Loganair’s new Derry – Liverpool air service takes off from CODA RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR Arranmore progress and potential flagged as population grows WhatsApp Twitter Road closed overnight following serious crash in Letterkenny Pinterest Pinterest Google+ By News Highland – September 6, 2018 Previous articleMan charged with stealing 35 sheep in Milford areaNext articleNearly 200 new recruits graduating from Garda College today News Highland Homepage BannerNews Facebook Facebook Publicans in Republic watching closely as North reopens further Google+ WhatsApp One person has been injured in a serious road traffic collision which occured outside Letterkenny on Thursday evening.The two vehicle crash occured at Dooballagh between Letterkenny and Drumkeen shortly before 8pm.Gardai say the road will be closed overnight.Diversions are in place – traffic travelling from Ballybofey will be diverted at Drumkeen with traffic from Letterkenny diverted towards Glenaquinn.The diversions are not suitable for HGVs which are asked to travel via Lifford. Nine til Noon Show – Listen back to Monday’s Programme Community Enhancement Programme open for applications Twitter Renewed calls for full-time Garda in Kilmacrennan
Photo: Stanislav Souček, mountfieldhk.czThe quarterfinals of the Generali Česká Cup playoffs started on the ice with less placed teams after the basic groups. The Steelworkers started great, Filip Zadina took part in the cannonade in Hradec Králové with two goals. Zlín lost Pardubice at home, Sparta failed in Liberec, the hockey players of Pilsen drew with Litvínov. Retaliation on the opponents’ pitches will take place on Wednesdays and Thursdays. The hockey players of Pilsen and Litvínov fought a dramatic battle in the first quarterfinals. Verva has not been successful in the West Bohemian metropolis for a long time, but this time it started better – Richard Jarůšek followed Samson Mahbod’s introductory goal before the end of the first period, who set his mood after an unchanged penalty shot.Kantner’s beautiful buttocksIn the middle act, Pavel Musil reduced to 1: 2, the duel was then ruled by defenses led by goalkeepers Dominik Pavlát and David Honzík. The home team managed to equalize in the 55th minute, the experienced Tomáš Mertl took care of that. By the end of the third act, the next goal did not fall, the match ended in a 2: 2 draw.HC SKODA PLZEŇ – HC VERVA LITVÍNOV 2: 2 (0: 2, 1: 0, 1: 0)Goals and recordings: 29. P. Musil (Gulaš, Budík), 55. Mertl (Kantner, Gulaš) – 8. Mahbod (Zdráhal, Jarůšek), 20. Jarůšek (Zdráhal, Kudla).Referee: Pesina, Prazak – Simanek, Zika.Exclusion: 3:4.No use.Shots on goal: 34:40.Viewers: 642.HC Škoda Plzeň: Pavlát – Budík, Jiříček, Houdek, Lang, Kremláček, Vráblík – Gulaš, Mertl, Kantner – Straka, Kodýtek, Eberle – P. Musil, Stach, Rob – Pour, Kracík, Suchý. Coaches: Čihák, Hanzlík and Špaček.HC VERVA Litvinov: Honzík – Irving, L. Doudera, Kudla, Balinskis, Háva, Štich, Baláž – Zdráhal, Mahbod, Jarůšek – Lukeš, Hübl, Pospíšil – Petružálek, M. Hanzl, Myšák – Helt, Jurčík, Látal. Coaches: Országh and V. Sýkora.This browser does not support IFRAME, please try to play the video at http://tv.isport.blesk.czIn the basic groups, Zlín was successful at home and Dynamo was outside, it was clear that the start play-off will delete one of the mentioned balances. The first variant is valid, the Rams scored another win in front of their audience, it was greatly deserved in the cup by the very productive Jakub Šlahař, who scored in the first period and in the second he recorded two recordings for Zdeněk Okála’s goals. Vladimír Svačina reduced the lead in the 49th minute, but in 74 seconds it was again two goals for the home team – Bedřich Köhler scored. Nothing has changed in the result of 4: 2.PSG BERANI ZLIN – HC DYNAMO PARDUBICE 4: 2 (1: 1, 2: 0, 1: 1)Goals and recordings: 10. Šlahař (Köhler), 27. Okál (Šlahař), 35. Okál (Šlahař, Nosek), 50. Köhler (Václavek, Suhrada) – 18. Poulíček (Mandate, Snack), 49. Svačina (Mandate, Hrádek)Referee: Mrkva, Śír – Hlavatý, Lederer.Exclusion: 5:5.Use: 1:0.Shots on goal: 19:36.Viewers: 696.Series status: 1:0.PSG Brave Zlín: Huf – Řezníček, Ferenc, Matyáš Hamrlík, Gazda, Suhrada, Nosek, Dluhoš – Herman, Fořt, Ondráček – Okál, Karafiát, Šlahař – Köhler, Fryšara, Dufek – Sebera, Sedláček, Václavek. Coaches: R. Svoboda and Martin Hamrlík.HC Dynamo Pardubice: Klouček – Kolář, Nakládal, Mikuš, Hrádek, Vála, Holland, Bučko – Blümel, Kousel, Anděl – Mandát, Poulíček, Svačina – Vondrka, Claireaux, Kusý – Machala, Zeman, Rohlík. Coaches: Razým, Mikeska and Čáslava.This browser does not support IFRAME, please try to play the video at http://tv.isport.blesk.czIn the last extra-league year, the hockey players