All categories

3 years ago

All sources of income is also known as which of the following?

2 answers:

5 0

All sources of income is also known as gross income. Correct answer: A It is the total income from all sources before deductions or taxes.For companies, gross income can also be known as gross profit . This measure can be used to determine whether an individual is a worthy borrower or renter.

Juliette [100K]3 years ago

3 0

The answer i would choose is A

You might be interested in

The Sharpe Company reports the following information for 2015: Sales $76,500 Direct materials used 7,300 Depreciation on factory

Strike441 [17]

Answer:

Period Cost for 2015 : $35,000

Explanation:

M 7,300

DL 10,500

Dep fac 4,700

Indirect labor 5,900

indirect materials 1,200

factory rent 4,200

fac utilities 1,200

total overhead 17,200

Cost : DM + DL + FO

7,300 + 10,500 + 17,200 = 35,000

<em>Notice: </em>The sales salaries and office salaries are expense, their are not included in the unit cost, so are not period cost. They are expenses of the period.

7 0

3 years ago

You've collected the following information about Molino, Inc.: Sales $ 215,000 Net income $ 17,300 Dividends $ 9,400 Total debt

evablogger [386]

Answer:

(a) 15.46%

(b) $11,904.11

(c) 6.15%

Explanation:

(a) Sustainable growth rate:

$Return\ on\ equity\ (ROE)=\frac{Net\ income}{Total\ equity}$

$Return\ on\ equity\ (ROE)=\frac{17,300}{ 59,000}$

= 29.32%

Retention Ratio = 1 - Dividend Payout

$=1-[\frac{9,400}{17,300}]$

= 45.66%

$Sustainable\ growth\ rate=\frac{(ROE\times Retention\ Ratio)}{(1-ROE\times Retention\ Ratio)}$

$Sustainable\ growth\ rate=\frac{(0.2932\times 0.4566)}{(1-0.2932\times 0.4566)}$

$=\frac{0.1338}{0.8662}$

= 0.15446

= 15.46%

(b) Additional borrowing:

New Total Asset = (Total debt + Total equity) × (1 + Sustainable growth rate)

= (77,000+59,000) × (1 + 15.46%)

= 157025.4

$New\ Debt=\frac{D}{D+E}\times New\ Total\ Asset$

$New\ Debt=\frac{77,000}{77,000+59,000}\times 157024.4$

= $88904.11

Increase in Borrowing = New debt - old debt

= $88,904.11 - $77,000

= $11,904.11

$ROA=\frac{Net\ income}{Debt+equity}$

$ROA=\frac{17,300}{77,000+59,000}\times 100$

= 12.72%

$Internal\ growth\ rate=\frac{(ROA\times Retention\ Ratio)}{(1-ROA\times Retention\ Ratio)}$

$Internal\ growth\ rate=\frac{(0.1272\times 0.4566)}{(1-0.1272\times 0.4566)}$

$=\frac{0.0580}{0.942}$

= 0.0615

= 6.15%

6 0

3 years ago

As part of an estate settlement Mary received $1 million. She decided to use the money to purchase a small business in Anywhere,

Kipish [7]

Answer:

Following are the solution to the given point.

Explanation:

For question 1:

Economic gains are distinct from bookkeeping gains. Accounting value also takes into account the cost of potential.

$\text{Economic Profit = Accounting Profit - Loss of salary - Risk free bond income}$

$= 150, 000 -75,000 - 1,00,000\\\\= - 25,000$

that's why "option a" is correct.

For question 2:

The "option d" is correct.

For question 3:

The "option c" is correct.

7 0

3 years ago

7. Eva and Maria entered into a written contract pursuant to which Eva was to render decorating services for Maria for a total p

xxMikexx [17]

Answer:

(a) Eva endorsed the check, without making any further notations on it, deposited it and sued Maria for the remaining $15,000 she claims is due. Judgment for whom?

Maria's debt is settled (cancelled) because Eva accepted the check and did not write "under protest" or "without prejudice" when she endorsed it. This debt was an unliquidated debt since maria and Eva did not agree on the total amount due, but since Eva cashed the check without writing down any type of notation with respect to their disagreement, the debt will be considered settles.

(b) Instead of the facts in (a) assume that Eva wrote "under protest" on the check when she endorsed it and, after depositing it, sues Maria for $15,000. What result?

If Eva wrote under protest, then she is not accepting Maria's payment. She is entitled to cash the check because she might need the money, but she is making it clear that she doesn't agree with the settlement. Eva could win the suit (that also depends on other factors not specified in the question).

(c) Instead of the facts in (a) and (b), assume that Eva and Maria had a telephone conversation in which Eva agreed to take $60,000 in full satisfaction of Maria’s obligation under the contract. Maria then sent the check, with a letter referencing the telephone conversation. Eva wrote "under protest" on the check, endorsed and deposited it, and then sued Maria for $15,000. What result? Explain.

Unless Maria can prove that Eva agreed with the $60,000 payment, then a court would not even consider the telephone call and the outcome would be similar to question (b). The problem with oral agreements is that one party will say this and the other party will say something else. You need some type of proof in order for an oral agreement concerning a $75,000 (or even $60,000) dispute to be valid.

3 0

3 years ago

The price quotations of Treasury bonds in the Wall Street Journal show an ask price of 104.25 and a bid price of 104.125.

Andreas93 [3]

As a seller we would receive $1,041.25

<u>Solution:</u>

You may receive the bid price of the dealer, $104.125\%$ of $1,000, or $1,041.25