Demand.
If you found this especially helpful, I'd appreciate if you'd vote me Brainliest for your answer. I want to be able to assist more users one-on-one, as well as to move up in rank! :)
Set specific, challenging, and reachable goals for the team. In addition, goal setting is the procedure of classifying to some degree that a team want to achieve and founding quantifiable goals and timeframes. When the team decide on a technique change to win the game in which this is an example of goal setting.
Answer:
ROA = 6.6%
ROE 14.52%
Explanation:
profit margin = net income / sale = 12%
assets turn over = sales / assets = 0.55
equity mutiplier = assets / equity = 2.2
ROE = return on equity = net income / equity
ROA = return on equity = net income / assets
we use the fraction properties to get ROE and ROA
ROA = 6.6%
We apply the same property to get ROE
ROE = 14.52%
Answer:
Explanation:
1.Convenient: Indirect taxes are more convenient to pay. ...
2.Less Pinching: The announcement effect of indirect taxes does not provoke resentment, because they cause less annoyance to the public as they are not felt directly. ...
3.Not Easily Evadeable: ...
4.Broad based: ...
hope it helps!!
pls make me brainlest!
:)
Answer:
<em>Ratification by Principal One of the criteria for enactment is that all material truths involved in the transaction must be known to the Principal. Van Stavern was not aware of Hash's behaviour. </em>
He did not realize that somehow the steel is being shipped under his name, and that the shipments were being billed him directly. Unlike liability through obvious authority, approval by the principal is a positive act by which he or she acknowledges the agent's illegal actions.
Just a principal would ratify; thus, Van Stavern was not directly imputed to information by the invoices and checks signed by Van Stavern's workers.
The court stated that the use of corporate checks was further proof that Van Stavern regarded the expenditures as business, not private. So Van Stavern could not be held personally liable.
Remember that on Sutton Steel that's not excessively harsh. Sutton understood it was working with a building company and did not seek to get the personal approval of the contract from Van Stavern.
<em>Lawfully, Sutton's agreement in this case is called an unaccepted offer which can be withdrawn at any time.</em>
<em></em>