of Mountfield and Třinec had a lousy balance, the opponents scored only two goals. The guests deployed overseas reinforcements of Lukáš Jašek and Filip Zadina, who contributed to the leadership of the Steelworks with two hits in the introductory third.Zadina was presented in style in TřinecVáclav Varadi’s charges continued their concentrated performance and added more goals. The East Bohemians, who won four opening battles in the basic group, were not enough this time. The steelworkers pushed the score into a clear form, they won 7: 1 on the Hradec Králové ice and created a luxurious lead over retaliation.MOUNTFIELD HK – HC OCELARI TRINEC 1: 7 (1: 3, 0: 3, 0: 1)Goals and recordings: 6. Lev (R. Pavlík) – 2. Zadina (D. Musil), 5. Stránský (Hrňa, M. Růžička), 13. Zadina (M. Doudera), 23. Chmielewski (Veselý), 29. Raška (Veselý) ), 35. M. Růžička (Stránský), 48. Kofroň (Kundrátek).Referee: Hradil, Kika – Gebauer, Rožánek.Exclusion: 7:2.Use: 0:2.Shots on goal: 27:35.Viewers: 1044.Series status: 0:1.Mountfield HK: Mazanec – Nedomlel, Zámorský, Jank, Čáp, Šalda, F. Pavlík, Gaspar – M. Chalupa, Sklenář, Smoleňák – Kevin Klíma, V. Růžička ml., Kelly Klíma – Perret, Koukal, Jergl – R. Pavlík, Lev, Pillar. Coaches: V. Růžička Sr., Branda and Kočí.HC Oceláři Třinec: Štěpánek – Gernát, M. Doudera, Galvinš, D. Musil, Jaroměřský, Kundrátek, M. Adámek – Stránský, Vrána, M. Růžička – F. Zadina, Jašek, O. Kovařčík – Chmielewski, Veselý, Raška – Kofroň, M. Kovařčík, Hrňa. Coaches: Varaďa, M. Zadina and Raszka.This browser does not support IFRAME, please try to play the video at http://tv.isport.blesk.czIn the basic part of last season, TELH dominated Liberec with all four mutual matches, this time also the White Tigers started better against Sparta – in the 7th minute they were sent to the lead by Jaroslav Vlach, soon after Radan Lenc joined with an exact end. Tomáš Filippi subsequently increased the lead, the North Bohemians kept the Praguers in check.Curiosity of all curiosities. Rousek caught himself a goalThe Liberec goalkeeper Jaroslav Pavelka collected for the first time at the beginning of the third act, when Jan Buchtele overcame him, the awakened guests soon added another goal – Marek Kvapil scored the drama. The finish was exciting, the decision was made in the time of 58:13, when Jaroslav Vlach prevailed during the weakening and Liberec secured the victory.WHITE TIGERS LIBEREC – HC SPARTA PRAGUE 4: 2 (2: 0, 1: 0, 1: 2)Goals and recordings: 7. J. Vlach (Knot, Šír), 14. Lenc (Derner, Gríger), 21. Filippi (Lenc), 59. J. Vlach (Rosandič) – 42. Buchtele, 45. Kvapil (Košťálek).Referee: Svoboda, Simek – Gerat, Hynek.Exclusion: 4:2.No use.Weakening: 1:0.Shots on goal: 33:41.Viewers: 1328.Series status: 1:0.White Tigers Liberec: Pavelka – Šmíd, Knot, Rosandič, Hanousek, Derner, Štibingr, Kunst – Birner, Filippi, Bulíř – T. Rachůnek, Gríger, Lenc – A. Musil, Jelínek, Zachar – J. Vlach, A. Najman, Šír. Coaches: Augusta and Kudrna.HC Sparta Prague: Machovský – Jeřábek, M. Jandus, Dvořák, Košťálek, Kalina, Pavelka – Rousek, Horák, Tomášek – Buchtele, Sukel, Kudrna – Kvapil, Pech, Forman – Zikmund, Říčka, Dvořáček – Vitouch. Coaches: Hořava and Jandač.This browser does not support IFRAME, please try to play the video at http://tv.isport.blesk.czOdvethose quarterfinals of the Generali Czech CupWednesday, August 26 – Match 2:17:00 HC Oceláři Třinec – Mountfield HK17:30 HC VERVA Litvinov – HC Skoda Plzen19:00 HC Sparta Prague – White Tigers Liberec (O2 TV Sport)Thursday, August 27 – Match 2:17:00 HC Dynamo Pardubice – PSG Berani Zlin (CT sport)Another Generali Czech Cup playoff programTuesday, September 1 – Matches 1:SemifinalTuesday, September 8 – Matches 2:SemifinalTuesday, September 15 – Match 1:finalTuesday, September 22 – Match 2:final Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
AUBURN, Mich. – The green flag flies this Friday night for Tri-City Motor Speedway’s seventh annual Greased Pig special.IMCA Modifieds race for $1,077 to win and a minimum of $150 to start their June 16 Fast Shafts All-Star Invitational ballot qualifier, sponsored by Allstar Performance. The main event will be 41 laps.IMCA Speedway Motors Weekly Racing National, Dirt Works Eastern Region, Allstar Performance State and local track points will be awarded.There is no entry fee. Pit gates at Auburn open at 5 p.m., the grandstand opens at 5:30 p.m., hot laps are at 6:30 p.m. with racing to follow the National Anthem at 8:15 p.m.Grandstand admission is $14 for adults and $13 for fans ages 55. It’s Kids’ Night and fans 15 and under get in free. Pit passes are $28 for adults and $14 for kids ages 3-12.More information about the Greased Pig is available by calling 989 316-6804 and at the track website, www.tricityracetrack.com.
