Answer:
The value of the stock = $19.64
Explanation:
According to the dividend valuation model, <em>the value of a stock is the present value of the expected future cash flows from the stock discounted at the the required rate of return.</em>
Year Workings Present value(PV)
1 $1 × (1.22) × 1.11^(-1) = 1.10
2 $1 × (1.22)^2 ×(1.11)^(-2) = 1.21
3 $1 × ((1.22)^2 × (1.05))/0.11-0.05) = 21.35 ( PV in year 2 terms)
PV (in year 0) of Year 3 dividend = 21.35 × 1.11^(-2)
= 17.33 (see notes)
<em>The value of the stock</em> = $1.10+ $1.21 + 17.3
= $19.64
Notes:
<em>Note the growth applied to year 3 dividend gives the PV in year 2 terms. So we need to re-discount again to year 0.</em>
<em />
The value of the stock = $19.64
Answer:
The correct answer is False.
Explanation:
Schedule M-1 is required when the gross income of corporations or their total assets at the end of the year is greater than $ 250,000.
Schedule M-3 asks certain questions about the financial statements of the corporation and reconciles the net income (loss) of the financial statements for the corporation (or group of consolidated financial statements, if applicable).
B) Family child care <span>refers to care of a child in someone else's home. This is like a day-care that exists in someone's place of residence. Usually there are a number of children enrolled at once, and the care-taker makes the home more suitable to the purpose, ensuring child safety and that there are plenty of activities to stimulate the children.
</span>
Answer:
<u><em>But where do we go from here? </em></u>
It depends on the result of more government intervention on quality life standards.
<u><em>Do we need less or more government involvement? </em></u>
It depends on the problems that need to be addressed. For example, to address problems such inequality it is mandatory that the government gets involve and create laws to prevent it. But surely for more movement of capitals there is no need of higher government involvement.
<u><em>Is it a question of the quality of that involvement? </em></u>
Yes. If government has an effective involvement there is even desirable to have its intervention but if it complicates everything then is repeled.
<u><em>Could it be smarter rather than just less? </em></u>
Yes, because it is proved that the economy acts in an effective way to good policy making.
<u><em>How can the cost of government involvement decrease?</em></u>
In this aspect it is important to mention the environmental issues in nowadasy economy. If the measurement of what is defined as "cost" is understand in the long run as conservation and balance between nature and economic explotation of resources.
