Suppose a huge increase in credit card frauds leads to many businesses refusing to accept payments by credit cards. as a result, people want to keep more cash on hand, increasing the demand for money. assume the fed does not change the money supply. according to the theory of liquidity preference, the interest rate will , which causes aggregate demand to . if instead the fed wants to stabilize aggregate demand, it the money supply government bonds.

On february 3, smart company sold merchandise in the amount of $5,800 to truman company, with credit terms of 2/10, n/30. the cost of the items sold is $4,000. smart uses the perpetual inventory system and the gross method. truman pays the invoice on february 8, and takes the appropriate discount. the journal entry that smart makes on february 8 is:

Diversified semiconductors sells perishable electronic components. some must be shipped and stored in reusable protective containers. customers pay a deposit for each container received. the deposit is equal to the container’s cost. they receive a refund when the container is returned. during 2018, deposits collected on containers shipped were $856,000. deposits are forfeited if containers are not returned within 18 months. containers held by customers at january 1, 2018, represented deposits of $587,000. in 2018, $811,000 was refunded and deposits forfeited were $41,000. required: 1. prepare the appropriate journal entries for the deposits received and returned during 2018. 2. determine the liability for refundable deposits to be reported on the december 31, 2018, balance sheet.

In december of 2004, the company you own entered into a 20-year contract with a grain supplier for daily deliveries of grain to its hot dog bun manufacturing facility. the contract called for "10,000 pounds of grain" to be delivered to the facility at the price of $100,000 per day. until february 2017, the supplier provided processed grain which could easily be used in your manufacturing process. however, no longer wanting to absorb the cost of having the grain processed, the supplier began delivering whole grain. the supplier is arguing that the contract does not specify the type of grain that would be supplied and that it has not breached the contract. your company is arguing that the supplier has an onsite processing plant and processed grain was implicit to the terms of the contract. over the remaining term of the contract, reshipping and having the grain processed would cost your company approximately $10,000,000, opposed to a cost of around $1,000,000 to the supplier. after speaking with in-house counsel, it was estimated that litigation would cost the company several million dollars and last for years. weighing the costs of litigation, along with possible ambiguity in the contract, what are three options you could take to resolve the dispute? which would be the best option for your business and why?