The convenience of self-checkout has made the service increasingly popular among customers in recent years. Retailers also take advantage of the self-checkout technology to reduce labor costs and speed up the checkout process.Unfortunately, this convenient option is popular among genuine customers and fraudsters alike.The seemingly easy process presents many fraud-related vulnerabilities and can impact the bottom line of many retail businesses. Problems like sweethearting, tag-switching, and operational losses can be difficult to detect if retailers don’t adequately supervise the area with associates and technologies.- Sponsor – Through interviews with dozens of shoplifters with recent self-checkout theft experiences, I explored their shoplifting behaviors, methods, and the thought process behind why they chose to leverage this method to conduct theft. In addition, I investigated the impact of self-checkout associates and how their engagement with the customers would impact the shoplifting experience of offenders.Why Self-Checkout Theft?The main reason offenders leverage this theft option is because they felt self-checkout theft is easier to get away with, either through prior experiences or established rationales.There are several contributing factors to why offenders believe self-checkout theft is easier to get away with. Almost all offenders I interviewed indicated they use self-checkout for shoplifting because they receive less attention from both employees and other customers.Some offenders indicated that if they ever got caught, they could always say they’d accidentally or inadvertently took the items, been distracted during checkout, or misused the technology due to its complexity. Furthermore, several offenders are under the impression that self-checkout theft is harder to prosecute because it’s hard to prove the intent behind the taking of unpaid items. The psychology behind shoplifting using a machine is rather interesting; some offenders confessed that because they are interacting with a machine rather than a human being, psychologically, they felt less guilty about stealing.During the interviews, I explored the reasons why some offenders target specific stores. Some feedback is rather sedentary and cannot be acted on, such as the omnipresence and proximity of the brand, size of the store, or the variety of products a retail chain carries. However, many offenders identified lack of employee oversight as the biggest opportunity retailers can act upon to reduce theft opportunities at self-checkouts. In addition, some offenders reported that outdate technologies and lack of consequences for shoplifting can precipitate more shoplifting incidents.Role of EmployeesWhen asked to identify loss prevention technologies in the self-checkout areas, many offenders interviewed recognized the associates as a deterrent before perceiving the surrounding technologies. Some offenders even reported that an attentive self-checkout associate is more effective at deterring theft than advanced technologies. Needless to say, self-checkout associates play a crucial role in deterring shoplifting.One offender even commented on the importance of an attentive associate in deterring shoplifting: “A lot of stealing got by because of lazy employees—employees are not paying attention, or are on their phones. It’s all about the employees. If the store has employees who are more attentive, then self-checkout theft would be hard.”As previously mentioned, a majority of the offenders admitted to intentionally using self-checkout services to avoid employee oversight. Therefore, increased associate supervision at self-checkout areas can help a store mitigate theft.However, there is a fine balance between the level of engagement associates should provide and its effectiveness in deterring shoplifting. In general, there are two categories of thoughts from the offenders. On one hand, some offenders suggested that employee engagement and assistance during the checkout process would discourage from stealing.Offender 2 said: “Employee engagement would deter me from stealing because that kind of lets me know that I’m being watched. Even if they just say, ‘Is there something I could help you with?’ or ‘Do you need any help today?’ It’s a lot easier to shoplift from a store when employees are not as engaging.”On the other hand, some offenders suggested that self-checkout associates do not necessarily have to be engaging to deter shoplifters; rather, they just need to be aware of the overall checkout process. As a matter of fact, these offenders even indicated it might be helpful if the employee is simply overseeing the area, rather than engaging with customers, as some offenders intentionally wait for moments when employees are assisting other customers so that they may shoplift without the risk of drawing attention.Offender 3 said: “You have an extra set of eyes on you, so you’re less likely to slide an item covered by another item.”Regardless of level of engagement the self-checkout associates seek to provide, the main force of deterrence is attentive self-checkout associates who pay attention to customers and their surroundings. Moreover, employee training can be crucial in combating self-checkout theft. Educating associates on suspicious activities and red flags indicators and then engage with the would-be shoplifters could enhance the overall effectiveness of customer service at self-checkout.The LPRC continue to help retailers shaping strategies to maximize convenience minimizing costs and losses through the SmartCheckout Centers of Excellence.Check out the video below to see clips from actual offender interviewers. Stay UpdatedGet critical information for loss prevention professionals, security and retail management delivered right to your inbox. Sign up now
