According to the following table, what is her hypothetical credit score?
Under 25 2-29 30-34 35-39
45-49
40-44
50 or over
Are
48
20
88
124
1 yr
2-3 yrs
4-5 yrs
|<1 yr
36
10+ yrs
Time at address
6-9 yrs
20
5-7 yrs
None
0-1 yrs
2 yrs
3 - 4 yrs
8 + yrs
Age of auto
48
64
52
None
< $125
$126 - $150
9151 - $199
S200+
Car payment
24
< $274
$275 - $399
$400 +
Owns clear Lives w/reatives
Housing costs
40
48
Both
Checking only
Savings only
Neither
Checking and savings accounts
60
Yes
Finance company reference
Major credit cards
Ratio of debt income
None
2 or more
20
No debts i 1%-5% 6%-15%
164
Never in the last 10 yrs Over 10 yrs ago,
16% over
Declared bankruptcy

Last year, western corporation had sales of $5 million, cost of goods sold of $3 million, operating expenses of $175,000 and depreciation of $125,000. the firm received $40,000 in dividend income and paid $200,000 in interest on loans. also, western sold stock during the year, receiving a $40,000 gain on stock owned 6 years, but losing $60,000 on stock owned 4 years. what is the firm's tax liability?

Don’t give me to many notifications because it will cause you to lose alot of points

Adog whistle manufacturer's factory was located near a residential area. the manufacturer used the most effective methods for testing its whistles, but it was impossible to completely soundproof the testing area. a breeder of champion show dogs bought some property near the factory and raised and trained her dogs there. although the whistles were too high-pitched to be perceived by human ears, they could be heard by the breeder's dogs. consequently, the dogs often were in a constant state of agitation. in a suit by the breeder against the manufacturer, what is the likely outcome? response - correct a the breeder will prevail on a trespass theory, because the sound waves are entering onto the breeder's property. b the breeder will prevail on a nuisance theory, because the sound of the whistles is a substantial interference with the breeder's use of her land. c the breeder will not prevail, because the sound of the whistles is not a substantial interference with the breeder's use of her land. d the breeder will not prevail, because the manufacturer has acted reasonably in testing its whistles.