Mr Dumas is a famous French chef who moved from Paris to Sydney on 1 November 2018 to work for an Australian fine dining restaurant. His remuneration includes a salary of $350,000 plus $50,000 bonus per year and a contractual term of two years. Mr Dumas would be paid a lump sum of $500,000 in return for his promise that, if he resigns, he would not set up in a business in Sydney in competition with an Australian fine dining restaurant for 3 years. Mrs Dumas moved to Sydney with her husband and three children. Mr Dumas obtained permanent residence since 1 November 2018 and bought the following assets in Sydney: A vintage motor vehicle built in 1961: acquired on 15 November 2018 at a cost of $150,000. Mr Dumas intended it to be kept as a long-term investment. A family house in Chatswood: acquired on 1 December 2018 at a cost of $1,200,000 10,000 Shares in BHP: acquired on 1 January 2019 at a cost of $300,000 were sold for $320,000 on 15 May 2020. During the financial year 2020, Mr Dumas signed the contract with SBS TV channel around November 2019 and agreed to travel to New Zealand in December 2019 for filming The Food Show. The fee of $100,000 will be paid out to him once the show is released on TV in August 2020. On 1 May 2020, Mr Dumas sold the following overseas assets which he bought before he came to Australia: 30,000 shares in a USA company: acquired on 1 July 1982 at a cost of $15,000 and was sold for $35,000 on 1 May 2020. The market value was $6,000 as at 1 November 2018. An investment flat in Paris: acquired on 15 July 2018 at a cost of $230,000 and was sold for $200,000 on 1 May 2020. Mr Dumas still maintains a bank account at the Bank of Paris in France which earned a total of $8,500(2018/2019) and $10,000(2019/2020) in interest income. He neither repatriated nor declared any part of the interest derived in France because he has paid 15% withholding tax. Hence, at the time of lodging his Australian tax return, Mr Dumas declared his Australian sourced income only. Mr Dumas lodged his 2018/19 tax return on 15 August 2019 and received a notice of assessment on 25 October 2019. On 15 February 2020, he received a notice of amended assessment which included his Australian taxable income the amounts derived in French. The amended assessment required Mr Dumas to pay $4,250 additional tax to the ATO. Mr Dumas and his family decided to relocate to New Zealand indefinitely and left Australia on 30 June 2020 to set up a high-end restaurant. On 10 July 2020, he also received a lump sum payment of $500,000 under the terms of his remuneration package with his Australian employer.

Required: Under what circumstances and on what grounds could the ATO issue the amended assessment for the year 2018/2019?

What should Mr Dumas do if he decides to dispute this amended assessment, and what time limits would apply for the dispute to be commenced?

Advise Mr Dumas on what amounts may be included in his Australian taxable income for the 2019/20 tax year.

Calculate his taxable income for the year ending 30 June 2020.

Based on documentation gathered, your internal audit fraud team has sufficient evidence to prove that a warehouse manager for the company where you work has been stealing inventory. You have been assigned to lead the interview of the manager. How would you prepare for an interview at the company’s warehouse offices? Include how you would initially contact the warehouse manager for an interview. Also, include in your discussion how you would prepare the interview room and how you would conduct yourself during the interview.

The break-even point tells a company the number of units or the amount of revenue that it must sell or earn in order to pay for all of its costs. At this point, the company has neither profit nor loss.

Companies have two main types of costs: variable costs and fixed costs.

Variable costs are those costs that vary with the number of units produced. Examples of variable costs are direct labor, direct materials and overhead.

Fixed costs are those costs that a company incurs that do not depend on production. For example, most selling, and all administrative costs are fixed. A company must pay these costs even if it does not have any production activity.

The formulas for computing break-even follow:

B/E _{(# units)} = .     Fixed Cost              .

                         Contribution Margin

B/E _(Revenue) = .     Fixed Cost              .

                     Contribution Margin Ratio

If you will notice, both formulas use something called Contribution Margin. Contribution Margin represents the amount of revenue available after all variable costs have been paid for. It represents what is left over to pay for the fixed costs. The Contribution Margin ratio is the percentage Revenue that the Contribution Margin represents. In concept this is similar to Gross Profit.

In Cost Accounting Variable Costs are grouped together, and Fixed Costs are grouped together to create a variation of the traditional Income Statement. This variation is called a Contribution Margin Income Statement.

Read the following ethical dilemma.

Spillproof Company produces molded plastic cup holders for automobiles. Below is a summary of its Contribution Margin Income Statement from last year:

• Revenues: $5,750,000
• Variable costs: $3,850,000
• Fixed costs: $2,000,000
• Net Loss: ($100,000)

Because the company’s CEO is very concerned about the firm’s net losses, she asks the production manager if there are any ways in which they can reduce costs.

A few weeks later, the production manager returns with a proposal to reduce variable costs to 53% of revenues by lowering the cost estimates that the company uses for environmental clean-up costs. Some years the company has to perform waste clean-up and other years it does not. Either way, the company records this estimated cost as part of Variable Cost since it is based on the number of units produced.

