Answer: d. Sell 210 shares and loan out the proceeds at 8 percent
Explanation:
Because the Firm wants to use a Debt to Equity Capital structure instead of an All Equity structure, she can lend money out at the company interest rate to NEGATE the conversion.
She can do this by selling 35% of her portfolio and loaning it out at 8%
35 % of her Portfolio would be,
= 0.35 * 600
= 210 shares
So she can sell 210 shares and loan at the proceeds at 8% to offset the Company's conversion
Answer:
the value of the project is $16,096.88
Explanation:
The computation of the value of the project is shown below:
= (Expected amount generated per year × (1 - (1 ++ rate of returm)^-time period )) ÷ rate of return
= $36,950 × [1 - 1.1^-6] ÷ 0.1
= $16,0926.88
Hence, the value of the project is $16,096.88
We simply applied the above formula so that the correct value could come
And, the same is to be considered
Answer:
A. property tax payments made in July and December
Explanation:
Indirect costs are defined as those cost that a business incurs during normal operation or production process that are not directly traceable to the product. Indirect costs include rent, taxes, salaries, and maintenance cost.
In this scenario if indirect costs are calculated monthly there will be discrepancy of taxes are paid in July and December. This is because during the first six months of the year tax will not be accounted for, and also from August to November tax will not be recognised. Therefore monthly calculations will not be a true reflection of indirect costs incurred.
1) Town of Bayport:
We have that the residents value the fireworks at
a total of 50+100+300=450$. That is the utility they gain. But they
would also have to pay 360$ for the fireworks. The total outcome is
450$+(-360$)=90$. Hence, the outcome is positive and the fireworks pass
the cost benefit analysis.
If the fireworks' cost is to be split
equally, we have that each of the 3 residents has to pay 360/3=120$. Let
us now do the cost-benefit analysis for everyone.
Jacques stands to gain 50$ from the fireworks but would have to pay 120$. He will vote against it.
Also, Kyoko will gain 100$ but would have to pay 120$. He will lose utility/money from this so he will vote against.
Musashi on the other hand, would gain 300$ and only pay 120$. He is largely benefitted by this measure. Only he would
We have that 2 out of the 3 would vote against the fireworks, so that the fireworks will not be bought. The vote does not yield the same answer as the benefit-cost analysis.
2) Town of River Heights:
We have that the total value of the fireworks to the community
is 20+140+160=320$. The total value of the fireworks is lower than
their cost so their cost benefit analysis yields that they should not be
bought.
However, let's see what each resident says. The cost to each resident is 360/3=120$. Rina is against the fireworks since she will only gain 20$. Sean and Yvette are for the fireworks since they gain 140$ and 160$ respectively, which are larger than the cost of the fireworks to each of them (120$). Hence, 2 will vote for the fireworks and one will vote against and fireworks will be bought.
Again, the vote clashes with the cost-benefit analysis.
3) The first choice is wrong. It is very difficult for a government to provide the exact types of public goods that everyone wants because that would be too costly; one cannot have a public good that everyone pays for so that only a couple of people enjoy it. In our example, we saw that in every case, a public good and its production would have sime supporters and some adversaries.
Majority rule is not always the most efficient way to decide public goods; as we have seen in the second case, the cost-benefit analysis yields that the fireworks are not worth it but they are approved by the majority nonetheless.
The final sentence is correct. The differing preferences of the people make a clearcut choice impossible and the government has to take into account various tradeoffs and compromises in order to determine which public goods to provide.