Lol shut up and get your own answer
Answer:
This deduction, created by the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, allows non-corporate taxpayers to deduct up to 20 percent of their QBI, plus 20% of qualified real estate investment trust (REIT) dividends and qualified publicly traded partnership (PTP) income.Jul 16, 2019
Explanation:
or 2018, the threshold amount is $315,000 for a married couple filing a joint return, and $157,500 for all other taxpayers. The SSTB limitations don't apply for taxpayers with taxable income at or below the threshold amount.This new deduction is equal to 20% of a taxpayer's “qualified business income” (QBI). QBI is calculated by netting the total amount of qualified income, gain, deduction and loss from any qualified trade or business. ... Capital gains and losses, certain dividends and interest income are some of the excluded items.Apr 2, 2019Section 199A defines a qualified trade or business by exclusion; every trade or business is a qualified business other than: The trade or business of performing services as an employee, and. A specified service trade or business.
Answer:
C.
Explanation:
I believe that they should recive up to 5 years in prision or 5,000 dollar fine.
Answer:
B. The requirement violates Article I, Section 4 of the Constitution, which gives Congress the power to "make or alter" state regulations providing for the "Times" and "Manner" of holding elections for senators and representatives.
Explanation:
Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act. ... Section 4(e) gives that the option to enroll and cast a ballot may not be denied to those people who have finished the 6th grade in a government funded school, for example, those in Puerto Rico, where the dominating study hall language is a language other than English.
Answer:
The exclusionary rule prevents the government from using most evidence gathered in violation of the United States Constitution. The decision in Mapp v. Ohio established that the exclusionary rule applies to evidence gained from an unreasonable search or seizure in violation of the Fourth Amendment. The decision in Miranda v. Arizona established that the exclusionary rule applies to improperly elicited self-incriminatory statements gathered in violation of the Fifth Amendment, and to evidence gained in situations where the government violated the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel. However, the rule does not apply in civil cases, including deportation hearings. See INS v. Lopez-Mendoza.
