On january 1 revis consulting entered into a contract to complete a cost reduction program for green financial over a six-month period. revis will receive $24,800 from green at the end of each month. if total cost savings reach a specific target, revis will receive an additional $12,400 from green at the end of the contract, but if total cost savings fall short, revis will refund $12,400 to green. revis estimates an 80% chance that cost savings will reach the target and calculates the contract price based on the expected value of future payments to be received.

required:

prepare the following journal entries for revis:
1. to 3.
prepare the journal entry on january 31 to record the collection of cash and recognition of the first month’s revenue,

assuming total cost savings exceed target, record the entry on june 30 for receipt of the bonus and

assuming total cost savings fall short of target and record the entry on june 30 for payment of the penalty.

Cooper sues company a in state court in south carolina, where he lives, for negligence alleging personal injury and property damage of $100,000 after a truck driven by an employee of company a rear-ended his pickup truck. company a is incorporated in delaware, has its headquarters in new york, but does a substantial amount of business in south carolina. claiming diversity of citizenship, company a seeks removal to federal district court, but cooper opposes the motion. which of the following is true regarding whether the case may be properly removed to federal district court? the amount in controversy satisfies diversity requirements; and if company a's nerve center is in a state other than south carolina, then the case may be properly removed to federal court. the amount in controversy satisfies diversity requirements; and because company a is incorporated and has its headquarters in a state other than south carolina, the case may be properly removed to federal court. because the amount in controversy satisfies diversity requirements and company a is incorporated in a state other than south carolina, the case may be properly removed to federal court regardless of where company a's headquarters, nerve center, or principal place of business is located. because the amount in controversy satisfies diversity requirements and company a is headquartered in a state other than south carolina, the case may be properly removed to federal court regardless of where company a is incorporated and regardless of the location of its nerve center. because the amount in controversy fails to satisfy jurisdictional requirements, regardless of the location of company a, the case may not be removed to federal court.