Answer: Illegal home use.
Explanation:
An illegal home use is when an additional structure is added to an already existing building, or a building is converted to be used for another purpose other than the original plan or purpose for the building which was approved by the government agency in charge city planning.
Illegal home use can lead to: overcrowding, obstruction of emergency fire exits, and exposing building occupants and neighbors to unsafe conditions.
Converting a residential home to an antique store is an example of illegal home use.
Answer:
b. $6,600,000
Explanation:
The computation of the fee is shown below:
= Annual management fee + performance management fee
where,
Annual management fee = $400 million × 0.01 = $4 million
And, the performance management fee
= Incentive percentage × hedge fund × excess return
= 20% × $400 million × 3.25%
= $2.6 million
The excess return is
= {($445 million - $400 million) × $400 million - 8%}
= 11.25% - 8%
= 3.25%
So, the fee is
= $4 million + $2.6 million
= $6.6 million or $6,600,000
Answer:
The alternative that should be chosen assuming identical replacement is:
Alternative B.
Explanation:
a) Data and Calculations:
Alternatives:
A B
First Cost $5,000 $9,200
Uniform Annual Benefit $1,750 $1,850
Useful life, in years 4 8
Rate of return 7% 7%
Annuity factor 3.387 5.971
Present value of annuity $5,927.25 $11,046.35
Net cash flow $927.25 $1,846.35
b) Alternative B yields a higher return than Alternative A. Since the two alternatives are based on the same rate of return, Alternative B will bring in a higher annual benefit, even when discounted to the present value.
Answer:
The correct answer is letter "D": the costs of non-action in removing the conflict will always be higher than the cost of removing the conflict.
Explanation:
Conflicts of interest arise in organizations when the personal interest of a representative contrasts the interest of the company typically resulting in an unethical action. An example of a conflict of interest is influencing the recruitment of an applicant because the representative knows that person.
<em>In case the cost of conflict is high, even higher will be the cost of non-action in removing the conflict since it will be detrimental for the company's interest over the long run.</em>
A. It reversed the earlier decision in Plessy v. Ferguson.