Owners of luxury vehicles, from Mercedes-Benz and Nissan’s Infiniti, are more likely to be interested in self-driving, according to a MaritzCX survey that polled a variety of car owners.On the opposite end, owners of RAM and Jeep cars, two of the popular off-road brands, were least likely to be interested in self-driving. Less than 10 percent of RAM and Jeep owners said they were “very interested”, compared to 27 percent for Mercedes and Infiniti.See Also: Tesla’s self-driving AI will “blow minds,” says MuskToyota, Chevrolet, Honda, and Ford car owners were all in the middle of the pack, at 20 to 18 percent.“Luxury-vehicle owners are more willing to accept this technology because they believe safety would be much better in these types of vehicles,” said Shawn St. Clair, the survey author and global syndication director at MaritzCX, to Bloomberg. “If you’re interested in off-roading in a Jeep or a Ram, you’re not interested in an autonomous vehicle.”Despite the positive numbers for Infiniti and Mercedes, the majority of car owners still reject the idea of self-driving. 48 percent stated that they weren’t interested in the technology.The numbers are a little better than a British survey, where 70 percent rejected full automation, but there’s still uncertainty surrounding self-driving and its apparent benefits.It’s still early days, but…That’s a worrying sign for auto manufacturers that have invested billions into the self-driving market. The manufacturers will have to prove the tech can work in crowded cities with thousands of pedestrians, two of the biggest fears from consumers, before we see consumer attitudes change.Self-driving is still a few years away from entering the market, but taxi trials have begun in Singapore and Pittsburgh. nuTonomy has a 2018 goal for launching a shuttle service in Singapore, while Tesla and Uber are reportedly aiming to have driverless cars on the road before 2020.These early services should provide enough evidence for worried consumers, so by the time General Motors, Ford, and other big automakers enter the scene, the fear of self-driving has been muted. Or at least, that’s what auto manufacturers are hoping will be the case. IT Trends of the Future That Are Worth Paying A… For Self-Driving Systems, Infrastructure and In… 5 Ways IoT can Help to Reduce Automatic Vehicle… David Curry Related Posts Break the Mold with Real-World Logistics AI and… Tags:#Autonomous car#driverless#Infiniti#Internet of Things#IoT#Jeep#Mercedes#RAM#Self-Driving
CCH Tax Day ReportThe Treasury and IRS have issued final and temporary regulations under Chapter 4, Subtitle A of the Code (Code Sec. 1471 – Code Sec. 1474), known as the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA) (P.L. 111-147), with respect to information reporting by foreign financial institutions (FFIs) with respect to U.S. accounts and withholding on certain payments made to FFIs and other foreign entities.On January 28, 2013, the Treasury and IRS published final regulations under Chapter 4 (Code Sec. 1471 – Code Sec. 1474) (T.D. 9610, I.R.B. 2013-15, 765) (the 2013 final regulations)). On March 6, 2014, the Treasury and IRS published temporary Chapter 4 regulations (T.D. 9657, I.R.B. 2014-13, 687 (2014 temporary regulations)). On March 6, 2014, temporary regulations were published under Chapter 3, Chapter 61 and Code Sec. 3406 (T.D. 9658, I.R.B. 2014-13, 748 (temporary coordination regulations)). The temporary coordination regulations modified certain provisions under Chapters 3 and 61 and Code Sec. 3406 to coordinate with the Chapter 4 regulations.T.D. 9809 adopts the 2014 temporary regulations as final, with some modifications, and corrects and makes modifications to the 2013 final regulations. Temporary regulations make revisions to the 2013 regulations.Many of the changes were described in the following notices: Notice 2014-33, I.R.B. 2014-21, 1033; Notice 2015-66, I.R.B. 2015-41, 541; and Notice 2016-8, I.R.B. 2016-6, 304.The following are some of the changes made to the scope of Chapter 4 and the definitions in Reg. §1. 1471-1:(1) A definition of branch is provided for purposes of Chapter 4 with respect to a branch of a financial institution.(2) The definition of a nonreporting intergovernmental agreement (IGA) FFI is revised to mean an FFI that is a resident of, or located or established in, a Model 1 or Model 2 IGA, jurisdiction, and that is a nonreporting financial institution described in Annex II of Model 1 or Model 2 IGA, a registered-deemend compliant FFI or an exempt beneficial owner.(3) The definition of certified deemed-compliant FFI is modified to exclude nonreporting IGA FFIs because some nonreporting IGA FFIs are required to obtain global intermediary identification numbers (GIINs).(4) A withholding agent must obtain a GIIN from a nonreporting FFI that is treated as a registered-deemed-compliant FFI.(5) The transitional relief in Notice 2014-33 for withholding agents to treat certain new entity accounts as preexisting accounts for purposes of documenting account holders is implemented (i.e., accounts issued, opened or executed on or after July 1, 2014, and before January 1, 2015).(6) A preexisting obligation includes an obligation (a) maintained by a participating FFI on the later of the date the FFI is issued a GIIN, or June 30, 2014, and (b) an obligation maintained by a registered deemed-compliant FFI prior to the later of the date of the FFI’s registration or the date the FFI is required to implement its account opening procedures, regardless of whether the participating FFI or registered-deemed compliant FFI is a withholding agent.