Nancy Corporation agreed to sell its common stock to Eddie Corporation for five monthly payments of $100,000. Eddie Corporation made the first payment but did not make any other payments. According to the stock subscription agreement, Eddie Corporation forfeits its payment and is entitled to no further consideration. How should Nancy Corporation account for the $100,000 forfeited payment?

Week 1 In a minimum of 5 to 7 sentences, describe your initial thoughts regarding the case and the challenges you feel you will face with regards to the depth and complexity of the issues that will be addressed.

Week 2 In a minimum of 5 to 7 sentences, summarize the background of your case and indicate any assumptions that you are making regarding the case. Define your problem statement and research question(s).

Week 3 In a minimum of 5 to 7 sentences, identify the key terms in your case, and state why you believe each is relevant to your case.

Week 4 Gather data from multiple sources and present that data in one to two pages (12-point font, double-spaced). Be sure to document your sources.

Week 5 Organize and interpret the findings of your research in one to two pages (12-point font, double-spaced).

Week 6 Develop your recommendations and conclusions and state them and their rationale in one to two pages (12-point font, double-spaced).

Week 7 Using the guidelines above, prepare a comprehensive research memorandum on the case that you chose. The Standard is three pages per team member.

Here's the Research memorandum Grading Rubric:-

ACCT 540 Research Memorandum Grading Rubric

ACCT 540 Research Memorandum Grading Rubric
Course Objective
Using the research analysis performed in CO E and the conclusions
and recommendations from CO F, in APA format, prepare a written
report of the findings and a memo summarizing the research results,
and present the conclusions and recommendations to the client.
Grading RubricWeek 7 Research Memorandum
	Possible	Criteria and Point Range
	Points
		010	1120	2125	2630
Introduction/Facts
	30	Facts are not properly identified.	Some of the facts are identified. Introductory comments are not sufficient.	Most facts and issues are identified. Introductory comments are not clear.	Facts are clearly identified. Introductory comments provide sufficient background on the topic.
		030	3160	6171	7280
Main Content
	80	The analysis is not appropriate relative to the facts presented.	Some of the analysis is supported by research.	Most of the analysis is supported by research.	The main content is rigorously supported by research. The analysis is appropriate based on the facts of the case.
		020	2140	4150	5160
Conclusion and Recommendation
	60	The conclusion is not appropriate based on the analysis.	The recommendation is not appropriate based on the conclusion.	Conclusion and recommendation may be appropriate but do not bring closure to the case.	Conclusion and recommendation follow logically from the body of the paper and bring closure to the case.
		010	1120	2125	2630
Grammar and Organization
	30	Paper does not appear professional, and there are numerous grammar and spelling errors.	Paper does not appear professional, and there are some grammar and spelling errors.	The paper appears professional, and there are minor grammar and spelling errors.	The paper appears professional and is reader-friendly.

I want the only week 7 answer in 3 pages in a word document before 10 June 2020.

Let me know if u have any confusion in question.

i send u sample of mini memo

In more complex memos when adding a judicial case, it is usually presented paragraph with at least three sentences, in order to adequately discuss three basic elements of the facts of a case, the court's holding, and the reasoning behind the court's decision. In the reasoning, FACTS: Tim gave Mary a diamond engagement ring worth $2,000 when Mary was a travel companion for Tim's month-long business trip to Europe. ISSUE: Whether a taxpayer who receives an engagement ring while serving as a travel companion can exclude the value of the ring as a gift under Section 102(a). CONCLUSION: A taxpayer can exclude the fair market value of an engagement ring as a gift. REASONING: Gross income under Section 61(a) includes all income, including compensation for services, unless otherwise excluded. The value of a gift is excluded under Section 102(a). The U.S. Supreme Court defined a gift as coming from real love and affection and not from a business relationship. Comm'r v. Duber- stein, 363 U.S. 278 (1960). Tim's engagement to Mary suggests true love for transferring the ring. Thus, the ring qualifies as a gift under the Supreme Court's analysis in Duberstein. The value of the engagement ring is excludable under Section 102(a) and is not part of Mary's gross income under Section 61(a) because it is not compensation for services. FIGURE 7.11 Brief Tax Research Mini-Memo Illustrated. All Rights Reserved. This print copy is licensed to you pursuant to your etext license and may not be sold, copied In more complex memos when adding a judicial case, it is usually presented paragraph with at least three sentences, in order to adequately discuss three basic elements of the facts of a case, the court's holding, and the reasoning behind the court's decision. In the reasoning, FACTS: Tim gave Mary a diamond engagement ring worth $2,000 when Mary was a travel companion for Tim's month-long business trip to Europe. ISSUE: Whether a taxpayer who receives an engagement ring while serving as a travel companion can exclude the value of the ring as a gift under Section 102(a). CONCLUSION: A taxpayer can exclude the fair market value of an engagement ring as a gift. REASONING: Gross income under Section 61(a) includes all income, including compensation for services, unless otherwise excluded. The value of a gift is excluded under Section 102(a). The U.S. Supreme Court defined a gift as coming from real love and affection and not from a business relationship. Comm'r v. Duber- stein, 363 U.S. 278 (1960). Tim's engagement to Mary suggests true love for transferring the ring. Thus, the ring qualifies as a gift under the Supreme Court's analysis in Duberstein. The value of the engagement ring is excludable under Section 102(a) and is not part of Mary's gross income under Section 61(a) because it is not compensation for services. FIGURE 7.11 Brief Tax Research Mini-Memo Illustrated. All Rights Reserved. This print copy is licensed to you pursuant to your etext license and may not be sold, copied