Answer:
The British approach appears to be more effective and even more efficient.
Explanation:
The British approach eliminates the tendency of lawyers to coach the witnesses to produce required answers. This means that using the British approach, witnesses are not properly prepared with correctly rehearsed answers to questions. The discovery of the case by both lawyers happens in the courtroom and not at a pretrial stage. With the British approach, courtroom lawyers are responsible for conducting the opening statement, direct examination of witnesses, closing statement, and cross-examination of witnesses.
The case portrays the need for a review of income and property taxes, highlighting information on which taxes should or should not have their exemption limits extended and how this affects the country's infrastructure.
Accordingly, we can answer the other questions as follows:
- Economic research is against increasing the income tax exemption limit, as this would harm the poorest population.
- The research states that the property tax is important for the growth of the country's infrastructure, in addition to falling on objects that are easy to identify and that belong to the richest population.
<h3>How does the survey present this information?</h3>
The research shows that the income import should matter the exemption in the poorest population and this is a way to promote more taxpayers for this tax. This is because by allowing poor people to be exempt from income tax, the State promotes economic ascension, allowing these people to reach higher economic levels and leave the lower classes, becoming taxpayers.
However, the research is in favor of extending the exemption limits for property tax. This is because these taxes must fall on people who own buildings and residences. These people have a higher economic standard and are easily identified since the properties are immovable assets.
Learn more about income tax:
brainly.com/question/17075354
#SPJ1
Answer: The Louisiana Civil Code
Explanation:
Answer:
D. a loose interpretation of the Constitution could be used to increase federal power.
Explanation:
John Marshall was the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States from 1801 till his death in 1835. Without any prior study in law, he studied law in only just six weeks.
Under Supreme Court's decision under Chief Justice John Marshall upheld Alexander Hamilton's interpretation of the Constitution. Alexander Hamilton advocated broad and liberal interpretation of the Constitution. This belief was upheld by the Supreme Court under Chief Justice John Marshall. The Supreme Court uphelded a loose and liberal interpretation of the Constitution could be used to increase federal power.
Therefore, option D is correct.
1 and 2 1 and 2 1 and 2 1 and 2 1 and 2
