Coffee roasting is a process that helps turn green coffee beans into brown beans. Color and texture make the difference between green and tan. The color of medium roast coffee is medium brown and the bean surface is oil-free. Also, the tit tastes like a sweater compared to light roast and tends to be more acidic. Let’s find out more.

What is the origin of it?

This is the era of coffee. You can find many stores offering “specialty coffees” in the here and now. In fact, they can be found all over the world and serve selected menus to suit the needs of roasted bean lovers.

The coffee culture has gone through many changes due to advancement in the field of science and technology. Today, better agricultural practices have resulted in much better coffee quality. Apart from this, the roasting techniques are much better, so they have simplified the processes.

Now, the medium roast is one of the most popular options. As the name suggests, the beans are not roasted until dark. But you can still enjoy great flavor as the beans won’t get too roasted.

Although dark roast is still popular, the new type of roast is quite popular around the world. Finally, the roasting style changed even more. Today, we have a type of coffee called light roast.

Most specialty stores offer only medium to light versions. Its goal is to provide subtle yet natural flavors. In this approach, the medium roast is like an “entry coffee”, especially for lovers of a dark roast. In addition, it provides dark roasted flavors in combination with notes of cereals, nuts and fruits.

What are medium roast coffee flavors?

Basically, the term “medium roast” can make you imagine three flavors: dark, light, and the in-between version called medium roast. But it is more than that.

In simple terms, medium roast refers to the funky type of coffee roast. Plus, it features the versatility and reliability of dark roast as well as the joy of light roast.

In simple terms, it offers all the flavors you can hope for, plus the many exciting ones. So, you can have a great cup of coffee.

Candy

• Nougat

• Candy

• brown sugar

• Oatmeal

Of nuts

• Cashew

• Peanut butter

• Almond

Tasty

• Apple

• Berries

• Citrus

The texture of these can be similar to that of tea or cream. Apart from this, the acidity can be juicy, syrupy, complex or delicate. This largely depends on the source of the coffee, and this is what adds interest and excitement to your coffee. In fact, the best flavor is the balance between body and acid.

Often times when people file for bankruptcy, they think it is an easy process that they can do on their own. To their surprise, the process ends up being much more complicated than they imagined. There are new laws that are happening all the time that continue to complicate the bankruptcy process. Bankruptcy attorneys are familiar with failures and can inform their clients of all the requirements necessary to file for bankruptcy. Although bankruptcy attorneys cost money, they are often worth the expense.

When someone decides to file for bankruptcy on their own, many mistakes can happen. One of the biggest mistakes is when someone fills out the required paperwork incorrectly. This type of mistake is very common for people who file bankruptcy on their own and is often the cause of their bankruptcy case being dismissed by the courts. If your bankruptcy case goes out of court, this can cost you more money than hiring a bankruptcy attorney at first.

Some people have been given the advice that if they cannot afford a bankruptcy attorney, they should hire a paralegal to fill out their legal forms. They often believe that a paralegal will prevent mistakes from being made and prevent their case from being thrown out due to the paperwork being filled out incorrectly. The truth is that, apparently, the goals are usually very expensive and they charge for each form that they complete. The targets apparently can’t represent you in a court case either. Instead of spending your money on a paralegal, your money will be much better spent on a bankruptcy attorney.

Most people will find that they must use a bankruptcy attorney. A bankruptcy attorney has gone through several years of training to become an attorney. Through this process of becoming a lawyer, they have learned all the ins and outs of the legal system, which will allow them to provide you with the necessary legal advice for your bankruptcy proceedings. Lawyers who specialize in bankruptcy often have been in the field for several years and can offer in-depth advice to each of their clients.

Since you will pay money for your bankruptcy attorney, it is important that you are prepared for each session with them. Do your own bankruptcy research and have fewer questions prepared in advance. Also, ask your attorney if there is anything you can do to lower your fees. You may be able to do some of the groundwork on your bankruptcy yourself. Discuss this option with your attorney at your initial consultation. That way, your bankruptcy attorney will know that it is financially difficult for you to pay them and is willing to do whatever it takes to lower your fees.

