Umm... I can't find the choices... So, those are the choices I made up that are correct to your question.
- Spills covering grounds or falling hazards, such as blocked paths or cords going over the ground.
- Working from heights, including ladders, scaffolds, roofs, or an elevated workspace.
- Unguarded device and moving machine pieces; guards dismissed or moving pieces that a worker can unintentionally touch.
If he was the first to say he wanted the product and the seller wants to sell it as fast as possible than yes. But not technically it would be a kind of verbal understanding and agreement.
Based on the given scenario If Elin delivers a check payable to her order to the first bank without signing it and receives cash, the transfer is an assignment, not a negotiation, this is a true statement.
<h3>What is a Negotiation?</h3>
This refers to the dialogue done with the aim of reaching an agreement or compromise about a thing.
Hence, we can see that Based on the given scenario If Elin delivers a check payable to her order to the first bank without signing it and receives cash, the transfer is an assignment, not a negotiation, this is a true statement.
This is because she did not make any bargains.
Read more about negotiation here:
brainly.com/question/902450
#SPJ1
Answer:
The options are missing:
- File the return since you know that Mary has done them a favor by allowing them to move in.
-
Explain the residency requirement and file the return showing the grandson lived with Mary for more than half the year.
-
File the return, but only after Mary assures you that Sheila will not be claiming her son.
-
Explain to Mary that she is not eligible to claim her grandson, and that you cannot knowingly file an incorrect tax return.
My answer would be:
4. Explain to Mary that she is not eligible to claim her grandson, and that you cannot knowingly file an incorrect tax return.
Explanation:
This is both a legal and ethical question.
Legally, Mary is not allowed to deduct Heila's son as her dependent because she only lived with her for 5 months and the minimum requirement is 6 months.
Ethically, you are asked to benefit someone that is your friend (or might not), but in order to do so you must break the law. Is it ethical to break the law in order to benefit an specific person? The answer is no, the law should be the same for everyone. To be honest, no one will probably even realize that you did something illegal, but bad actions always have consequences and we do not always realize them.