We already know the ratio of the company's profits in 1994 to profits in 1992, since we're told the percent changes from year to year in the stem, so Statement 2 just restates information we already know, and is useless.

If in 1994 the company profits were $100,000 greater than in 1993, and were also 10% greater than in 1993, then 10% of the 1993 profits is equal to $100,000, and the 1993 profits must have been $1m. From there, we can work backwards using the 20% increase from 1992 to 1993 to find the profits in 1992 (bizarrely, they work out to be $833,333.33 and 1/3 of a cent, which doesn't really make sense). So Statement 1 is sufficient.