Answer:
a. $80,318.70
b. $97,568.57
Explanation:
Here is the full question :
You have just received a windfall from an investment you made in a friend's business. She will be paying you $ 15 comma 555 at the end of this year, $ 31 comma 110 at the end of next year, and $ 46 comma 665 at the end of the year after that (three years from today). The interest rate is 6.7 % per year. a. What is the present value of your windfall? b. What is the future value of your windfall in three years (on the date of the last payment)?
Present value is the sum of discounted cash flows
Present value can be calculated using a financial calculator
Cash flow in year 1 = $ 15,555
Cash flow in year 2 = $31,110
Cash flow in year 3 = $ 46,665
I = 6.7%
Present value = $80,318.70
The formula for calculating future value:
FV = P (1 + r)^n
FV = Future value
P = Present value
R = interest rate
N = number of years
$80,318.70(1.067)^3 = $97,568.57
Answer:
Cash payments for income tax = $165000
so correct option is C. 165,000
Explanation:
given data
Income tax = $175,000
beginning tax payable = $30,000
end of the year tax payable = $40,000
to find out
Cash payments for income tax reported on the statement of cash flows
solution
we get here Cash payments for income tax that is express as
Cash payments for income tax = Income tax + beginning tax payable - end of the year tax payable ..............................1
put here value we get
Cash payments for income tax = $175000 + $30000 - $40000
Cash payments for income tax = $165000
so correct option is C. 165,000
Answer:
The correct answer is letter "D": set aside any award.
Explanation:
Arbitrators are individuals without the range of judges that are called in disputes to resolve a matter before taking it to court. Similar to trials, each party involved in the dispute present their defense in front of the arbitrator who promotes the mutual agreement between the two parties but, if that does not happen, the arbitrator provides a resolution that tends to be definite.
<em>Arbitrators must be impartial. Thus, if the arbitrator meets with one of the parties and, eventually, the decision of that case favors that party, the court can take away any reward provided until an investigation is conducted.</em>
Answer:
i think your answer is correct
Explanation:
hello
2, 3, and 4, make the most sense to me. I'm not completely sure about 4, but I'm confident about the other two :)