Under current law, a person can spend up to $ 2 million free of federal estate taxes. Dennis M. Sandoval, Director of Education for the American Academy of Estate Planning Lawyers, says married couples can easily double the amount with simple planning. In 2009, the amount is scheduled to increase to $ 3.5 million. In 2010, the wealth tax is repealed. However, the estate tax exemption is only short-lived. Like a phoenix rising from the ashes, the inheritance tax reappears in 2011 for everyone with property exceeding a million dollars. The current tax system has created a lot of uncertainty and has wreaked havoc among estate planning attorneys.

In recent years, the debate over whether to repeal the estate tax has become more heated. Many wealthy people have voiced their opposition to repealing the estate tax, especially at a time when the economy appears to be slowing down, Congress seems unable to control record deficits, and at least some believe the war on terror must continue. Among this group are William H. Gates, Sr., father of Microsoft founder Bill Gates; legendary investor Warren E. Buffett; billionaire financier George Soros; philanthropist David Rockefeller, Jr. and Ben Cohen, co-founder of Ben and Jerry’s.

Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Arizona), one of the leading advocates of repeal of the estate tax, stated that the estate tax should be repealed to protect family businesses and family farms. “However, a report from the Congressional Budget Office (“CBO”) found that very few farmers and small business owners paid estate taxes. Mr. Sandoval says experienced estate planning attorneys often advise wealthy farmers and business owners how to reduce or eliminate estate tax, including ownership of life insurance in special trusts. The benefits of these policies, which pass free of income and estate taxes to the heirs, can be used to pay estate taxes and to facilitate the distribution of the farmer’s property among family members who wish to continue operating do the farm and family members with other business activities and desires.

Neil E. Harl, an economics professor at Iowa State University whose experience planning estate taxes for farmers has made him a household name in the grain belt, said many Americans were under the false impression that that the estate tax was destroying family farming. Michael J. Graetz, a professor at Yale Law School, said the repeal of the inheritance tax is primarily a benefit for people with large holdings in stocks and other securities, not for farmers and small business owners.

No matter which side of the fence you fall, to repeal or reform the inheritance tax, the law, as it currently exists, creates a lot of uncertainty. Significant estate tax repeal or reform is unlikely until after the 2008 presidential election. In the meantime, people with more than $ 1 million in net worth should seek the advice of an experienced estate planning attorney. .

I grew up in the 1980s when it seemed like everyone wanted to be a LA Law lawyer. The 1980s, 1990s, and 2000s (through 2007) were the era of Big Law when the promise of a $ 100,000 to $ 160,000 salary was apparently extended to anyone who graduated from one of the top 20 schools and many people who will graduate from a top 50 law school with excellent grades and internships.

Even in previously bad economies (1990-1992, 1998-2000), the legal profession seemed to survive, if not prosper. Hundreds of thousands of smart (and even not-so-smart) people were encouraged to become lawyers thanks to a combination of outrageous salaries: In 2007, Cravath, one of the nation’s leading corporate law firms, offered bonuses of nearly $ 100,000 for top performing associates: federally subsidized student loans, the alleged security of a sheltered profession (with its bar exams), and putative prestige (see any John Grisham novel).

Of course, the truth of all that was always a bit fishy. While a top 20 law graduate in his day could expect to earn a six-figure salary, unless he chose to pursue public interest law, many graduates weren’t so lucky. And while it’s really nice to think of yourself as a noble-minded constitutional litigator, or a trial attorney for a Grisham novel, the day-to-day practical experience of being a lawyer was (and still is) overwhelming.