The CEO likes the new projected net income and new break-even point, but is concerned that this change in the estimate will misrepresent the potential liability. The manager disagrees. He feels that the company will not be violating any laws by changing their estimate, and that there is only a possibility of environmental costs in the future anyway.

Requirements for your Main thread post:

1. Calculate the CURRENT breakeven revenues using the current Contribution Margin Income Statement information above.  Show us your work!
2. Re-calculate the breakeven revenues if variable costs are 53% of revenues.  Show us your work!
3. Calculate Spillproof’s projected Net Income/Loss.   Show us your work!
4. Discuss the following:

• 1. What are the ethical issues involved in this case? Explain your answer.
  2. Do you feel that the Production Manager is acting improperly or immorally? Why or why not? Please explain your response.
  3. What stakeholders would be affected if the CEO implemented the Production Managers suggestions? Why?
  4. What should the CEO do?

You are working for a US-based company and have been tasked with integrating an acquisition in Japan (based in Osaka). Prior to this acquisition your company had only a representative office based in Tokyo. What are the four key elements of Human Relations Management and for each element list at least one criterion relevant to your firm’s future success in this marketplace. Where would you establish the administrative offices for the acquired company (explain the rationale for your decision).

F6: The Logic of Individual Choice 28 28 unread replies. 28 28 replies. Joseph Gallo, the founder of the famous wine company that bears his name, said that when he first started selling wine right after Prohibition (laws outlawing the sale of alcohol), he poured two glasses of wine from the same bottle and put a price of 10 cents a bottle on one and 5 cents a bottle on the other. He allowed people test both and asked them which they wanted. Most wanted the 10-cent bottle, even though they were the same wine. What does thus tell us about people? Can you think of other areas where that may be the case? What does this suggest about pricing? Is the rational choice theory still applicable in this case?

name of the book: Economics 9th edition

IT MUST BE 250 WORDS VERY IMPORTANT PLEASE

In April 1993, Dr. Nancy Olivieri, head of the hemoglobinopathy program at the Hospital for Sick Children (HSC), the teaching hospital for the University of Toronto in Canada, signed an agreement with the Canadian drug company Apotex to undertake clinical trials on a drug called deferiprone (referred to as L1 during the study). The drug was designed to help children with thalassemia, an inherited blood disorder that can cause the fatal buildup of iron in the blood. The agreement that Olivieri signed with Apotex included a clause (later referred to as a “gag clause”) that specifically prevented the unauthorized release of any findings in the trial for a period of three years: As you now [sic], paragraph 7 of the LA-02 Contract provides that all information whether written or not, obtained or generated by you during the term of the LA-02 Contract and for a period of three years thereafter, shall be and remain secret and confidential and shall not be disclosed in any manner to any third party except with the prior written consent of Apotex. Please be aware that Apotex will take all possible steps to ensure that these obligations of confidentiality are met and will vigorously pursue all legal remedies in the event that there is any breach of these obligations. The existence of this clause was to prove significant to the relationship between Olivieri and Apotex. After reporting some initial positive findings in the trial in April 1995, Olivieri reported in December 1996 that long-term use of the drug appeared to result in the toxic buildup of iron in the liver of a large number of her pediatric patients—a condition known as hepatic fibrosis. When she reported the findings to Apotex, the company determined that her interpretation of the data was incorrect. Olivieri then contacted the hospital’s Research Ethics Board (REB), which instructed her to change the consent form for participation in the trial to ensure that patients were made aware of the risks of long-term use of the drug. After copying Apotex on the revised form, the company notified Olivieri that the Toronto trials were being terminated effective immediately and that she was being removed as chair of the steering committee of the global trial that included patients in Philadelphia and Italy. When Olivieri notified Apotex that she and her research partners, including Dr. Gary Brittenham of Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, were planning to publish their findings in the August 1998

