The fact that generally accepted accounting principles allow companies flexibility in choosing between certain allocation methods can make it difficult for a financial analyst to compare periodic performance from firm to firm. suppose you were a financial analyst trying to compare the performance of two companies. company a uses the double-declining-balance depreciation method. company b uses the straight-line method. you have the following information taken from the 12/31/13 year-end financial statements for company b: income statement depreciation expense $10,000 balance sheet assets: plant and equipment, at cost $ 200,000 less: accumulated depreciation (40,000 ) net $ 160,000 you also determine that all of the assets constituting the plant and equipment of company b were acquired at the same time, and that all of the $200,000 represents depreciable assets. also, all of the depreciable assets have the same useful life and residual values are zero. required: 1. in order to compare performance with company a, estimate what b's depreciation expense would have been for 2013 if the double-declining-balance depreciation method had been used by company b since acquisition of the depreciable assets. year 1 2010year 2 2011year 3 2012year 4 2013 2. if company b decided to switch depreciation methods in 2013 from the straight line to the double-declining-balance method, prepare the 2013 adjusting journal entry to record depreciation for the year. my wrong 2010200,000200,000 x 10% = 20,00020,000200,000 - 20,000 = 180,0002011180,000180,000 x 10% = 18,00020,000 + 18,000 = 38,000200,000 - 38,000 = 162,0002012162,000162,000 x 10% = 16,20038,000 + 16,200 = 54,200200,000 - 54,200 = 145,8002013145,800145,800 x 10% = 14,58054,200 + 14,580 = 68, 780200,000 - 68,780 = 131, 2202. dr. depreciation expense = 131,220 cr. accumulated depreciation = 131,220