During january 2017, wells, inc. acquired 30% of the outstanding common stock of wilton co. for $1,400,000. this investment gave wells the ability to exercise significant influence over wilton. wilton’s assets on that date were recorded at $6,400,000 with liabilities of $3,000,000. any excess of cost over book value of wells’ investment was attributed to unrecorded patents having a remaining useful life of ten years. in 2017, wilton reported net income of $600,000. for 2018, wilton reported net income of $750,000. dividends of $200,000 were paid in each of these two years. what was the reported balance of wells’ investment in wilson co. at december 31, 2018?

How should the environmental effects be dealt with when evaluating this project? the environmental effects should be ignored since the plant is legal without mitigation. the environmental effects should be treated as a sunk cost and therefore ignored. if the utility mitigates for the environmental effects, the project is not acceptable. however, before the company chooses to do the project without mitigation, it needs to make sure that any costs of "ill will" for not mitigating for the environmental effects have been considered in the original analysis. the environmental effects should be treated as a remote possibility and should only be considered at the time in which they actually occur. the environmental effects if not mitigated would result in additional cash flows. therefore, since the plant is legal without mitigation, there are no benefits to performing a "no mitigation" analysis.