wrong transaction was made. But sometimes these things can actually be a major plus for them without them even realizing before they made the choice.