The moments of glory are few and far between. Don’t get me wrong, I enjoy practicing criminal law and I enjoy helping clients. And as my father would say, it’s better than digging a ditch. But the daily practice of law is not outside of a movie script. It involves helping people with a DWI, drug charges, or embezzlement or theft. Rarely are most attorneys involved in high-profile murder trials involving movie stars!

Demand for the law school and government subsidy for the school led to the growth of the school industry, aided by publications like US News with their ridiculous school rankings. The schools became centers of financial profit for the universities (such as successful sports programs) and in many cases they were asked to return money to the central administration of the university to help finance the rest of the less profitable parts of the university.

The costs were passed on to recent graduates and ultimately to the legal consumer in the form of high legal fees, especially in corporate law.

Who benefited? One of the beneficiaries was the law school. The typical faculty member of a decent law school has almost no practical experience. The person went to one of the best law schools, practiced for a year or two, and then entered the legal academy job market at the age of 28 or 29 to get a job at the school. Some law professors keep their skills practical by doing pro bono legal work, or consulting in parallel.

Most law professors know very little about what it means to be a lawyer, and they are actually proud of it. That’s because the rest of the university has always viewed law schools (and business schools) as essentially trade schools. Since law professors don’t want to think they are involved in a massive vocational technical school, they try to distance themselves from the practice of law.

Second, the current curriculum associated with law school has changed little since the 1930s, when it focused on 19th century common law concepts or old property or liability law ideas. These principles have very little to do with the basic way in which property, tort, or criminal law is practiced in modern America. Most of these laws are statutory, not common law, anyway.

As if to excuse their woefully inadequate ability to train lawyers, law professors and deans of law schools love to tell incoming students that they don’t teach you to be a lawyer, but rather they teach you to think like a lawyer through of the Socratic Method.

Of course, “thinking like a lawyer” is a silly concept. All it really means is to think carefully about a problem. Yes, it requires a bit of discipline. But it is not difficult and does not require three years of school.

The Socratic method, the one made famous by John Houseman’s Professor Kingsfield in The Paper Chase, is also nonsense. Most teachers don’t do well. And all that amounts to asking direct and hypothetical questions about something that has just been read and will soon be forgotten.

The problem with the Law School, which has almost always been ineffective in training lawyers, is that it has an integrated electorate, the law professor, who will fight like hell to maintain their privileged position.

Law school has boomed in the last 4 years, as it usually happens when the economy crashes. This is because, instead of going out into an uncertain job market, many young recent college graduates (and even mid-career professionals) decide to go to school in the hope of improving their employability. (What they often do is add to the burden of their debts, with no reasonable hope of repaying those loans. Hence the clamor that student loans are cancellable in bankruptcy!)

But as the legal market continues to suffer, even compared to other parts of the economy, potential students will take other paths and head to other types of careers, even if those careers are less financially rewarding, because the large amount of the money it takes to go to school for three years is too much to consider paying.

In recent conversations with other attorneys, I have heard that even the best law schools have trouble locating their students. That puts the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, which is a good law school, but not a great law school, in a very difficult position.

If the University of Virginia (a top 10 law school) has trouble placing a third of its class of students in the top law firm positions, what does that mean for UNC-CH, which is not as prestigious and also has the unfortunate situation of being in a state with only two moderate-sized legal markets (Charlotte and Raleigh) and competing with other good law schools, including Duke (although Duke tends to send students out of state) and Wake Forest, as well as Campbell (which is an underrated school that trains its graduates better than UNC) and Central North Carolina (which is the best value for a legal education in the state and trains excellent attorneys).

There are too many UNC Chapel Hill graduates in the North Carolina government to allow the law school to disappear entirely, but its privileged position will begin to erode. Like the privileged position of many law schools.

So what will happen to the Law School? First, the deans of the smartest schools will stop pretending that law school is not a trade school. They will embrace the idea that the entire curriculum needs to be revamped to focus on the practical skills required to practice law.