(7) Changes to the definition of a U.S. person, including not treating an individual as a U.S. person for tax year or portion of a tax year that the person is a dual resident taxpayer treated as a nonresident alien.(8) The definition of withholding is modified to mean the deduction and withholding of tax at the applicable rate from payments.The following are some of the changes made to the provisions for the requirement to deduct and withhold tax on withholdable payments made to certain FFIs under Proposed Reg. §1. 1471-2:(1) It is clarified that a foreign branch of a U.S. financial institution is a U.S. withholding agent and a payee that is a U.S. person and, therefore, has primary withholding responsibility on withholdable payments that it makes and is not subject to Chapter 4 withholding on withholdable payments it receives(2) The pro rata rule for allocating collateral rule under the grandfather rule is modified as provided in Notice 2015-66, such that the rule is not mandatory. Also, as provided in Notice 2015-66, the definition of grandfathered obligation is amended to include an obligation that gives rise to the payment of substitute interest and that arises from the payee posting collateral that is a grandfather obligation.The following are some of the changes made to the provisions for identification of payees under Reg. §1.1471-3:(1) To coordinate with the requirements of a qualified intermediary (QI) acting as a qualified derivatives dealer (QDD), the regulations provide that an intermediary, QI, flow-through entity or U.S. branch must provide a valid Form W-8IMY to a withholding agent for Chapter 4 purposes.(2) A U.S. branch of an FFI that agrees to be treated as a U.S. person is no longer required to be a participating FFI or registered-deemed compliant FFI when acting as an intermediary. A U.S. branch that does not agree to be treated as a U.S. person is not required to be part of an FFI that is a participating FFI or registered-deemed compliant FFI, provided the branch, when acting as an intermediary applies the rules of Reg. §1. 1471-4(d)(2)(iii)(C).(3) An FFI may include on its FFI withholding statement an allocation of a portion of a withholdable payment to a pool of account holders, for whom no reporting is required on Forms 1042-S, 1099 and 8966, provided the FFI provides to the withholding agent, for each account holder in the pool (a) payee-specific information and any other information required under Chapter 3 or 61 on the withholding statement, and (b) documentation.(4) It is clarified that the Chapter 4 status of a payee shown on the withholding statement must be the applicable Chapter 4 status code used to report the payee on Form 1042-S and that an FFI withholding statement provided by an FFI (other than an FFI acting as a QI, WP or WT) must identify the GIIN of an intermediary or flow-through as required under Reg. §1.1471-3(d) and the chapter 4 status code used to file Form 1042-S.(5) A Chapter 4 withholding statement may include an allocation of a portion of a payment to a pool of payees, rather than to each payee, for whom no reporting is required on Forms 1042-S, 1099 and 8966, provided payee-specific information is included and any required information under Chapter 3 and 61 is provided to the withholding agent for each payee in the pool.(6) It is clarified that, when a Chapter 4 withholding agent provides pooled allocation information with respect to payees treated as nonparticipating FFIs, the withholding agent does not need to obtain documentation for each nonparticipating FFI included in the pool.(7) The requirements for indefinite validity of a withholding certificate no longer require contemporaneous receipt of a beneficial owner certificate and documentation.(8) Relief is provided from the requirement that a withholding agent obtain new documentation from an FFI following a change in circumstances that does not affect whether withholding is required.(9) Withholding agents may rely on electronically transmitted documentation, even if payment was made prior to March 6, 2014.(10) Withholding agents can accept a prior version of a withholding certificate until the later of six full months after the revision date or the calendar year during which the revised version is issued, unless a shorter transition period is designated.(11) The regulations incorporate procedures for withholding agents to document the Chapter 4 status of a sponsored entity in Notice 2015-66. A withholding agent is not required to verify the GIIN of a sponsored entity before January 1, 2017.(12) A withholding agent making a payment to a branch, including a disregarded entity, of a participating FFI or registered-deemed compliant FFI located outside of the FFI’s country of residence or organization must confirm the GIIN of the branch receiving the payment.(13) A withholding agent is not required to apply the reason to know rule for limited branches to an investment entity.(14) It is clarified that a withholding agent that receives documentation from an intermediary or flow-through entity that is a reporting Model 1 or Reporting Model 2 FFI may rely on the Chapter 4 status of the payee that is determined based on payee information or publicly available information, if permitted under the applicable IGA, provided the withholding agent has the necessary information for reporting on Form 1042-S.The following are some of the changes made to provisions on the FFI agreement in Reg. §1. 