In the days following the 9/11 attacks there have been many changes in the organization and how the government handles the flow of people coming into the country. The INS was first started as the organization that was responsible for handing the people who were applying for citizenship and residency. INS stands for Immigration and Naturalization Service, the organization charged with respecting the safety of the USA.
The INS is now responsible for many tasks that it never had before, including inspecting travelers who are entering and exiting the United States gates through more than 300 points of entry nationwide. Whether you are coming or going from the United States, you are likely to be passing through an INS worker who is responsible for helping make sure anyone who is wanted by the law is not able to gain entry to the country. Although largely a precaution, it is thought that this will be most helpful in preventing possible threats to national security.
Other tasks of the INS include handling the residence status of all who apply for residence and citizenship. They also handle and seek to regulate the status of all permanent and temporary immigration requests. The INS. also handles tourists, and students, as well as those coming for conventions, special classes, visiting family and all other business.
The INS has also been given the tasks of controlling all of the borders into the United States, especially the borders between Mexico and the United States and Canada and the United States. This is an extremely large task since the United States shares such large land borders with two other countries. This allows for an almost daily flow of people trying to enter the country illegally.
INS workers are also responsible for handling and removing all people who have no legal rights to be in this country. They are responsible for removing the parties in accordance with the laws, and by following all of the standards that are set in place for obtaining temporary status, or returning the person to the country where they came from.
In a report the INS released in 2001, there was 31,971 employees on staff. This resulted in a rate of 24,233 of these employees being classified as enforcement personal were used to enforce the laws, rulings and policies of this country. The INS today is a function of the Justice Department and serves mostly as an investigative unit, unlike many other departments, which serve as law enforcement units instead.
In recent years, the borders have had more illegal entry than previously, which has resulted in larger amounts of staff being added to help secure the borders and protect our country. Without being able to know who is entering our country, we are unable to truly protect our citizens and other people. Border patrol agents is the one largest area where the INS has seen growth in jobs available. Due to the increase of jobs in the border patrol, we are able to see much fewer illegal entries into the country.
As we progress into a country that is, more accommodating of people from various cultures it will be quite interesting to see how the INS is changed to adapt and become more friendly to the needs of all people, even those entering the country.
Monday, March 12, 2012
The Fairness of Limited Liability
Limited liability is one of the most successful commercial creations of all time, almost singularly responsible for the growth and expansion of capitalism. Encouraging risk and promoting successful enterprise through both small and large businesses alike, limited liability has been the driving force behind economic success in the Western world and is one of the most celebrated legal creations of all time. But what is it about limited liability that makes it so successful? Indeed, is the structure of limited liability fair as regards creditors, who ultimately bear the brunt of this mechanism?
Limited liability in general means a sacrifice of privacy in return for the benefit of limited personal liability. In layman's terms, this means that the company promoter is not personally liable for any of the company's debts, thus encouraging risk and promoting enterprise. For most small businesses, it is a lifeline, and without it the economy would level out and stifle with fewer new start-ups each year. At the back end, however, these businesses leave behind a trail of debts that ultimately result in financial loss for lenders and those that operate on credit terms. This raises the general question of whether limited liability as a creation is fair for the creditors it so apparently prejudices?
Limited liability has given life to companies across the world, by providing the reassurances necessary to entrepreneurs to take the risk, safe in the knowledge that personally speaking they should come out unscathed. From this, more companies have grown and flourished, which has led to more jobs and better state welfare for virtually all capitalist economies. The strength of this function has gone a long way towards building the great superpowers, and is seriously underestimated as a legal construct.
Limited liability leaves a gap in the pockets of those companies that lend money or offer their customers credit terms during the course of their business. As a consequence of the promoter's ability to walk away with his hands clean, many businesses find the squeeze of bad debts too severe, and end up having to take on credit of their own to meet the shortcomings. In theory, limited liability leaves creditors in a weak situation, with relatively limited powers to regain the full amount of any monies due.
In reality, limited liability doesn't operate in that way. Of course, many businesses go under every year as their owners walk free of encumbrance, but generally speaking the economic world does not work between insolvent companies. However, the flexibility allowed by limited liability has meant debt in a sense has become effective currency, and has helped businesses to survive during tough times, and to seek the financial help necessary without the appropriate risk.
Limited liability might be seen as slightly unfair at the razor's edge, but it works all round to ensure that everyone has access to credit and the benefits of limitation of damages when it is necessary. Ultimately, it promotes a more competitive, lower-risk environment within which business can flourish and economies can grow and multiply, providing jobs and economic strength to nations embracing its basic form. As legal fictions go, the limited company has undoubtedly prove itself to be one of the most popular ever created, and its growth looks set to continue as it is developed and refined across the world.
Limited liability in general means a sacrifice of privacy in return for the benefit of limited personal liability. In layman's terms, this means that the company promoter is not personally liable for any of the company's debts, thus encouraging risk and promoting enterprise. For most small businesses, it is a lifeline, and without it the economy would level out and stifle with fewer new start-ups each year. At the back end, however, these businesses leave behind a trail of debts that ultimately result in financial loss for lenders and those that operate on credit terms. This raises the general question of whether limited liability as a creation is fair for the creditors it so apparently prejudices?
