Adams Moving and Storage, a family-owned corporation, declared a property dividend of 1,000 shares of GE common stock that Adams had purchased in February for $37,000 as an investment. GE’s shares had a market value of $35 per share on the declaration date. Prepare the journal entries to record the property dividend on the declaration and payment dates.

      General Journal                  Debit        Credit

1.     Loss on investment            $2,000

       [$37,000 - (1000 * $35)]    

              Investment in GE stock                $1,600

2.     Retained earnings             $35,000

        (1000 * $35)

             Property dividends payable          $35,000

3.     Property dividends payable $35,000

              Investment in GE stock                 $35,000

Explanation:

Given:

1. Lost on the investment:

Number of share*Market price  - Investment:

= $1000*35 -  $37,000 = $2000

1. Loss on Investment A/c Dr $2000        

           To GE shares investment A/c $2000

(Being the adjustment is recorded)

3. Retain earning:

Number of share*Market price

= $1000*35 = $35,000

Retained earnings A/c Dr $35,000        

          To Property Dividends Payable $35,000

(Being the entry is made on declaration date)

3. Property dividend

Property Dividends Payable A/c $35,000

            To GE shares investment A/c $35,000

(record the property dividend on the declaration and payment dates)

C. Fair Credit Reporting Act

Explanation:

Fair Credit Reporting Act was brought into action to lay governance on the credit bureaus regarding their consumers' credit information. The act presents the rules and regulations to be followed to obtain and present the credit details of the consumers. Also, it looks over the manner in which the details are shared with the consumers and others for various other purposes.

According to the given excerpt, the Fair Credit Reporting Act allows Carlos to take an action in case of any error found in his credit report.

Options:

a. The small land-owner had an advantage in the negotiations by possessing something that the mine needed. 

b. It allowed for equality in the negotiations between interested parties. 

c. The impoverished context allowed the government to gain access to the land. 

d. No real impact?

Answer:

c. The impoverished context allowed the government to gain access to the land. 

Explanation:

The explorations that led to the discovery of Tintaya mine go back to 1917. In 1971, the Peruvian government promoted the exploitation  of the mine. In 1980, the expropriation of approximately 4,000 hectares of land, owned by the communities, was carried out. It is for this reason that started a dispute between the commoners and the Company. In 1985 the exploitation of Tintaya began and it became the third producer of the country. In 1994, the mine was bought by Broken Hill Proprietary (BHP), who subsequently merged with the company Billiton, forming the second biggest group in the world production of minerals. In 2001, the first proposal for the framework agreement was made public. An agreement was reached and the framework agreement was consolidated in 2003. The signature of the framework agreement was an innovative milestone. Never before, a mining company had agreed to transfer a percentage of profits to communities and to engage to dialogue with them at all times. In 2005, a violent takeover occurred of the Tintaya facilities. A reformulation of the framework agreement was demanded. The implementation of the framework agreement was taking place very slowly. The president of BHP Billiton had to suspend the mining activity until a new agreement was reached. Then the negotiations began again. Xstrata Cooper (now Glencore) bought Tintaya from BHP Billiton in 2006. The owner changed, but the same conflicts and mobilizations continued until 2012. The last stoppage lasted eight days. During this paralysis, violent acts occurred and even the mine was asked to close, which was completely rejected by the government. At present, no resolution or reformulation of the framework agreement has been reached. 

So is often the case, the expansion of mining activity led to the expropriation or purchase of land, back in 1980, from five communities and left open conflicts (low prices, evictions, illegitimate negotiations, etc.), as well as various environmental and human rights problems.