Answer:
Explanation:
To write off specific accounts:
Debit (contra asset account) - Allowance for uncollectible accounts $17,000
Credit (asset account) - Accounts receivable $17,000
To reinstate account previously written off:
Debit (asset account) - Accounts receivable $750
Credit (contra asset account) - Allowance for uncollectible accounts $750
To adjust allowance for uncollectible accounts at year-end
:
Bad debt expense = allowance for uncollectible accounts at the end of the period - (allowance for uncollectible accounts at the beginning of the period - wrote off + reinstate account previously written off)
Bad debt expense = $14,900 – ($15,300 – $17,000 + $750)
Debit (expense account) - Bad debt expense $15,850
Credit (contra asset account) - Allowance for uncollectible accounts 15,850
Answer:
the biography
Explanation:
people would rather know who you are than just see the cover you put up
Answer:
punishment
Explanation:
Basically, the manager is trying to change the behavior of his employee, Chuck. In management and organizational psychology, that is often referred to as the <em>reinforcement theory of motivation</em>.
In this example, the manager uses remuneration punishment in order to alter Chuck's noted behavior pattern.
<u>NOTE </u>- This is not to be confused with <em>negative reinforcement</em>, which is also related to the reinforcement theory. Although the term <em>negative </em>may imply some similarities with punishment, negative reinforcement is a different concept. While punishment is directly weakening the <em>unwanted </em>behavior, negative reinforcement is strengthening a <em>desired </em>behavior, by means of removing an unwanted consequence <u>for the employee</u> when he follows the wanted behavior pattern.
For example, a form of negative reinforcement would be if Chuck knew upfront that his pay would be reduced if he yelled at his customers and he avoided yelling in the first place because of that.
Answer:
This is the sample answer
Explanation:
After a natural disaster, such as a major hurricane, there is increased demand for gasoline, lumber, bottled water, clothing, and other essential goods as people try to replace and rebuild what was lost. At the same time, the supply of these goods likely decreases because of disruptions to factories and transportation. Under normal market conditions, producers would raise their prices at the first sign of trouble, both to offset their own losses from the disaster and to obtain optimal profits.
However, people who have lost everything need to start rebuilding as soon as possible at a price they can afford to pay. The sooner the community is rebuilt and back to normal, the sooner the local economy will return to normal for both consumers and producers. For this reason, I think the government should introduce price ceilings on essential goods during a disaster. Many people would not be able to buy the goods they need without price ceilings. Although producers lose out on maximizing their profits, their actual losses are limited because they are allowed to raise prices to cover production and transportation costs driven up by the disaster.
Because citizens benefit so greatly from them, I think emergency price ceilings are beneficial to the economy as long as producers do not suffer significant losses from them.
Answer:
Acquisition price for 30% share $3,000,000
($36,000 / $120,000 * 100)
Add: Net income $180,000
($600,000 * 30%)
Less: dividend ($108,000)
($360,000 * 30%)
Less: excess depreciation <u>-($45,000)</u>
($1,200,000 / 8 yrs*30%)
Investment reported in Balance <u>$3,027,000</u>
Sheet 2018
