Answer: $3000
Explanation: Allowance for doubtful accounts is the contra account to accounts receiveable when all the bad debts need to be accounted for. The bad debts reduces the accounts receivable line but all bad debts are actually deducted from the allowance for doubtful accounts.
The allowance for doubtful accounts for that year is calculated as 5% of the accounts receivable balance. This amounts to $8000 (160000 x 5%) before bad debts have been accounted for. Allowance for doubtful accounts moves in the opposite direction as accounts receivable because it is a contra account to this line item. At the end of the year before year end closing entries are done, and after the bad debts have been accounted for, the balance on the allowance for doubtful accounts is $5000.
This means that bad debts for that year is:
8000 (balance before bad debts have been accounted for)
- 5000 (balance after bad debts have been accounted for)
= $3000.
Answer:
Jan. 22
Dr Cash $7,140,000
Cr Common Stock $6,300,000
Cr Paid in capital in excess of par $840,000
Feb. 27
Dr Cash $180,000
Cr Preferred Stock $135,000
Cr Paid-In Capital in Excess of Par-Preferred $45,000
Explanation:
Preparation of the entries for January 22 and February 27.
Jan. 22
Dr Cash $7,140,000
(210,000*$34)
Cr Common Stock $6,300,000
(210,000*$30)
Cr Paid in capital in excess of par $840,000
($7,140,000-$6,300,000)
Feb. 27
Dr Cash $180,000
(15,000*$12)
Cr Preferred Stock $135,000
(15,000*$9)
Cr Paid-In Capital in Excess of Par-Preferred $45,000
($180,000-$135,000)
The first one!
Bob's stocks are worth more than leslie's.
Answer:
$357,500
Explanation:
Cash flow from operating activities on the statement of cash flows:
= Net income + Depreciation Expense - Increase in accounts receivable - Increase in inventory + Decrease in prepaid expense - Decrease in accounts payable
= $350,000 + $26,000 - $3,000 - $5,000 + $2,500 - $13,000
= $357,500
Therefore, the net cash flow from operating activities is $357,500.
Answer:
First of all, an auditor must be skeptical about the information that he/she is gathering and analyzing. They should try to get as much audit evidence as they can in order to form an opinion. But an auditor can also reasonably assure that there are no material misstatements, either intentional or not intentional.
Most auditor procedures are intended to discover unintentional misstatements, but intentional misstatements are very hard to discover because more than one individual (or even a very large group) might have colluded in order to conceal them. The auditor gets his information from the controller, internal auditor, and other people within the organization, but what if they all colluded in order to conceal their bad actions.
E.g. an auditor should check for shipping receipts to be complete, accurate and in order, but he/she relies on information given by the same people that he/she is evaluating. The auditor can conclude that the shipping reports are complete, but he/she cannot state that they are true and valid because he/she wasn't there.
