ACC 548 Week 2 Textbook Problem (P4-2, P6-1)

Order ready-to-submit essays. No Plagiarism Guarantee!

Note: All our papers are written from scratch by human writers to ensure authenticity and originality.

P. 4-2

Verify your essay before you submit. Get an Official Turnitin Report for Just $8.99!

Check your paper with the same Turnitin report your professor uses. AI detection + similarity score without storing your work. Pay once, no subscription

Check My Assignment!

P. 4-2

The state in which Beanville is located collects sales taxes for its cities and other local governments. The state permits small merchants to remit sales taxes quarterly. The state sales tax rate is 6 percent. In December 2016, city merchants collected $50 million in sales taxes that they remitted to the state on January 15, 2017. The state, in turn, transferred the taxes to the city on February 15, 2017.
In December 2016, the federal government awarded Beanville a reimbursement grant of $500,000 to train law-enforcement agents. The city had applied for the grant in January of that year. The city may incur allowable costs any time after receiving notification of the award. In 2017, the city incurred $400,000 in allowable costs and was reimbursed for $350,000. It was reimbursed for the $50,000 balance in February 2018. In January and February 2018, it incurred the remaining $100,000 in allowable costs and was reimbursed for them in April 2018.
In December 2016 the city levied property taxes of $1 billion for the calendar year 2017. The taxes are due June 30, 2017. The city collected these taxes as follows:
It estimates the balance of $32 million would be uncollectible. In addition, in the period from January 1 through February 28, 2017, the city collected $16 million in taxes that were delinquent as of December 31, 2016. In the period March 1 through June 30 2017, the city collected $8 million of taxes that were also delinquent as of December 31, 2016.
In December 2017 Beanville sold a city-owned warehouse to a private developer. Sales price was $4.2 million. The warehouse had cost $4 million when it was acquired 10 years earlier. It had an estimated useful life of 40 years (with no salvage value).
In December 2017, Beanville’s city-owned radio station held its annual fund drive. A local business offered to match all pledges made on December 2, 2017, up to $50,000, assuming that the amount pledged was actually collected. Based on past experience the city estimates that 90 percent of the pledges will actually be collected. By year-end 2017, the city had collected $25,000 of the pledges, and in January and February it collected an additional $15,000. It received $25,000 of the matching funds on February 15, 2018. Respond with respect only to the $50,000 in matching fund

P6-1

The financial statements of an actual capital projects fund leave it to the report reader to draw inferences on key transactions.
The accompanying statements of the parks, recreations, and municipal capital improvement bond fund (a capital projects fund) were drawn from an annual report of Parkville. According to a note in the report (the only one pertaining to the fund), the fund is maintained “to account for bond proceeds to be utilized for the construction and refurbishment of parks and recreation facilities and the refurbishment of othermunicipal facilities.”

The variances in expenditures between budget and actual are substantial. What is the most likely explanation?
A schedule of long‐term debt payable (in the statistical section of the report) indicates that only $7 million, of parks, recreation, and municipal capital improvement bonds were authorized and issued. How do you reconcile that amount with the proceeds from bonds payable reported in the statement of revenues, expenditures, and changes in fund balance?
Another schedule of transfers between funds (in the same section) indicates that $131 thousand was transferred to the general fund. What conclusions can you draw about whether interest on fund investments must be used either to repay the capital improvement bonds or to construct and refurbish city facilities?
How much of fund resources did the government spend during the year on capital improvements?
How do you explain the absence in the balance sheet of “construction in process?”
Why is a major portion of the fund balance “restricted?”

The state in which Beanville is located collects sales taxes for its cities and other local governments. The state permits small merchants to remit sales taxes quarterly. The state sales tax rate is 6 percent. In December 2016, city merchants collected $50 million in sales taxes that they remitted to the state on January 15, 2017. The state, in turn, transferred the taxes to the city on February 15, 2017.
In December 2016, the federal government awarded Beanville a reimbursement grant of $500,000 to train law-enforcement agents. The city had applied for the grant in January of that year. The city may incur allowable costs any time after receiving notification of the award. In 2017, the city incurred $400,000 in allowable costs and was reimbursed for $350,000. It was reimbursed for the $50,000 balance in February 2018. In January and February 2018, it incurred the remaining $100,000 in allowable costs and was reimbursed for them in April 2018.
In December 2016 the city levied property taxes of $1 billion for the calendar year 2017. The taxes are due June 30, 2017. The city collected these taxes as follows:
It estimates the balance of $32 million would be uncollectible. In addition, in the period from January 1 through February 28, 2017, the city collected $16 million in taxes that were delinquent as of December 31, 2016. In the period March 1 through June 30 2017, the city collected $8 million of taxes that were also delinquent as of December 31, 2016.
In December 2017 Beanville sold a city-owned warehouse to a private developer. Sales price was $4.2 million. The warehouse had cost $4 million when it was acquired 10 years earlier. It had an estimated useful life of 40 years (with no salvage value).
In December 2017, Beanville’s city-owned radio station held its annual fund drive. A local business offered to match all pledges made on December 2, 2017, up to $50,000, assuming that the amount pledged was actually collected. Based on past experience the city estimates that 90 percent of the pledges will actually be collected. By year-end 2017, the city had collected $25,000 of the pledges, and in January and February it collected an additional $15,000. It received $25,000 of the matching funds on February 15, 2018. Respond with respect only to the $50,000 in matching fund

P6-1

The variances in expenditures between budget and actual are substantial. What is the most likely explanation?
A schedule of long‐term debt payable (in the statistical section of the report) indicates that only $7 million, of parks, recreation, and municipal capital improvement bonds were authorized and issued. How do you reconcile that amount with the proceeds from bonds payable reported in the statement of revenues, expenditures, and changes in fund balance?
Another schedule of transfers between funds (in the same section) indicates that $131 thousand was transferred to the general fund. What conclusions can you draw about whether interest on fund investments must be used either to repay the capital improvement bonds or to construct and refurbish city facilities?
How much of fund resources did the government spend during the year on capital improvements?
How do you explain the absence in the balance sheet of “construction in process?”
Why is a major portion of the fund balance “restricted?”

SOURCE: WWW.ROYALRESEARCHERS.COM

Havent found the Essay You Want?

We Can Help

The Essay is Written From Scratch for You

🛒Place Your Order

ORDER AN ESSAY WRITTEN FROM SCRATCH at : https://royalresearchers.com/