Limited liability has given life to companies across the world, by providing the reassurances necessary to entrepreneurs to take the risk, safe in the knowledge that personally speaking they should come out unscathed. From this, more companies have grown and flourished, which has led to more jobs and better state welfare for virtually all capitalist economies. The strength of this function has gone a long way towards building the great superpowers, and is seriously underestimated as a legal construct.
Limited liability leaves a gap in the pockets of those companies that lend money or offer their customers credit terms during the course of their business. As a consequence of the promoter's ability to walk away with his hands clean, many businesses find the squeeze of bad debts too severe, and end up having to take on credit of their own to meet the shortcomings. In theory, limited liability leaves creditors in a weak situation, with relatively limited powers to regain the full amount of any monies due.
In reality, limited liability doesn't operate in that way. Of course, many businesses go under every year as their owners walk free of encumbrance, but generally speaking the economic world does not work between insolvent companies. However, the flexibility allowed by limited liability has meant debt in a sense has become effective currency, and has helped businesses to survive during tough times, and to seek the financial help necessary without the appropriate risk.
Limited liability might be seen as slightly unfair at the razor's edge, but it works all round to ensure that everyone has access to credit and the benefits of limitation of damages when it is necessary. Ultimately, it promotes a more competitive, lower-risk environment within which business can flourish and economies can grow and multiply, providing jobs and economic strength to nations embracing its basic form. As legal fictions go, the limited company has undoubtedly prove itself to be one of the most popular ever created, and its growth looks set to continue as it is developed and refined across the world.
Sunday, March 11, 2012
The European Convention on Human Rights: The Wider Implications
The European Convention on Human Rights has seen vast changes to the legal framework of countries across Europe. By imposing fundamental freedoms and liberties in an indefeasible form, it has created a host of legal problems and issues for courts to tackle in an attempt to improve human rights. Distinct from the US, which already retains fundamental freedoms through its definitive constitution, much of Europe in particular the UK doesn't have the same codified provisions for its citizens. This has now been revolutionized by the ratification of the European Convention (ECHR), which sets out certain primary standards that must be attained in relation to each individual citizen. In this article, we will look at the advantages of the ECHR, and the wide-ranging impact it has had on the various constitutions around Europe.
The European Convention on Human Rights was established as an international treaty to afford a uniform standard of human rights treatment across Europe. Covering basic freedoms like the right to life through to trickier issues such as the right to liberty and the right to marry, ECHR has had an astonishing impact on Europe both legally and politically. In passing legislation, European governments have to as a matter of law legislate in accordance with the provisions contained within the ECHR. This means parliaments of signatory countries are being bound by their predecessors to legislate in a particular way, which has ruled out a number of would-be pledges and meant the reversal of certain national laws.
One area where this has caused problems is in abortion. The perpetual morality debate aside, abortion has been held to contravene the right to life provision in certain European countries. Although there is still great scope for challenge, this could potentially cause problems in the coming years as more and more cases of this nature are brought before the European court. Another major problem area is that of same sex marriages. The universal right to marry means that any provision stopping same sex marriage anywhere in Europe could potentially be struck down as illegal, requiring nations to actively realign their current provisions to avoid any discrimination. For this reason, the UK, amongst others, have taken proactive measures to permit same-sex marriages to avoid the embarrassment of a public ruling against them. This obviously raises problems of national power and freedom: nations are now utterly bound by the principles of European 'liberty', whether they like it or not.
Thankfully this social and legal upheaval is working towards a more liberty-orientated Europe. It is certainly taking time, and given the fact that the ECHR is over half a century old, its impacts are becoming more and more apparent as time wears on and as courts are presented with modern challenges located within the context of the original ECHR provisions. Additionally, the European Convention on Human Rights is being regularly updated and amended to provide a steadfast constitution for the citizen whilst retaining the flexibility to adapt to contemporary situations. Although the ECHR and the provisions contained within it have met stiff opposition throughout their lifetime, most would now agree that the level of individual certainty provided by these fundamental freedoms is making for a better quality of life and reducing the scope for discrimination and prejudice across Europe.
The European Convention on Human Rights was established as an international treaty to afford a uniform standard of human rights treatment across Europe. Covering basic freedoms like the right to life through to trickier issues such as the right to liberty and the right to marry, ECHR has had an astonishing impact on Europe both legally and politically. In passing legislation, European governments have to as a matter of law legislate in accordance with the provisions contained within the ECHR. This means parliaments of signatory countries are being bound by their predecessors to legislate in a particular way, which has ruled out a number of would-be pledges and meant the reversal of certain national laws.
One area where this has caused problems is in abortion. The perpetual morality debate aside, abortion has been held to contravene the right to life provision in certain European countries. Although there is still great scope for challenge, this could potentially cause problems in the coming years as more and more cases of this nature are brought before the European court. Another major problem area is that of same sex marriages. The universal right to marry means that any provision stopping same sex marriage anywhere in Europe could potentially be struck down as illegal, requiring nations to actively realign their current provisions to avoid any discrimination. For this reason, the UK, amongst others, have taken proactive measures to permit same-sex marriages to avoid the embarrassment of a public ruling against them. This obviously raises problems of national power and freedom: nations are now utterly bound by the principles of European 'liberty', whether they like it or not.
