You are responsible for implementing activities for a group of six foreign students and eight American students who are they
Answer:
$ 49,640
Explanation:
The question is asking for PLANNING BUDGET
Planning Budget does not in anyway mean flexible budget.
So the quantity of units for Planning Budget would be what the company budgeted that is 7,300 units
The next step in the solution to the question will be to know the cost per unit. For Direct Labor the price given is $ 6.80 per unit
Total Direct Labor for May in the planning budget would be 7,300 X 6.80 = $ 49,640
Answer:
It is cheaper to make the part in house.
Explanation:
Giving the following information:
Harrison Enterprises currently produces 8,000 units of part B13.
Current unit costs for part B13 are as follows:
Direct materials $12
Direct labor 9
Factory rent 7
Administrative costs 10
General factory overhead (allocated) 7
Total $45
If Harrison decides to buy part B13, 50% of the administrative costs would be avoided.
To calculate whether it is better to make the par in-house or buy, we need to determine which costs are unavoidable.
Unavoidable costs:
Factory rent= 7
Administrative costs= 5
General factory overhead= 7
Total= 17
Now, we can calculate the unitary cost of making the product in-house:
Unitary cost= direct material + direct labor + avoidable administrative costs
Unitary cost= 7 + 5 + 5= $17
It is cheaper to make the part in house.
Answer:
United Disposal, General Manufacturing Corporation, Ace Trucking Company, and/or Investment Properties.
Explanation:
When the EPA cleans up site, it generally uses money from its superfund and it is allowed to recover the money from the entity that caused the pollution (either directly or indirectly), the owner of the premise or the user of the premise. I.e. they can recover the funds from anyone involved. The EPA will try to recover the funds based on several aspects including the financial position of the entities involved. E.g. if United Disposal, Ace Trucking Company and General Manufacturing Company filed for bankruptcy, the EPA will recover the funds from Investiture Properties even if they were not responsible for the pollution.
Answer:
Right now marcantuone and robert gieson ought not be held at risk for what the drycleaner inhabitants did.Because there was no release of perilous substance during their ownership.The chlorinated dissolvable pollution issue right now the aftereffect of dry cleaning activity led preceding the condemnee's acquisition of the property.There was no proof of a release of unsafe substance during the time of condemnee's ownership.The sullying was not found until after the condemner had procured the title to the property in the judgement activity.
As indicated by the spill demonstration the obligation is vested on a condemner who bought debased property and didn't attempt any assessment or examination at the hour of procurement.