issue of the New England Journal of Medicine, Apotex Vice President Michael Spino threatened legal action for breaching the confidentiality clause in her agreement with the company. Olivieri then asked the HSC administration for legal support in her forthcoming battle with Apotex. The administrators declined. She then approached the University of Toronto, where the dean of the Faculty of Medicine declined to get involved on the grounds that her contract with Apotex had been signed without university oversight and that the university would never have agreed to the confidentiality clause in the first place. Olivieri forged ahead with the publication despite this [lack of support] and instantly became celebrated as a courageous whistle-blower in the face of corporate greed. The situation was further clouded by reports that the University of Toronto and HSC were, at the time, in the process of negotiating a $20 million donation from Bernard Sherman, the CEO and founder of Apotex. The bitter relationship with her employers was to continue for several years, during which time she was referred to the Canadian College of Physicians and Surgeons for research misconduct and dismissed from her post at HSC, only to be reinstated following the aggressive support of several of her academic colleagues, including Dr. Brenda Gallie of the Division of Immunology and Cancer at HSC, who led a petition drive that succeeded in garnering 140 signatures in support of a formal enquiry into Dr. Olivieri’s case. That enquiry was undertaken by both the Canadian College of Physicians and Surgeons, which found her conduct to be “exemplary,” and by the Canadian Association of University Teachers, whose 540-page report concluded that Dr. Olivieri’s academic freedom had been violated when Apotex stopped the trials and threatened legal action against her. The two-and-a-half-year battle ended in January 1999 when an agreement was brokered between the university, HSC, and Olivieri thanks to the efforts of two world-renowned experts in blood disorders—Dr. David Nathan of Harvard and Dr. David Weatherall of Oxford who intervened on the basis of the international importance of Dr. Olivieri’s research. Working with the president of the University of Toronto, Robert Pritchard, and lawyers for both parties, a compromise settlement was reached that reinstated Olivieri as head of the hemoglobinopathy program at HSC, covered her legal expenses up to $150,000, and withdrew all letters and written complaints about her from her employment file. As part of the agreement, a joint working group appointed by the University of Toronto and the university’s Faculty Association was chartered with the task of making “recommendations on changes to university policies on the dissemination of research publications and conflict of interest and the relationship of these issues to academic freedom.”

1. Was it ethical for Apotex to include a three-year gag clause in the agreement with Dr. Olivieri?

2. Even though Dr. Olivieri later admitted that she should never have signed the agreement with Apotex that included a confidentiality clause, does the fact that she did sign it have any bearing on her actions here? Why or why not?

3. Was Olivieri’s decision to publish her findings about the trial an example of universalism or utilitarianism? Explain your answer.

4. If we identify the key players in this case as Dr. Olivieri, Apotex, the Hospital for Sick Children, and the University of Toronto, what are the conflicts of interest between them all?

5. What do you think would have happened if Dr. Olivieri’s fellow academics had not supported her in her fight?

6. How could this situation have been handled differently to avoid such a lengthy and bitter battle?

Bansal Real Estate Company was founded 25 years ago by the current CEO, RanjitBansal.
The company purchases real estate, including land and buildings, and rents the property to
tenants. The company has shown a profit every year for the past 18 years, and the stock
holders are satisfied with the company’s management. Prior to BansalReal Estate Mr.
Bansal was CEO and founder of agro firm which was bankrupt because of debt financing.
So Mr. Bansal was against debt financing and therefore the Bansal Real Estate Company is
100% equity financed with 15 million shares outstanding and the stock currently trades at
Rs. 300 per share.
Bansal is evaluating a plan to purchase a huge tract of land near Kathmandu for Rs 900
million. The land will generate huge revenue so the pretax income will increase by Rs. 220
million in perpetuity. The new CFO Mr. Supreme has determined the current cost of capital
of the company is 12.5%. He feels that the company would be more valuable if it included
debt in its capital structure, so he is evaluating whether the company should issue debt to
entirely finance the new project. He thinks that the bond can be issued at par with coupon
rate of 8%. Based on some conversations with investment bank, he thinks that the 70%
equity and remaining debt would be optimal capital structure. He also thinks that higher
debt would be lowering the rating and cost would increase. The corporate tax rate is 40%.
a. If the Bansal wishes to maximize its total market value, would you recommend that it
issues debt or equity to finance land purchase? Explain
b. If the company issue debt then what would be the impact in price per share? If the
company issue equity rather thandebt, what would be the impact in price per share?

A proprietorship commenced operations on May​ 1,2020 and will have a calendar fiscal year. On June​ 1, 2020​, the proprietorship acquired goodwill for $60,000.

What is the maximum CCA deduction of the goodwill for the year 2020​?

Using the information provided, calculate the weighted average number of common shares in
circulation for the year 2020.
 The common shares of a company were 120,000 on January 1, 2020.
 On February 1, the company issued 60,000 additional shares
 Another 48,000 were issued on March 1.
 On April 1, the company issued 24,000 new shares.
 On May 1, the company bought 36,000 portfolio shares
 Purchased another 36,000 portfolio shares on June 1.
 On July 1, he declared a 20% dividend in shares.
 On August 1, it issued 75,000 new shares.
 On August 15, it carried out a 1.50: 1 share split.
 On September 1, it issued another 18,000 shares
 On December 1, it acquired 6,000 portfolio shares

Provide the process (if you could use excel, better for me)

8. Mary has just completed her undergraduate degree from Northwestern University and is already planning on entering an MBA program four years from today. The tuition will be $20,000 per year for two years, paid at the beginning of each year. In addition, Mary would like to retire 15 years from today and receive a pension of $60,000 every year for 20 years and receive the first payment 15 years from today. Mary can borrow and lend as much as she likes at a rate of 7%, compounded annually. In order to fund her expenditures, Mary will save money at the end of years 1-3 and at the end of years 6-14. Calculate the constant annual dollar amount that Mary must save at the end of each of these years to cover all of her expenditures (tuition and retirement)? ($38254.77) I would like to know how to solve using solver in excell