Thankfully this social and legal upheaval is working towards a more liberty-orientated Europe. It is certainly taking time, and given the fact that the ECHR is over half a century old, its impacts are becoming more and more apparent as time wears on and as courts are presented with modern challenges located within the context of the original ECHR provisions. Additionally, the European Convention on Human Rights is being regularly updated and amended to provide a steadfast constitution for the citizen whilst retaining the flexibility to adapt to contemporary situations. Although the ECHR and the provisions contained within it have met stiff opposition throughout their lifetime, most would now agree that the level of individual certainty provided by these fundamental freedoms is making for a better quality of life and reducing the scope for discrimination and prejudice across Europe.
Freelance Trader Taxation Law
They say the only things in life that are certain are death and taxes. For the sole trader, this is definitely the case, and at times it can seem like an overbearing pressure. Thankfully, for the sole trader there are many ways in which you can minimize liability to income tax and leave more in your bank account at the end of the month. In this article, we will look at some of the key features of tax management from the perspective of the sole trader, and some of the ways in which the sole trader can minimize the legal consequences of his operation.
As a sole trader, you are usually accountable for your profits in terms of income tax. This can be particularly problematic, given that the structure of income tax in most jurisdictions is a fairly heavy burden on the citizen, particularly those with higher incomes. The first thing that should be considered is incorporation. As a corporate entity, you will be required to handle more paperwork, but ultimately it will save you money. Corporation tax on profits is lower than income tax in the majority of situations, and dividend income carries less taxable weight than other income, for example wages and salaries. The first thing to do, as a sole trader within the top income tax bracket, is to incorporate, which could potentially save thousands every year.
The sole trader must be aware of the fact that there are certain items that cannot be discounted from income. In fact, certain everyday items must be declared and must give rise to tax. For example, say a self-employed solicitor is given a bottle of fine wine by a particular client every year as thanks for his service. This wine, although not initially apparent, will usually require declaration for tax, on the basis that it is an ongoing gift or benefit arising from employment. It is therefore important to watch what is included and what is ignored from your tax return. If you are at all unsure, it is better to include an item and pay tax, rather than running the risk of neglecting to mention its existence. Alternatively, it may be a good idea to consult a specialist on the particular laws of your jurisdiction, and to determine whether or not it would be possible to avoid liability.
Another important thing to remember is that there may be certain personal capital gains liability for disposal of a primarily business asset. As a sole trader, this means you will be liable to account for the disposal of the asset and any capital gains at market value, which can be a costly business. Again, it is probably advisable to consult a tax lawyer or tax adviser to minimize liability on disposal and to manage your tax liability more effectively.
Tax law is a particularly intricate area of the law, and one that is in perpetual change. This means the small business owner is required to keep one eye on tax developments to avoid being caught out, which means there is less room for focus on the core areas of business and making money. Alternatively, the advice of a tax specialist can be invaluable in minimizing overall liability and ultimately saving money from your tax bill every year.
As a sole trader, you are usually accountable for your profits in terms of income tax. This can be particularly problematic, given that the structure of income tax in most jurisdictions is a fairly heavy burden on the citizen, particularly those with higher incomes. The first thing that should be considered is incorporation. As a corporate entity, you will be required to handle more paperwork, but ultimately it will save you money. Corporation tax on profits is lower than income tax in the majority of situations, and dividend income carries less taxable weight than other income, for example wages and salaries. The first thing to do, as a sole trader within the top income tax bracket, is to incorporate, which could potentially save thousands every year.
The sole trader must be aware of the fact that there are certain items that cannot be discounted from income. In fact, certain everyday items must be declared and must give rise to tax. For example, say a self-employed solicitor is given a bottle of fine wine by a particular client every year as thanks for his service. This wine, although not initially apparent, will usually require declaration for tax, on the basis that it is an ongoing gift or benefit arising from employment. It is therefore important to watch what is included and what is ignored from your tax return. If you are at all unsure, it is better to include an item and pay tax, rather than running the risk of neglecting to mention its existence. Alternatively, it may be a good idea to consult a specialist on the particular laws of your jurisdiction, and to determine whether or not it would be possible to avoid liability.
Another important thing to remember is that there may be certain personal capital gains liability for disposal of a primarily business asset. As a sole trader, this means you will be liable to account for the disposal of the asset and any capital gains at market value, which can be a costly business. Again, it is probably advisable to consult a tax lawyer or tax adviser to minimize liability on disposal and to manage your tax liability more effectively.
Tax law is a particularly intricate area of the law, and one that is in perpetual change. This means the small business owner is required to keep one eye on tax developments to avoid being caught out, which means there is less room for focus on the core areas of business and making money. Alternatively, the advice of a tax specialist can be invaluable in minimizing overall liability and ultimately saving money from your tax bill every year.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)