Thank you for posting your question here at brainly. I hope the answer will help you. Feel free to ask more questions.
The strength of bargaining power forces depends on the availability of substitutes and <span>the relative size of the firm </span>compared to the size of suppliers or customers.
Answer:
$4,522
Explanation:
As the restaurant is not acquired so the amount of $28,000 would be non-deductible
Also if the expenses is incurred so the maximum deduction allowed is in excess of $50,000 is $5,000
Now
= $51,000 - $50,000
= $1,000 reduction
And,
= $5,000 - $1,000
= $4,000 deduction
Now
= $51,000 - $4,000
= $47,000
Now
= $47,000 ÷ 180 months
= $261 × 2 months
= 522
Now total deduction is
= $4,000 + $522
= $4,522
Answer:
$120 billion
Explanation:
Economy operating at $300 billion above its natural level of output.
Marginal propensity to consume, MPC = 3/5 = 0.6
For closing this expansionary gap, the government have to decrease its spending by the amount calculated as follows:
Spending multiplier:
= 1/ (1 - MPC)
= 1/ (1 - 0.6)
= 1/ 0.4
= 2.5
Hence, the government spending reduces by
= Expansionary gap ÷ Spending multiplier
= $300 ÷ 2.5
= $120 billion
Answer:
The answer is letter B
Explanation:
Relationships involving income statement accounts tend to be more predictable than relationships involving only balance sheet accounts.
Because analytical procedures are evaluations of financial information made by study of plausible relationships among financial and nonfinancial data using models that range from simple to complex. The reason is that income statement amount is based on transactions over a period of time, but balance sheet amounts are for a moment in time. Moreover, amounts subject to management discretion tend to be less predictable.
I believe it is write the names over and over again because that is is the most effective way to memorize kinetically.
