Answer:
Unfavorable (increases taxable income).
Explanation:
$200,000-$50,000=$150,000Unfavorable (increases taxable income)
Book income would be $150,000 less than taxable income because the company increased its reserve for warranties by $200,000 and then went ahead to deduct $50,000 on its tax return related to warranty payments made during the year which is why the impact on taxable income compared to pretax book income of the book-tax difference that results from these two events will be $150,000 Unfavorable (increases taxable income).
Answer:
The correct answer is D
Explanation:
The formula to compute the EBIT (Earnings before Interest and Tax) is as:
EBIT (Earnings before Interest and Tax) = Revenue - Provision for income tax - amortization and depreciation - Interest expense - income from continuing operation
where
Revenue is $2,462
Depreciation and amortization is $216
Provision for income tax is $40
Income from continuing operation is $53
Interest expense is $230
Putting the values above:
EBIT = $2,462 - $216 - $230 - $53 - $40
EBIT = $1,923
yes or no?
Answer:
The Answer is gonna be Yes
It has also estimated the activities for each cost driver as follows:
How much is the overhead allocated to each unit of Generic and Label?
Answer:
The allocated overhead per unit to Generic is $1.34 and to Label is $1.25 per unit.
Explanation:
Please see attachment
Answer:
False, you would want them to align.
Explanation:
Answer:
Dr. Allowance for Doubtful Accounts $7,400
Cr. Accounts Receivable $7,400
Explanation:
A write off eliminates the account receivable balance. It is recorded as the debit to Allowance for Doubtful Accounts because of its credit nature. It reduces the balance of the allowance use it for actual write off. On the other hand it credit the account receivable balance to reduce it as it is debit in nature.
Had Marcus clicked on the link at the bottom of the screen, he would have seen the following:
The second screen stated "Three-day trial version- Free! $59.99 annual fee thereafter." Marcus was annoyed that the app would cost him almost $60 but figured he would set a reminder on his phone to cancel the app before the trial period expired so he wouldn't get charged. Plus, he wanted to see the app in action. If it was actually worth the price, he wouldn't mind paying the annual fee. He clicked "Continue" and put in his bank card information on the next screen. The following screen asked Marcus a series of questions about his stress level and what he felt caused stress in his life. He clicked "high" and "work" as the level and cause. He then completed the first CalmDown meditation in the app, but was not impressed with its functionality. Deciding he would cancel his subscription immediately, he went into the profile settings to try to find the cancel option but couldn't. He searched every possible place on the app but didn't see a way to cancel the subscription. Marcus decided to try to find the app's developer through their website, but a quick search didn't turn up anything. Already stressed and becoming more frustrated, Marcus decided to contact the app store. They informed him that he should be able to go into his app store account and cancel the subscription there. However, when Marcus went there, he didn't see the app as an option or as a subscription. Thinking that maybe his subscription didn't process, he just deleted the app from his phone.
Marcus didn't give the app or the subscription any more thought, becoming increasingly more distracted by the amount of stress at work. Four months later, Marcus was looking at his bank account online and noticed it was lower than it should have been. He began reviewing the charges and noticed multiple charges for $59.99 to a merchant named "CDgotU." He immediately remembered the app and contacted his bank to dispute the charges. His bank replied that due to the charges being debit withdraws he needed to dispute them within 2 days of being made. Moreover, if he had been diligent about watching his account, they could have put a block on the account and the remaining fraudulent charges would have been prevented. The bank representative also told him that he should try to get a refund from the company that charged him. After making his case with the bank representative for several hours about how he tried to cancel his subscription, he was unsuccessful. The bank's representative was able to provide Marcus a phone number attached to the Merchant account, but when Marcus called the number it was disconnected. The bank could not provide him with any additional information such as a company address or website.
After more internet searching, Marcus saw a number of other complaints online about the app, and noticed it had been removed from the app store and was no longer available for download. Marcus decided to bring an action against the company for fraud, breach of contract, conversion, and several other claims in his home state of Vermont.
Can Marcus compel the bank or the app store to provide additional information about the creator of CalmDown in order to determine the creator's location and potential assets?
a. No, these records are not subject to being subpoenaed due to their confidential nature.
b. Yes, he can subpoena records during the discovery process from both, but the bank and the app store may ask the judge to deny the request or limit the request due to privacy concerns.
c. Yes, but he must subpoena these records prior to the filing of the complaint.
d. Yes, he can file interrogatories during the discovery process to both the bank and the app store.
Answer: b. Yes, he can subpoena records during the discovery process from both, but the bank and the app store may ask the judge to deny the request or limit the request due to privacy concerns.
Explanation:
Marcus can indeed compel the bank or the app store to provide additional information about the creator of the app should he wish to find out the creator's location and its potential assets so he can purse the case appropriately legal wise.
He can do this by subpoenaing the required information when laying the background for the suit. As this information is considered private and confidential however, both the bank and the store could appeal to the Judge to refuse Marcus's request on the grounds of privacy concerns.
Answer:
the anser is B
Explanation: