Introduction This case analyzes the legal and ethical aspects of the Kelo Vs. City of New London case of 2005. There are three questions at the center of this case: 1) Does the city of New London violate the Fifth Amendment's Takings Clause if the city takes private property and sells it for private development, with the anticipation the development will improve the city's poor economy? 2) Does the city of New London fulfill the public use stipulation from the Fifth Amendment’s Takings Clause? 3) Does public purpose equal public use? Legal Analysis Model Statement of Facts In 2005, the US Supreme Court decided the case of Kelo Vs. City of New London.
The supreme court case Kelo v. City of New London Connecticut was argued and decided by the supreme court in 2005. This is one of the most recent supreme court rulings that has directly affected my community. The case directly deals with the taking of private property in order to benefit the community in multiple ways, this is also called eminent domain. The citizens who were involved were 15 families who decided to not accept the pharmaceutical company's offer to buy their land and house. The company had already gotten the other 100 families to accept the offer to buy their property.
Memorial University Le Chateau: Positioning for the Post-Boomer Market Case Memo Retail Management September 25th, 2013 Problems and Key Issues The retail apparel market in Canada faced some uncertainty issues in 2009. Because of the economic decline in the country, consumer spending had changed and though the economy was recovering in the later months of the year, it was still unclear how retail consumers would react. To add to the uncertainty of the market baby boomers, who had been strongly marketed to for the past 50 years in North America, were starting to retire. This meant less disposable income, and a change in spending habits. Positioning is extremely important for a retail firm, because of course a retail store cannot be everything, and firms that were previously positioned to target this generation were now left wondering what to do next.
The estate tax began in 1916 with the gift tax following in 1924. Another tax was eventually added, a generation-skipping tax, where all together these taxes represent “one way of reducing the potential wealth society’s richest families might accumulate over several generations” (Spilker, Ayers, Robinson, Outslay & Worsham, 2013, pg. 25-2). It even seems like the government has debated over the ‘fairness’ of these taxes because in 2010, the estate tax was optional. In light of the direction our country is headed, taxes seem to be a priority and to some, a solution, to the debt problem we currently face.
Leasing the building will allow John to write off the payments as rent expense. However, if he has the capital to purchase the building, it would be considered an asset and he would be allowed to depreciate over the life of the building. This decision would have to weigh factors such as: capital investment, loan options if no capital investment, and expected future profits and expenses of the business. 2. Jane Smith tax issues: Issue a) What are the different tax consequences between paying down the mortgage (debt) and assuming a new mortgage (debt) for federal income tax purposes?
Part A: Analysis Business Model Seagate and Deal Rationale #1: Why is Seagate undertaking this transaction? How suitable is an LBO for a technology firm like Seagate, and what are the potential sources of value creation in the transaction? Motivate your answer. The Seagate management believes that the company needs heavy and intensive that are not feasible if Seagate Inc. remains a public company. Other capital re-organizations alternatives involve significant tax liability and considering the present state with Seagate being a public company, tax liability will result in loss of wealth for the shareholders since it involves corporate taxes as well as personal tax liability.
Separate Transaction reasoning: There are three main reasons why the Veritas shares should be divested in a separate transaction. The first one is to escape tax. Separating the deal in different transactions, and using a tax-free stock swap, implies that stocks are not sold ( if company as a whole were to be sold ) , therefore escaping from a huge tax liability bill. The second one it’s obvious. The value to the separate transitions would be higher than a combined one.
Case Two: Starbucks in 2009: The Coffee Goes Cold Strategic Management 4813 David Lemons A. Problem Summary: After a couple decades of tremendous growth of the Starbucks expansion, the company took an unexpected turnaround in 2007, where they saw their stock price drop. Their share price had dropped more than 75% during the next years. Howard Schultz came back as CEO at the beginning of 2008 and suggested several turnaround strategies. Starbucks was hit hard, the net income was down nearly 70% and it also dealt with its first ever decline in quarterly revenues.
Abstract In 1990 Siemens AG merged with Nixdorf Computer to form Siemens Nixdorf Informationssysteme (SNI). SNI faced major challenges in becoming profitable after the merger. Decision making mainly trickled down from executives. The company was also not exploiting growing markets. These factors resulted in a failure to be profitable all four years since the merger.
Tarquin Hall, being an extensive traveller of Africa, the Middle East and South Asia, returned to London after ten years of living abroad. Having failed to make his fortune, Hall returned to London, broke. Expecting to purchase a residence in the western part of London, Hall was forced to look for housing elsewhere, due to the highly increased estate pricing. Now looking to settle down in the suburbs, he received this demoralizing message from an estate agent: “You won't get a shoebox in Dagenham on your budget, sir,”. Unable to find affordable property in the western part of London, Hall was now forced to set his eyes on the East-end, an area mostly unknown to him.