If the government spends more money, but doesn't increase taxes, they have to borrow money from other countries in order to spend it. If we borrow money from other countries, then our country owes their country. When we owe something, that is called debt.
They are examples of non sworn personnel
I believe the correct answer is Payment, because if the worker receives $500 EVERY TWO WEEKS it most likely means that is his payment or what he is employed for
Answer:
Three part test.
The outcome: if the three requirements are not met, then there is not point the Government should interfere.
At the end, the law will be held.
Explanation:
In some cases, the courts are allowed to protect individual, company or business organization from Government interrupting with these individuals or business organization "fundamental right" and this is the "substantive due process rights " of insurance companies as mentioned in the question above.
The test that the United State Supreme Court can use to determine whether the regulations they want to enact would violate the substantive due process rights of insurance companies is what is known as the THREE PARR TEST.
THE THREE PART TEST has its root from cases such as that of Pasgraf V Long Island Railroad co. The three part test involves three main subjects and they are;
=> foreseeability: are the policies in which insurance companies work going to affect the consumers in the future?
=> proximity: what kind of relationship do the insurance companies have with there consumers?
=> fairness: are these policies just and fair?
CONCLUSION: if the three requirements are not met, then there is not point the Government should interfere.
Answer: A. As Expenses
B. No treatment.
Explanation:
A. The $100,000 was not structured and a loan so it will be accounted for as EXPENSES. This means that it will be deducted from the Income for the year from Calhoun's books.
B. A C Corporation is by definition taxed SEPARATELY from it's owners in the United States of America. Seeing as both Corporations were C Corporations, Jonathan as the owner of both companies need not worry about how he should treat the $100,000 payment as he will not ne taxed on it.
