Pn = P0(1+r)∧n
Pnis future value of P0
P0 is original amount invested
r is the rate of interest
n is the number of compounding periods (years, months, etc.)
P(n) = 2250(1+(.03/4)∧8
** since the interest is compounding quarterly, you need to divide the rate by 4, the number of quarters in a year.
Then you would do the math.
Answer:
A. $32.08
Explanation:
Dividend=$1.25
Capital gain after one year=$35
Rate of return=13%
Formula for this will be;
Share price=(dividend+capital gain)/(1+rate of return)
Share price=(1.25+35)/(1+.13)
Share Price=36.25/1.13
Share price=32.08
The correct answer is choice B.
Choice B, a company recognizes expenses when they incur them, is the only choice which is in accordance with US Generally Accepted Accounting Principals. All of the other options are against GAAP.
Option C
Direct labor hours ; Indirect labor is not an example of a cost and its related cost driver
<u>Explanation:</u>
A cost driver triggers a variation in the price of the activity. The idea is everywhere ordinarily employed to allocate aloft prices to the abundance of built assemblies. It can further be related to activity-based costing inquiry to ascertain the circumstances of expenses, which can be done to depreciate overhead prices.
In unusual accounting systems, cost drivers are practically inapplicable in determining the enrichment, Quantity of set-ups, Amount of machine-hours, Amount of labor hours, Abundance of orders bound and uttered.
Answer:
Jill cannot hold the manufacturer responsible for her injury.
Explanation:
The above question is incomplete as there are several answer options which are listed below;
• Jill can hold the manufacturer liable for her injury as long as Lexi was in the room when she got
• Jill can hold the manufacturer liable for her injury
• Jill cannot hold the manufacturer responsible for her injury
• Lexi can hold the manufacturer liable for Jill's injury.
The above answer - Jill cannot hold the manufacturer responsible for her injury, is true according to the rule of privity of contract. The rule states that a person who is not a party to a contract does not have right to sue or be sued and to enforce the obligations arising from the contract, unlike a person who is a party to the contract.
With regards to the above scenario, Lexi, who buys a food processor is the party to the contract here, hence can sue and be sued in case of any injury suffered by her, however, Jill whom food processor was loaned to, is the third party here, hence not covered by the rule of privity of contract.