1471-4:(1) The phase-in of withholding for pass-thru payments, as provided in Notice 2015-66, is incorporated such that no withholding is required before the later of January 1, 2019, or the date the regulations defining the term are published in the Federal Register.(2) The provisions of Notice 2016-8, modifying the time for certification of due diligence requirements, are incorporated.(3) It is clarified that FFIs are required to report on accounts held by passive non-financial foreign entities (NFFEs) that are U.S. owned foreign entities.(4) An FFI that elects to report a U.S. account that is a cash value insurance or annuity contract can report either the account balance or value.(5) The availability of limited branch status and limited FFI status until December 31, 2016, as stated in Notice 2015-66, is incorporated, into the regulations.(6) As provided in Notice 2014-33, a limited FFI or limited branch may open U.S. accounts for persons resident in the same jurisdiction as the limited FFI or branch, provided certain requirements are met.(7) As provided in Notice 2015-66, a prohibition from registration will not prevent an FFI from becoming a limited FFI if certain conditions are met.(8) As provided in Notice 2016-8, the certification of compliance for the responsible officer must be submitted on or before July 1 of the calendar year following the end of each certification period.(9) The IRS can request additional information based on the absence of information filed by the FFI with the IRS for the calendar year.The following are some of the changes made to the definitions in Reg §1.1471-5:(1) The definition of an FFI is modified to refer to an entity that is (or is not) resident in, or organized under the laws of, as applicable, a country that has in effect an IGA. For an entity resident in a country that has in effect a Model 1 or Model 2 IGA, the definition of an FFI to means an entity that is treated as a FATCA Partner Financial Institution under an IGA, not any entity treated as a financial institution under an IGA, because the term financial institution in the IGAs includes a U.S.financial institution.(2) The preexisting account certification by a local FFI or restricted fund must be submitted by the due date of the FFI’s first certification of compliance.(3) A withholding partnership (WP) may be a sponsored investment entity to the extent permitted in the WP Agreement if the WP otherwise meets the requirements for status as a sponsored investment entity.(4) A sponsoring entity that is a withholding agent is separately liable for the failure to withhold on or report with respect to a payment made by a sponsoring entity on behalf of a sponsored FFI.(5) As provided in Notice 2016-8, a registered-deemed compliant FFI must certify to the IRS on or before July 1 of the calendar year, following the end of each certification period. The first certification period begins on the later of the date the FFI registers as a deemed-compliant FFI and is issued a GIIN, or June 30, 2014, and ends on the close of the third full calendar year following that date. Each subsequent certification period is the three calendar year period following the previous certification period.Changes were also made to the provisions on withholding on NFFEs under Reg. §1.1472-1, including changing the date that the first certification period begins for a direct reporting NFFE to the later of the date the GIIN is issued to the NFFE, or June 30, 2014, and providing that the certification will be due on or before July 1 of the calendar year following the end of each certification period. The changes conform to the due dates for the certifications of compliance by participating FFIs and registered deemed-compliant FFIs. The requirement for a direct reporting NFFE to obtain consent to revoke its direct reporting NFFE status was removed.Changes made to the Code Sec. 1473 definitions under Reg. §1.1473-1 include, as provided in Notice 2015-66, a modification to the definition of a withholdable payment to include, for sales or dispositions occurring after December 31, 2018, any gross proceeds from the sale or other disposition of any property type that can produce interest or dividends that are U.S. FDAP income.Changes made to the provisions for liability for withheld tax and withholding agent reporting under Reg. §1.1474-1 allow electronic recipient copies of Form 1042-S for purposes of Chapter 4 and a withholding agent reporting on an owner-documented FFI to request an automatic 90-day extension of time to file Form 8966, and under certain hardship conditions, an extra 90-day extension. Additionally, a withholding agent is relieved from reporting with respect to a passive NFFE with one or more substantial U.S. owners if certain requirements are met.Temporary RegulationsA number of the provisions from the Chapter 3 regulations in T.D. 9808 (TAXDAY, 2017/01/03, I.2) are incorporated into the temporary regulations, including the rule that addresses the hold mail instruction and the provisions permitting a withholding agent to accept Forms W-8 with electronic signatures and an alternative withholding statement from a nonqualified intermediary. The temporary regulations also incorporate the additional requirements for reliance on documentation received after the time of payment to establish that a payment was income effectively connected with the conduct of a U.S. trade or business.The temporary regulations provide that a withholding agent will have reason to know of a change in circumstances with respect to an FFI’s Chapter 4 status