The next law school will need to adjust, downward, tuition to reflect the true earning potential associated with the degree, and increased competition for alternative ways of learning to practice law, and diminishing demand as that people realize that being a lawyer is not as financially rewarding as it once was.

Finally, efforts will be launched to change the way the legal profession is regulated. Most state colleges require three years of legal education. This will come under attack as more and more people realize that this requirement is absurd at first glance.

There are many who say that reference checking is fast becoming a “lost art” … something of great value that could be lost forever. Why are so many companies not doing reference checks these days?

We live in an age of legalism. Businesses, especially those with “deep pockets”, want to avoid legal tangles and litigation. Many companies have strict policies that prohibit releasing information about former employees other than employment verification. Typically, requests for information about former employees are sent to the Human Resources Department. HR staff often have limited knowledge about employee performance, etc. For these reasons, many companies question the value of reference checking.

For those who believe that reference checking is a “lost art”, I think they have it “half done.” We agree that reference checking, like art, can be invaluable. But we don’t agree that reference checking should become a thing of the past … a step we used in our hiring processes many years ago. But like art, its value is variable. The information we obtain can be “useful” (and always is) to “invaluable” in helping us avoid a terribly costly recruitment error. The first rule of reference checking is to just do it!

Consider creating a policy that a reference check must be performed before you can bid. Reference checking can be a “negotiator” … or a “deal breaker”. It’s amazing what people will tell us … like these actual examples of references telling me about candidates …

“We have a rule about not giving information. But … let me put it this way. If I was shipwrecked in the middle of the ocean and I could choose six people to get on the life raft with me … he wouldn’t be one of them.”

“Of the 8 people who inform me, where would I classify Greg? … One minus two.”

“He just couldn’t decide that this was what he wanted to do. So we finally agreed that it was better to part ways.”

Sometimes a reference will vindicate a candidate. A candidate for vice president of manufacturing warned me that his boss would probably give him a bad reference. The boss had a history of retaliating against people who resigned. He viewed resignation as an act of treason. So I called a third party, one of the candidate’s colleagues at the company, who knew both men for reference. He gave an enthusiastic account of the candidate and confirmed that the boss was very upset when people left.

It is true that obtaining quality information from references is increasingly difficult due to the world in which we live. But it can be done. The method I’ll share with you will certainly improve your odds … but it all starts with your commitment to … DO IT!

I have used a method of reference checking that has been amazingly successful, even in the age of legalism, and even with companies that have policies against giving references. It’s a four-step process, easy to implement …

STEP ONE: Assign an interviewer in your hiring process to gather references. You should only be interested in references from past and present supervisors. Get their names and phone numbers. The interviewer should explain your requirement to speak with references before hiring. Get the candidate’s permission to do so.

STEP TWO: You must prepare the reference for your call and request the help of the candidate. Ask the candidate to call the supervisor and ask if they would give you a positive reference. The candidate must then tell the supervisor that they will hear from them within two days.

STEP THREE: I recommend that the hiring manager make the call. The call should not be made until all interviews have been completed and the candidate is deemed worthy of being hired. Interviews always raise questions that can only be answered by the candidate’s immediate or previous supervisor. Prepare for the call. You can assume the call will be short, so have a list of four of the five questions you would like to ask.

STEP FOUR: Make the call. If a receptionist responds, ask to speak to the reference using their first name. If they ask the reason for your call, explain that you are a friend and that you are waiting for their call. Again, you should expect a short conversation. Be prepared, move fast, and take notes. Obviously be very courteous and grateful for your input.

The key to talking to former supervisors is to enlist the candidate’s help. If the candidate cannot get the cooperation of his supervisor, there could be a serious problem. It is certainly a warning sign that something could be wrong.

