Answer:
$200 million
$30 million
Explanation:
When the requiredreserce ratio is 15 percent or 0.15 , then the money multiplier is (1 / required reserve ratio) or (1/0.15 = 0.67)
Now, change in money supply = money multiplier * open market purchase of government bonds.
Here , the Federal Reserve a $30 million open market purchase Of govemment bonds.
As a result of this;
Money Supply increases by (6.7 * $30 million) = $200 million.
This is the maximum amount the money supply could Increase.
Now, if the bank holds. $30 million as excess reserves, then money supply could increase by as much as $30 million. This is the smallest amount themoney supply could increase.
So, If the required reserve ratio is 15 percent the largest possible increase in the money supply that could result is $200 million- and the smallest possible increase is $30 million.
Answer:
30,000 units
Explanation:
Budgeted sales is 30,000 units
Beginning inventory = 5000 units
Ending inventory = 5000 units
In order to meet the sales of 30,000 units, the sum of budgeted production and beginning inventory must be at least 30,000 units. However, since the company desires to have 5000 units in ending inventory, this sum must be raised to 35,000 units, which means the production needs to 30,000 units
--> Budgeted production = 30,000 + 5000 - 5000
= 30,000 units
Answer: Has competitively valuable value chain match-ups with the company's present businesses such that its businesses can perform better together than apart.
Explanation:
The better-off test of diversification is that the company must gain a return that is higher than incremental growth. Incremental growth is usually defined a 1 + 1 = 2 formula and this test argues that Diversification must provide more than this such that the company achieves synergistic growth ( 1 + 1 = 3) which is what happens when different entities work better together than alone.
Diversification should therefore be into an area that will be able to match-up with the company's present businesses such that its businesses can perform better together than apart and produce even greater returns.
CVP analysis is more difficult because its requires costs to be broken down between variable and fixed which is not done in absorption costing.
<h3>What is a
CVP analysis?</h3>
This is an analysis that find out how changes in the firm's variable and fixed costs affect the firm's profit.
Hence, the analysis is difficult when using absorption costing than when using variable costing because its requires costs to be broken down between variable and fixed which is not done in absorption costing.
Read more about CVP analysis
<em>brainly.com/question/26654564</em>
State tax is 5%, so 0,05
0,05•4000=200$
Federal tax is 25% so 0,25
0,25•4000=1000$
Total of taxes to pay =1000+200=1200$
So the real profit will be
4000-1200=3800$
The real value of Annie's profit is 3800$