The answer is table styles
Answer:
The correct answer is that: informants are difficult to control and the police can not trust in them always.
Explanation:
To begin with, if the police officer finds out that the informant went behind his back and purchase drug then the officer must understand that the informant is not trustful and moreover<u> he could mean a risk to the whole undercover operation</u> that the police officer is managing, therefore that the scenario is propounding that situations like that exemplify that informants can not be trusted due to the fact that they are ex convicted and that is why the officers have to be carefull when working with them.
Canada has a
strong primary manufacturing sector
but a weak secondary manufacturing
sector.
It goes to the stockholders
Answer:
The tax for all five cases is as calculated in the attached figure.
Explanation:
The calculation of tax for individual income is calculated as attached in the excel file screen shot. As year is not mentioned, the tax tables are used for 2015 (As observed by finding a reference question).
Net Taxable Income: |$62449
Dividend: |$ (560)
--------------------------------------------
Taxable Income |$ 61889
(excluding dividend) |
For income bracket | Tax Rate | Tax Amount
(0-18450) | 10% of Income | 18450*10%= $1845
(18451-74900) | 15% of Income | (61889-18450)*10%= $6525.85
Total Tax (Less Dividend) | $ 8360.85
Tax on Dividend is given as
0% for Income less than 74900. As income is less than the value so the dividend tax is 0.
Total Tax=Tax(less dividend)+Tax(dividend)
Total Tax=$ 8360.85
The other entries are calculated using the same in the excel and the screenshot is attached below.