Which of the following is not a product cost under variable costing?

Nash's Trading Post, LLC uses the percentage of receivables basis to record bad debt expense and concludes that 3% of accounts r

skelet666 [1.2K]

Answer:

(a) Prepare the adjusting journal entry to record bad debt expense for the year with Allowance for Doubtful Account of $ 3,041

Dr Bad Debt Expenses $10,150

Cr Allowance for doubtful debt $10,150

(b) Prepare the adjusting journal entry to record bad debt expense for the year with Allowance for Doubtful Account of $ 918

Dr Bad Debt Expenses $14,109

Cr Allowance for doubtful debt $14,109

Explanation:

The Allowance for Doubtful Account will have the Balance of : 439,700 x 3% = $13,191

(a): Bad Debt Expenses needs to be recorded: 13,191 - 3,041 = $10,150

(b): Bad Debt Expenses needs to be recorded: 13,191 + 918 = $14,109

3 0

3 years ago

suppose the price of an important input in the production of books were to increase. what can be concluded about the quantity of

Westkost [7]

The conclusion that can be drawn about the number of books supplied for $16 when an important production input of books increases is that the quantity supplied is reduced.

<h3>How do production costs affect supply?</h3>

When production costs (input) increase, the quantity supplied at a given price decreases.

Conversely, a decrease in production costs increases the quantity supplied.

Thus, the conclusion that can be drawn about the number of books supplied for $16 when an important production input of books increases is that the quantity supplied is reduced.

Learn more about supply and production costs at brainly.com/question/2223110

#SPJ12

7 0

2 years ago

In its Department R, Recyclers, Inc., processes donated scrap cloth into towels for sale in local thrift shops. It sells the pro

HACTEHA [7]

Answer:

Units to be accounted for:

Beg WIP 300 units

started 2700 units

Total 3,000 units

Equivalent units

physical materials conversion

tranferred 2,850 2,850 2,850

ending 150 150 (20%) 30

total 3,000 2,700 2,880

Cost to be accounted for:

materials conversion

beg WIP 0 576

incurred 0 10,800

Total 0 11,376

Equivalent unis cost

materials zero

conversion: $11,376 / 2,880 = $3.95

Cost assigned for:

Transferred units

2,850 units x 3.95 = 11,257.5

ending work in process units

30 units x 3.95 = 118.5

Total cost to be assigned for 11,376

Notice: Total cost to be asisgned for and assigned cost are the same.

Explanation:

1) We count the physical units

2) Then, we solve for the equivalent units which, under weighted average are:

transferred units + completion on ending work in process.

3) Now, we solve for equivalent unit cost:

for materials, this is zero are there is no cost associaed with.

4) Finally, we made the cost assignment which, should match the beginning WP cost and the incurred cost during the period.

8 0

3 years ago

n the first two years your investment increases by 2.5% annually, in the third year it returns 12% but in the fourth year it goe

mote1985 [20]

Answer:

Ans. The average annual rate of return over the four years is 2.792%

Explanation:

Hi, first let´s introduce the formula to use

$r(Average)=\sqrt[n]{(1+r(1))*(1+r(2))*(1+r(3))+...(1+r(n))}-1$

Where:

r(1),(2),(3)...n are the returns in each period of time

n =number of returns to average (in our case, n=4).

With that in mind, let´s find the average annual return over this four years.

$r(Average)=\sqrt[4]{(1+0.025)*(1+0.025)*(1+0.12)+(1-0.07))} -1=0.022792$

Therefore, the average annual return of this invesment in 4 years is 2.2792%

Best of luck.

5 0

3 years ago

Solving for dominant strategies and the Nash equilibrium Suppose Nick and Rosa are playing a game in which both must simultaneou

slava [35]

Answer:

The only dominant strategy in this game is for NICK to choose RIGHT. The outcome reflecting the unique Nash equilibrium in this game is as follows: Nick chooses RIGHT and Rosa chooses RIGHT.

Explanation:

ROSA

left right

4 / 6 /

left 3 4

NICK

right 6 / 7 /

7 6

Rosa does not have a dominant strategy since both expected payoffs are equal:

if she chooses left, her expected payoff = 3 + 7 = 10
if she chooses right, her expected payoff = 4 + 6 = 10

Nick has a dominant strategy, if he chooses right, his expected payoff will be higher:

if he chooses left, his expected payoff = 4 +6 = 10
if he chooses right, his expected payoff = 6 + 7 = 13

The only possible Nash equilibrium exists if both Rosa and Nick choose right, so that their strategies are the same, resulting in Rosa earning 6 and Nick 7.

8 0

3 years ago