On January 1, Year 1, Li Company purchased an asset that cost $70,000. The asset had an expected useful life of five years and an estimated salvage value of $14,000. Li uses the straight-line method for the recognition of depreciation expense. At the beginning of the fourth year, the company revised its estimated salvage value to $7,000. What is the amount of depreciation expense to be recognized during Year 4

Materials purchases (on credit). direct materials used in production. direct labor paid and assigned to work in process inventory. indirect labor paid and assigned to factory overhead. overhead costs applied to work in process inventory. actual overhead costs incurred, including indirect materials. (factory rent and utilities are paid in cash.) transfer of jobs 306 and 307 to finished goods inventory. cost of goods sold for job 306. revenue from the sale of job 306. assignment of any underapplied or overapplied overhead to the cost of goods sold account. (the amount is not material.) 2. prepare journal entries for the month of april to record the above transactions.

The manager of the quick stop corner convenience store (which never closes) sells four cases of stein beer each day. order costs are $8.00 per order, and stein beer costs $.80 per six-pack (each case of stein beer contains four six-packs). orders arrive three days from the time they are placed. daily holding costs are equal to 5 percent of the cost of the beer. if he were to order 16 cases of stein beer at a time, what would be the average inventory level? a. 0.25 days b. 3 days c. 1 day d. 4 days e. 20 days

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.