Multiple Choice
Edgar Co. acquired 60% of Stendall Co. on January 1, 2013. During 2013, Edgar made several sales of inventory to Stendall. The cost and selling price of the goods were $140,000 and $200,000, respectively. Stendall still owned one-fourth of the goods at the end of 2013. Consolidated cost of goods sold for 2013 was $2,140,000 because of a consolidating adjustment for intra-entity sales less the entire profit remaining in Stendall's ending inventory.
How would consolidated cost of goods sold have differed if the inventory transfers had been for the same amount and cost, but from Stendall to Edgar?
A) Consolidated cost of goods sold would have remained $2,140,000.
B) Consolidated cost of goods sold would have been more than $2,140,000 because of the controlling interest in the subsidiary.
C) Consolidated cost of goods sold would have been less than $2,140,000 because of the non-controlling interest in the subsidiary.
D) Consolidated cost of goods sold would have been more than $2,140,000 because of the non-controlling interest in the subsidiary.
E) The effect on consolidated cost of goods sold cannot be predicted from the information provided.
Correct Answer:

Verified
Correct Answer:
Verified
Q36: Gargiulo Company, a 90% owned subsidiary of
Q37: Stark Company, a 90% owned subsidiary of
Q38: When comparing the difference between an upstream
Q39: Strickland Company sells inventory to its parent,
Q40: On November 8, 2013, Power Corp. sold
Q42: Walsh Company sells inventory to its subsidiary,
Q43: Wilson owned equipment with an estimated life
Q44: On January 1, 2012, Smeder Company, an
Q45: On January 1, 2013, Pride, Inc. acquired
Q46: On January 1, 2012, Smeder Company, an