Job costing, normal and actual costing. Atkinson Construction assembles residential houses. It uses a job-costing system with two direct-cost categories (direct materials and direct labor) and one indirect-cost pool (assembly support). Direct labor-hours is the allocation base for assembly support costs. In December 2016, Atkinson budgets 2017 assembly-support costs to be $8,800,000 and 2017 direct laborhours to be 220,000. At the end of 2017, Atkinson is comparing the costs of several jobs that were started and completed in 2017. Laguna Model Mission Model Construction period Feb–June 2017 May–Oct 2017 Direct material costs $106,550 $127,450 Direct labor costs $ 36,250 $ 41,130 Direct labor-hours 970 1,000 Direct materials and direct labor are paid for on a contract basis. The costs of each are known when direct materials are used or when direct labor-hours are worked. The 2017 actual assembly support costs were $8400000 and the actual direct labor hours were 200000. 1. Compute the (a) budgeted indirect-cost rate and (b) actual indirect-cost rate. Why do they differ? 2. What are the job costs of the Laguna Model and the Mission Model using (a) normal costing and (b) actual costing? 3. Why might Atkinson Construction prefer normal costing over actual costing?

When an interest-bearing note comes due and is uncollectible, the journal entry includes debiting

Andrew cooper decides to become a part owner of a corporation. as a part owner, he expects to receive a profit as payment because he has assumed the risk of - serious inflation eroding the purchasing power of his investment.- being paid before the suppliers and employees are paid.- losing his home, car, and life savings.- losing the money he has invested in the corporation and not receiving profits.- the company giving all of the profits to local communities

Alandowner entered into a written agreement with a real estate broker whereby the broker would receive a commission of 10% of the sale price if he procured a "ready, willing, and able buyer" for the landowner's property and if the sale actually proceeded through closing. the broker found a buyer who agreed in writing to buy the property from the landowner for $100,000, the landowner's asking price. the buyer put up $6,000 as a down payment. the agreement between the landowner and the buyer contained a liquidated damages clause providing that, if the buyer defaulted by failing to tender the balance due of $94,000 at the closing date, damages would be 10% of the purchase price. the landowner included that clause because she was counting on using the proceeds of the sale for a business venture that would likely net her at least $10,000. the buyer became seriously ill and defaulted. when he recovered, he demanded that the landowner return his $6,000, and the landowner refused. the broker also demanded the $6,000 from the landowner and was refused. the broker and the buyer filed separate suits against the landowner, with the buyer pleading impossibility of performance. the two cases are consolidated into a single case. how should the court rule as to the disposition of the $6,000?