on the date that the jurisdiction where the FFI is a resident, organized or located ceases to be treated as having an IGA in effect.The temporary regulations address the requirement that an FFI cannot qualify as an owner-documented FFI if it is a member of an expanded affiliated group with any FFI that is a depository institution, custodial institution or specific insurance company-the FFIs must be investment entities. Under the temporary regulations, a withholding agent cannot act as a designated withholding entity for an owner-documented FFI if the withholding agent knows or has reason to know that the owner-documented FFI is a member of an expanded affiliated group with any FFI that is a depository institution, custodial institution or specific insurance company.Under the limitations on standards of knowledge that apply with respect to accounts acquired in a merger or bulk acquisition, the temporary regulations provide that a transferee FFI must obtain written representation of the application of due diligence procedures from a transferor FFI that is a participating FFI or a registered-deemed compliant FFI, or a deemed compliant FFI that applies the due diligence rules as a condition of its status.Additionally, if a participating FFI (successor) acquires accounts of another participating FFI (predecessor) in a merger or bulk acquisition of accounts, the successor may assume the predecessor’s obligations to report the acquired accounts with respect to the calendar year of the merger or acquisition, provided certain requirements are met.With respect to the account reporting requirements for participating FFIs that are partnerships, the FFI that is a partnership must report the partner’s distributive share of the partnership’s income or loss for the calendar year, without regard to whether the amount is distributed during the year, and any guaranteed payments for the use of capital. The rules under the temporary regulations apply with respect to calendar year 2017, but may be applied retroactively to January 28, 2013.The temporary regulations also require reporting for a closed or transferred account when the account is closed or transferred by any person, not just the account owner. Additionally, the temporary regulations allow a withholding agent who is required to report on Form 1042-S under Chapter 4 to rely on the procedures used for combined reporting on Form 1042-S that apply for Chapter 3 purposes following a merger or acquisition.T.D. 9809, 2017FED ¶47,008Proposed Regulations, NPRM REG-103477-14, 2017FED ¶49,732Other References:Code Sec. 1471CCH Reference – 2017FED ¶32,884CCH Reference – 2017FED ¶32,884DCCH Reference – 2017FED ¶32,884ECCH Reference – 2017FED ¶32,884FCCH Reference – 2017FED ¶32,884HCCH Reference – 2017FED ¶32,884LCCH Reference – 2017FED ¶32,884NCCH Reference – 2017FED ¶32,884PCCH Reference – 2017FED ¶32,884RCCH Reference – 2017FED ¶32,884TCCH Reference – 2017FED ¶32,884XCCH Reference – 2017FED ¶32,884ECCH Reference – 2017FED ¶32,884NCCH Reference – 2017FED ¶32,884QCCH Reference – 2017FED ¶32,884UCCH Reference – 2017FED ¶32,887.024CCH Reference – 2017FED ¶32,887.027CCH Reference – 2017FED ¶32,887.0272CCH Reference – 2017FED ¶32,887.0274CCH Reference – 2017FED ¶32,887.0276CCH Reference – 2017FED ¶32,887.0278CCH Reference – 2017FED ¶32,887.20Code Sec. 1472CCH Reference – 2017FED ¶32,890CCH Reference – 2017FED ¶32,890ACode Sec. 1473CCH Reference – 2017FED ¶32,895Code Sec. 1474CCH Reference – 2017FED ¶32,895CCH Reference – 2017FED ¶32,899DCCH Reference – 2017FED ¶32,899FCCH Reference – 2017FED ¶32,900BCCH Reference – 2017FED ¶32,899H
Massachusetts intends to waive tax penalties for the underpayment of estimated corporate excise tax on IRC Sec. 965 income.What is the IRC Sec. 965 Transition Tax?The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (P.L. 115-97) made numerous changes to federal income tax provisions. The changes include the IRC Sec. 965 transition tax on the earnings and profits (E&P) of foreign corporations that is deemed repatriated.The tax applies to E&P accumulated after 1986 and before 2018.Does Massachusetts Require Reporting for IRC Sec. 965 Income?Massachusetts generally follows the IRC as amended and in effect for the tax year. Consequently, corporations that report IRC Sec. 965 income for federal income tax purposes must also report that income to Massachusetts.The reporting requirements apply to a corporation if:it is subject to the corporate excise tax for the tax year; orit is not subject to the tax, but it is filing as a member of a Massachusetts combined group.When does Massachusetts Require Estimated Tax Payments?Massachusetts estimated tax requirements apply to a corporation if it reasonably estimates its excise tax liability will exceed $1,000 for the tax year. A penalty applies if a corporation underpays its estimated tax liability.A safe harbor exists to provide certain taxpayers relief from the estimated tax penalty.How do Corporations Request Penalty Relief?A corporation must file Massachusetts Schedule M-2220, Underpayment of Massachusetts Estimated Tax by Corporations, with its return. The corporation must also file a Massachusetts Schedule TDS, Taxpayer Disclosure Statement. The disclosure statement must:identify the amount of federal gross income relating to IRC Sec. 965; andexplain the Schedule M-2220 underpayment calculation.Technical Information Release 18-4, Massachusetts Department of Revenue, May 15, 2018, ¶401-650Login to read more tax news on CCH® AnswerConnect or CCH® Intelliconnect®.Not a subscriber? Sign up for a free trial or contact us for a representative.
