Answer:
b. Roma and Taylor
Explanation:
In this case each attorney is liable for his negligence, so Taylor will be liable for not appearing in court .
Roma is his supervisor, and he will also be liable because he is responsible for Taylor's performance.
The other attorneys in the firm will not be liable, because there is personal liability. When they are not directly involved in negligence, they will not be liable to Umberto.
Answer:
1. per se application
U.S. Competition Law
This law checks whether certain parts of a contract or agreement have violated US antitrust laws.
2. Misuse of activity
EU Competition Law
This is part of the European Union's competition law that prohibits the use of activity to try to gain unfair advantges.
3. Extraterritoriality
US and EU
This is a provision in both US and EU anti-competition and anti-trust laws that states that the activities of foreign companies fall under the law if these activities influence the people within the jurisdiction of the US or the EU.
4. Trade obstacle, nontariff
France
These are a part of the French system.
5. Strict liability
U.S. Tort Law
A concept in US Tort law that states that a person is liable for an offence they committed and their state of mind or intent when they committed said offence is irrelevant.
6. Punitive damages
U.S. Product Liability Law
A concept in the US that allows for the extra punishment of the party in the wrong to dissuade others from doing so and to reward the party in the right more justly.
Answer: Instrumental
Explanation:
Rational choice theory, is a school of thought which is based on the assumption that individuals will choose a course of action which goes in line with what they personally prefer.
For the instrumental rationality, it has to do with looking for the most cost effective method in order to achieve a particular objective. Therefore, the behavior of corporate executives who outsource jobs to other countries where labor cost is cheaper than in the United States is defined as being instrumental.
The question incomplete! The complete question along with answer and explanation is provided below.
Question:
Eagle Life Insurance Company pays its employees $.30 per mile for driving their personal automobiles to and from work. The company reimburses each employee who rides the bus $100 a month for the cost of a pass. Tom, in his Mazda 2-seat Roadster, collected $100 for his automobile mileage, and Mason received $100 as reimbursement for the cost of a bus pass.
a. What are the effects of the $100 reimbursement on Tom's and Mason's gross income?
b. Assume that Tom and Mason are in the 24% marginal tax bracket and the actual before-tax cost for Tom to drive to and from work is $0.30 per mile. What are Tom's and Mason's after-tax costs of commuting to and from work?
Explanation:
a.
For Tom:
He is required to include the $100 in gross income therefore, he would have to pay after-tax cost on the reimbursement.
For Mason:
He is not required to include the $100 in gross income due to qualified transportation fringe.
b.
For Tom:
Marginal tax = 24%
The after-tax cost of commuting = 0.24*$100 = $24
The before-tax cost of commuting = $0 (since he was reimbursed)
For Mason:
The after-tax cost of commuting = $0
The before-tax cost of commuting = $0 (since he was reimbursed)
Answer:
$15,850
Explanation:
Particulars Amount
Sales revenues, each year $40,000
Less : Depreciation $10,000
Less : Other operating costs <u>$17,000</u>
EBIT $13,000
Less : Interest expense <u>$4,000</u>
EBT/PBT $9,000
Less: Tax at 35% <u>$3,150 </u> ($9,000*35%)
PAT $5,850
Add: Depreciation <u>$10,000</u>
Cash flow after taxes <u>$15,850</u>
