|
If you’re unsure of how to deal with digital assets in your estate plan, my new Estate Planning Law Report might give you a place to start. It’s about the Revised Uniform Fiduciary Access to Digital Assets Act (the “RUFADAA” for you acronym mavens).
My Estate Planning Law Report, both the current and past issues, along with my Real Estate Law Updates and Tax Law Special Reports, are available for your perusal in the news and events section of deconcinimcdonald.com.
0 Comments
A member of the U.S. House of Representatives thinks that unemployment is a result of greed, and that the solution to unemployment is for the government to guarantee a job to everyone. The assumption is, apparently, that a tax on greedy people will produce the revenue to pay the people to whom the government will provide jobs.
I don’t think I have seen any emails like the ones described in a recent IRS news release, but they all follow the same formula: we’re from the IRS, we need information from you, comply or you’ll lose out on this benefit, or, if you don’t comply we’re coming to get you. This particular variation indicates that they want your personal information to issue you a refund.
The IRS response should be familiar to my loyal readers: the IRS does not send emails about refunds, nor does the IRS initiate contact with taxpayers via email, text or social media channels to request personal or financial information. It looks like it would be messy to eat, but that doesn’t mean I wouldn’t try it: a hunk of fried chicken sandwiched between two donuts (served hot!). According to the report I saw, it’s available on a test basis in Richmond and Norfolk, Virginia. I haven’t seen anything about when it might be available in Arizona.
From the National Constitution Center, a Constitution Day live blog.
Last time it was the ever-present advocacy for preserving the appearance of old buildings.
This time it’s the effort to stamp out, or at least severely restrict, short-term residential rentals. I’ve been wondering what’s become of Psy. The post I saw on Lowering the Bar doesn’t help with that, but I can at least link to it as my small way of keeping alive the memory of the music video/dance phenomenon of the decade (as if you could forget it, right?).
The Lowering the Bar item is about a gang shootout that was allegedly incited by a “Gangnam Style dance-off,” but fails to note that you can’t spell “Gangnam Style” without “gang.” At least one blogger, and a number of commenters on the blog where he posts, think that historic preservation of private property should be the sole province of the property owner.
That viewpoint is consistent with consistent with the more general opinion I have expressed about building aesthetics: if it’s private property, and there weren’t any rules in place regulating the building’s appearance when the owner bought it, then the owner I should be able to do pretty much whatever he or she wants to the appearance of the building. I have written recently about the duties of corporate decision-makers. The issue was highlighted by a statement issued last month by the Business Round Table. This post on the Columbia Law School’s blog gives the best explanation I have seen yet of the implications of the Business Round Table’s statement. Money quote: Delaware law certainly permits boards to consider stakeholder interests and take a long-term view on how best to maximize corporate wealth. At the same time, it is clear that shareholders are the only constituency with a claim on Delaware boards’ fiduciary duties. Any evolution of corporate behavior in light of the BRT’s Statement will have to occur within the guardrails set by that reality. And because virtually all major U.S. corporations are organized under Delaware law, their decision makers must follow Delaware law.
Via Professor Bainbridge. Constitution Day is September 17. That’s the day in 1787 that the United States Constitution was signed by delegates to the Constitutional Convention.
Here’s a question to ponder for Constitution Day: would a federal wealth tax, suggested by some politicians, be constitutional? There are credible opinions on both sides of the question. And while I’m on the subject of politicians’ tax proposals, it’s still crickets from that senator who said he wants a tax on unrealized capital gains. Remember I predicted that he would probably never provide the details of how his proposal would work? That’s because it won’t work. |
AuthorThe contents of this blog, this web site, and any writings by me that are linked here, are all my personal commentary. None of it is intended to be legal advice for your situation. Archives
December 2024
Categories
All
|
RSS Feed