Answer:
a. How will the $20,000 payments be treated by Fred and Tammy if covered by prior law? b. How will the payments be treated if the divorce is covered by new law? c. What is Tammy's basis in the residence? d. What role would a tax adviser play in a divorce?
Explanation:
a. For Fred, the 20,000 must be included in income. There is no deduction for paying alimony. For Tammy, the amount is not included in income.
b. If the divorce was complete prior to December 31, 2018, Fred can deduct the $20,000 payments as alimony.
If the divorce was complete prior to December 31, 2018, Tammy must include the $20,000 payments in gross income.
c. It's $100.000,00
d. Tax advisors are responsible for determining the value of property given in lieu of cash for an alimony payment.
Answer:
Its so that they cant make you wait in prison for years until a trial.
Explanation:
You have the right to a speedy trial, that means they cant make you wait for years and just keep you in prison or jail. They have to give you a trial and the 6th amendment makes it so it has to be quick (within a couple months or up to a year)
Have fun passing that class I currently have three hours to do 25 assignments at the end of that three hours I will have my finals grade for all of my classes ahhh
Answer:
Explanation:
If you're referring to regulations:
There is a maximum amount of money individuals and organizations can send directly to candidates (HARD MONEY)
A way to bypass this is if you send money to a political party which then runs ads for campaigns
Example; You already contributed your maximum $5,000 to the Trump Campaign but you want to contribute $20,000 in total so you give the Republican Party $15,000.
Also no foreign money is allowed in political elections.
Answer:
It is the duty of Congress to have hearings in order to confirm a Supreme Court Justice nominee (as stated in the Constitution). This exclusive power rests on the U.S. Senate. The consensus, however, may be different and may vote against a nominee. Political parties within the Senate generally get in the way of who will vote and who won't, and vice-versa.
Explanation:
For example, Merrick Garland (former President Obama's nominee) was not given a hearing. Furthermore, Congress failed to perform the duties to have a hearing and decide whether to vote or deny a nominee. This is an example of how they refused to even vote on him. This is not the way government should operate.