England head coach Gareth Southgate believes Raheem Sterling is finally ready to fulfill his potential for England after conquering his national team drought with his brace in the victory over Spain.The Manchester City forward excelled as he scored twice to inspire last month’s impressive 3-2 victory against La Furia Roja in the UEFA Nations League, and since then has scored three in four for his club side, who this week awarded him a new five-year deal.Following four in 11 for club and country before then the only consistent criticism has been his lack of killer instinct in front of goal, something he appears to have been convincingly overcome.“That (against Spain) was a big psychological barrier overcome and he has continued that form with his club over the last few weeks,” said Southgate, according to BT Sport.“We are really looking forward to seeing him again next week.”Crouch: Liverpool could beat Man United to Jadon Sancho Andrew Smyth – September 14, 2019 Peter Crouch wouldn’t be surprised to see Jadon Sancho end up at Liverpool one day instead of his long-term pursuers Manchester United.“I am really pleased for him because he is in outstanding form. He had an outstanding performance against Southampton. We have got huge belief in him and that belief in his own game is coming now.”“We have been happy with his performances for a long time and the missing piece has been the goals; you can see what it meant to him in Seville to get the goals which he has been overdue with us.”“In any sport you’re at your best when you’re playing without thinking too much and that’s what he did.”“He got his chance and just hit it; he didn’t have an extra touch or wait an extra half-a-second or millisecond, he just hit things and that’s why he scored the goals he did. You want all players to be free of overthinking; that’s when they’re in a good place and a good flow.”
West Ham United forward Marko Arnautovic has been named the Austria Footballer of the Year after an impressive 2018.The Austrian forward has had a brilliant season with West Ham scoring 11 premier league goals in 2018 so far.This is his first Austrian Footballer of the Year award, after RP Leipzig’s Marcel Sabitzer claimed the 2017 honour.Arnautovic has been involved in seven Premier League goals in 13 appearances.Six-time winner of the award, David Alaba, has already Tweeted his congratulations to his international compatriot.The Bayern Munich defender tweeted: “Congratulations bro, you’ve had a massive year!”Report: England’s Rice gets death threats George Patchias – September 9, 2019 England International Declan Rice has received death threats.Rice a one time Ireland International, switched allegiances only this year. The West Ham United man played for…Meet Marko #Arnautovic, Austrias Footballer of the Year 🏆🇦🇹 Congrats, Bro! You‘ve had a massive year 👊🏾 #da27 @oefb1904 pic.twitter.com/E937PhGEAl— David Alaba (@David_Alaba) December 21, 2018Arnautovic is the 23rd different Austrian player to be given this honour, and the first to do so while based in the Premier League.West Ham will host Watford this weekend and Arnautovic is expected to feature in the game.
Steve Bosh Posted: August 20, 2018 Updated: 8:30 PM August 20, 2018 Categories: California News, Local San Diego News, Politics FacebookTwitter More customers upset, as long DMV wait times persist Steve Bosh, 00:00 00:00 spaceplay / pause qunload | stop ffullscreenshift + ←→slower / faster ↑↓volume mmute ←→seek . seek to previous 12… 6 seek to 10%, 20% … 60% XColor SettingsAaAaAaAaTextBackgroundOpacity SettingsTextOpaqueSemi-TransparentBackgroundSemi-TransparentOpaqueTransparentFont SettingsSize||TypeSerif MonospaceSerifSans Serif MonospaceSans SerifCasualCursiveSmallCapsResetSave SettingsCALIFORNIA (KUSI) – What is the state doing to shorten the excessive wait times at its DMV locations?The response has been to throw more money and people to fix the problem, but you would be hard pressed to find anybody who believes this will work- including DMV employees.KUSI’s Steve Bosh has an update: