题目内容
甲企业为增值税一般纳税人，适用的增值税税率为17%，原材料采用实际成本进行日常核算。2007年3月份，甲企业发生如下涉及增值税的经济业务或事项：（1）购入原材料一批，增值税专用发票上注明的价款为90000元，增值税额为15300元。该批原材料已验收入库，货款已用银行存款支付；（2）销售商品一批，增值税专用发票上注明的价款为300000元，增值税额为51000元，提货单和增值税专用发票已交购货方，并收到购货方开出并承兑的商业承兑汇票；（3）在建工程领用生产用库存原材料20000元，应由该批原材料负担的增值税额为3400元；（4）盘亏原材料4000元，应由该批原材料负担的增值税额为680元；（5）职工医院维修用材料5000元，其购入时支付的增值税为850元；（6）以银行存款交纳增值税20000元。要求：编制上述业务的会计分录（“应交税费”科目要求写出明细科目及专栏名称）。（答案中的金额单位用元表示）
查看答案
搜索结果不匹配？点我反馈
更多问题
Passage One It’s a brand new world—a world built around brands. Hard-charging, noise-making, culture-shaping brands are everywhere. They’re on supermarket shelves, of course, but also in business plans for network company startups and in the names of sports complexes. Brands are infiltrating (渗透) people’s everyday lives—by sticking their logos on clothes, in concert programs, on subway station walls, even in elementary school classrooms. We live in an age in which CBS newscasters wear Nike jackets on the air, in which Burger King and McDonald’s open kiosks (小亭) in elementary school lunchrooms. But as brands reach (and then overreach) into every aspects of our lives, the companies behind them invite more questions, deeper scrutiny—and an inevitable backlash by consumers. "Our intellectual lives and our public spaces are, being taken over by marketing—and that has real implications for citizenship," says author and activists Naomi Klien. "It’s important for any healthy culture to have public space—a place where people are treated as citizens instead of as consumers. We’ve completely lost that space." Since the mid-1980s, as more and more companies have shifted from being about products to being about ideas. Starbucks isn’t selling coffee; It’s selling community! Those companies have poured more and more resources into marketing campaigns. To pay for those campaigns, those same companies figured out ways to cut costs elsewhere, for example, by using contract labor at home and low-wage labor in developing countries. Contract laborers are hired on a temporary, per-assignment basis, and employers have no obligation to provide any benefits (such as health insurance) or long-term job security. This saves companies money but obviously puts workers in vulnerable situations. In the United States, contract labor has given rise to so-called McJobs, which employers and workers alike pretend are temporary—even though these jobs are usually held by adults who are trying to support families. The massive expansion of marketing campaigns in the 1980s coincided with the reduction of government spending for schools and for museums. This made those institutions much too willing, even eager, to partner with private companies. But companies took advantage of the needs of those institutions, reaching too far, and overwhelming the civic space with their marketing agendas. What does "that" (Line 1, Para. 3 ) refer to
48岁，女性，突然胸闷痛，心悸，心电图示Vl～3有深而宽的Q波，ST段抬高，伴有室性期前收缩，二联律形成，抢救中突然抽搐，最可能的原因是
Passage One It’s a brand new world—a world built around brands. Hard-charging, noise-making, culture-shaping brands are everywhere. They’re on supermarket shelves, of course, but also in business plans for network company startups and in the names of sports complexes. Brands are infiltrating (渗透) people’s everyday lives—by sticking their logos on clothes, in concert programs, on subway station walls, even in elementary school classrooms. We live in an age in which CBS newscasters wear Nike jackets on the air, in which Burger King and McDonald’s open kiosks (小亭) in elementary school lunchrooms. But as brands reach (and then overreach) into every aspects of our lives, the companies behind them invite more questions, deeper scrutiny—and an inevitable backlash by consumers. "Our intellectual lives and our public spaces are, being taken over by marketing—and that has real implications for citizenship," says author and activists Naomi Klien. "It’s important for any healthy culture to have public space—a place where people are treated as citizens instead of as consumers. We’ve completely lost that space." Since the mid-1980s, as more and more companies have shifted from being about products to being about ideas. Starbucks isn’t selling coffee; It’s selling community! Those companies have poured more and more resources into marketing campaigns. To pay for those campaigns, those same companies figured out ways to cut costs elsewhere, for example, by using contract labor at home and low-wage labor in developing countries. Contract laborers are hired on a temporary, per-assignment basis, and employers have no obligation to provide any benefits (such as health insurance) or long-term job security. This saves companies money but obviously puts workers in vulnerable situations. In the United States, contract labor has given rise to so-called McJobs, which employers and workers alike pretend are temporary—even though these jobs are usually held by adults who are trying to support families. The massive expansion of marketing campaigns in the 1980s coincided with the reduction of government spending for schools and for museums. This made those institutions much too willing, even eager, to partner with private companies. But companies took advantage of the needs of those institutions, reaching too far, and overwhelming the civic space with their marketing agendas. How can brands infiltrate people’s daily life
Passage One It’s a brand new world—a world built around brands. Hard-charging, noise-making, culture-shaping brands are everywhere. They’re on supermarket shelves, of course, but also in business plans for network company startups and in the names of sports complexes. Brands are infiltrating (渗透) people’s everyday lives—by sticking their logos on clothes, in concert programs, on subway station walls, even in elementary school classrooms. We live in an age in which CBS newscasters wear Nike jackets on the air, in which Burger King and McDonald’s open kiosks (小亭) in elementary school lunchrooms. But as brands reach (and then overreach) into every aspects of our lives, the companies behind them invite more questions, deeper scrutiny—and an inevitable backlash by consumers. "Our intellectual lives and our public spaces are, being taken over by marketing—and that has real implications for citizenship," says author and activists Naomi Klien. "It’s important for any healthy culture to have public space—a place where people are treated as citizens instead of as consumers. We’ve completely lost that space." Since the mid-1980s, as more and more companies have shifted from being about products to being about ideas. Starbucks isn’t selling coffee; It’s selling community! Those companies have poured more and more resources into marketing campaigns. To pay for those campaigns, those same companies figured out ways to cut costs elsewhere, for example, by using contract labor at home and low-wage labor in developing countries. Contract laborers are hired on a temporary, per-assignment basis, and employers have no obligation to provide any benefits (such as health insurance) or long-term job security. This saves companies money but obviously puts workers in vulnerable situations. In the United States, contract labor has given rise to so-called McJobs, which employers and workers alike pretend are temporary—even though these jobs are usually held by adults who are trying to support families. The massive expansion of marketing campaigns in the 1980s coincided with the reduction of government spending for schools and for museums. This made those institutions much too willing, even eager, to partner with private companies. But companies took advantage of the needs of those institutions, reaching too far, and overwhelming the civic space with their marketing agendas. What is the author’s attitude towards the massive expansion of marketing campaigns
微信支付 
支付宝支付