Answer:
A. 1/3 computers
B. 0.6 computers
Explanation:
A. The opportunity cost incurred by the US to make cars is the number of computers it would have to give up to make a car.
The US can either make 12 cars or 4 computers. For every car made therefore the US forgoes;
= 4/12
= 1/3 computers.
B. The same logic applies to Japan. They can either make 10 cars or 6 computers.
Their opportunity cost for cars is therefore;
= 6/10
= 0.6 computers
Answer:
The cost assigned to Job 7 at the end of the week is 5,700 dollars.
Explanation:
In job order costing the cost that is to be assign to a specific order is sum of actual direct material cost and actual labour cost require to perform that job. Factory overheads are also added to the job cost on the basis of allocation method (on basis of budgeted applied OH rate).
So Following costs will be assign to Job 7.
RAW materail = $ 700
Labor Cost = $ 3000
Overhead = $ 2000 (10* 20)
Total Cost = $ 5700
Answer: The Japanese companies invest in Brazil in order to cut cost.
Explanation:
Since Brazil is one of the world's lowest-cost producers of ethanol and soybeans. Japanese corporations investing heavily in Brazil to lease large tracts of land to grow soybeans for export to Japan, are doing this in order to minimize their cost.
Growing soyabeans in Brazil is cheaper since there's a lower cost of producing it when compared to the higher cost of producing it in Japan. This in turn, helps the Japanese companies reduce their cost as the cost of factor Input is reduced and also the Japanese companies can make more profit.
Option C is incorrect when allocating service department costs to operating departments.
<u>Explanation:
</u>
Typically, fixed costs are not assigned to working departments; however, they have to be absorbed by the service. This statement is incorrect in the service dept. Cost to Operating dept.
The reciprocal method assigns the cost of services to operating departments and other departments. The reciprocal costs are identified and the costs are assigned to each other and to services offered by each service department.
For example, if Service Department A requires certain services of Service Department B, the cost allocation system would not include these services. Since these services are not delegated to other departments, some auditors assume that the direct approach is not right.
