B & C have raised a number of important points regarding our original paper. Many of the issues were addressed in the original paper so that our response to them here necessarily has been some- what repetitious of the previous discussion. Nevertheless, we are grateful to B & C for pointing out some potential difficulties in applying the technique, for emphasizing the need for validation before the technique can be of practical value, and for giving us the opportunity to clarify and expand upon numerous issues which possibly were not dealt with satisfactorily in the original paper.

A popular rule of thumb asserts that an extra tax deduction will generate a tax benefit equal to the tax rate times that deduction. This paper shows that when the extra tax deduction is a preference item, this rule of thumb can be economically harmful. The decision model presented in this paper examines the implications of taking extra tax deductions of preference items in the light of the minimum-maximum tax structure set forth in the 1976 Tax Act. The corporation tax situation with respect to the preference tax structure is also considered. The impact of the preference tax deduction is analyzed under a number of constraints and illustrated with a specific set of data. The generality of the conclusions reached is then tested by quantitative techniques.

Reviews the book "Cost Accounting: Accumulation, Analysis, and Control," by Benny R. Copeland and Nelson G. Sullivan.

In a recent comment on Haim Falk and James A. Heintz's paper, Edward Blocher and Kung H. Chen re-emphasized the need for validation of the Falk and Heintz (F&H) proposed model and the application of Guttman's scalogram technique for risk analysis of equity securities. The purpose of this paper is to assess empirically the validity of F&H's model. Thus, 459 corporations were graded according to F&H's composite risk measure. This grading was then compared with three market-based risk measures. The market-based risk measures were derived by utilizing Sharpe's capital asset pricing model. The Standard and Poor 400 industrial index served as the basis for calculating the return on all capital assets in the market. In light of the additional effort and resources needed to adjust a traditional market price index for dividends, some researchers have ignored the dividend figures in measuring the market risk. While F&H's model gained substantial support on the company dimension, the usefulness of the industry factor has been found effective only if weak monotonic relationships are acceptable.

[It is demonstrated that, under regularity assumptions on individuals' preferences, for an open dense set of exchange economies indexed by initial endowments, the core does not possess the equal treatment property. The assumptions made on individuals' preferences are subsequently shown to characterize an open dense subject of the space of preferences.]

Albert A. Hirsch, Saul H. Hymans, Harold T. Shapiro, Econometric Review of Alternative Fiscal and Monetary Policies, 1971-75, The Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 60, No. 3 (Aug., 1978), pp. 334-345

Frederick L. A. Grauer, The Theory of the Trading Firm Revisited: Discussion, The Journal of Finance, Vol. 33, No. 3, Papers and Proceedings of the Thirty-Sixth Annual Meeting American Finance Association, New York City December 28-30, 1977 (Jun., 1978), pp. 1031-1033