This system is not perfect. But using it will dramatically increase your chances of making contact with the referral. Reference checking can be a valuable component of a hiring process. Use it with an open mind. Assuming it’s a lost art could deprive you of a valuable source of information and contribute to serious hiring mistakes.

http://www.performanceleadershipllc.com

William E. Miller

Why is it acceptable to lose money to the casinos and the state of Florida but not to your friends? The answer to that question is because the Florida Legislature said so and because they can’t make money off their friends. Florida Statutes 849.01, state in part:

“Who by himself or himself, … maintains a table or gaming room, … or a house, … for the purpose of gambling or gambling or in any place from which he or she has direct or indirectly the control, or administration, … allows any person to gamble for money or other valuable thing in any game, … will be guilty of a felony of the third degree “, punishable by up to five years in prison.

The state does not limit gambling to card games and slot machines. Gambling includes and is not limited to betting on billiards or pool games, horse racing, and sporting events. Florida, in its abundant hypocrisy, allows gambling in a casino operated under the Seminole Gaming Compact. In April, the Florida Senate passed the Seminole Gaming Compact, which authorizes slot machines and table games, which requires the tribe to share an estimated $ 400 million a year in revenue with the state.

The state of Florida makes money with smaller organizations known as arcades. A card room is a facility where authorized games are played for money or anything of value and to which the public is invited to participate in such games and the operator of that facility charges a fee for participation. To operate one of these card rooms, you have to pay a license, employee labor fees, a tax for each person who enters, and a tax on gross monthly income.

Recently, the Metropolitan Bureau of Investigation (MBI), which is a 14-agency federal, state, and local law enforcement task force, raided a local facility that functioned as a slot machine gambling house. The business offered a $ 3,000 prize but the winner was predetermined and not based on playing time. According to the MBI, they will be charged with extortion, punishable by up to 30 years in prison, operating a slot machine and maintaining a gambling house. MBI claims to be a moral guardian and protect its citizens from gambling, but they are aware that legislators, judges, and law enforcement officers have friendly poker games, office groups, and routine gambling between them.

There is an exception to the gambling laws that allows a person to host a game. A game is allowed when any player’s winnings in a single round, hand, or game do not exceed $ 10 in value. It is hypocritical for the state to limit the amount you can bet on a private game, but not limit the amount you can spend in lottery, horse racing, jai-alais, or casinos.

So why exactly is the state banning poker parties in the privacy of your own home? Is it because of a moral problem with the game? That cannot be true as they are promoting gambling in the casinos run by the Seminole Gaming Act. Additionally, the state spends more than $ 3 million a year just advertising and promoting the state lottery in an effort to induce Florida citizens to gamble even more. Obviously, this is not a moral issue, but rather a greed, as the state of Florida cannot get into your pockets when you play with family or friends. Let’s just identify this nonsense for what it is instead of hiding behind a fabricated morality and denying the truth.

Today there is a proliferation of advertising promising a $ 399 divorce. Is something like that even remotely possible? Probably not. For starters, in New York State alone, court costs will exceed $ 300. However, you can obtain the necessary forms to process an uncontested divorce at your local county clerk’s office or even more easily on the website of the county. New York State Office of Court Administration. So, if you have no disputed issues in your divorce, a cooperative spouse, and the willingness to do the paperwork, your total costs probably won’t exceed $ 400 (including the round-trip subway or bus fare).

This article is for those of you who will need to hire an attorney, either because

disputed matters, complex assets, or child custody matters that require the expertise of a family law specialist, or you simply want someone to do the field work for you. And, if this is your situation, it should come as no surprise that you don’t get much in terms of personalized service or representation for $ 399.

The good news is that if you are wise and sensible (and have a spouse who will be, too), you may be able to get a divorce without spending a fortune. By that I mean you could do the job in the range of $ 1,500 (in the simplest, most “undisputed”) to $ 10,000 (in a more complex situation). However, I cannot insist too much, keeping your costs in this range will only be possible if neither you nor your spouse are uncompromising or seeking blood.

The following is a list of dos and don’ts to achieve this:

(1) Select your attorney carefully.

Make sure it’s someone whose personality and behavior match yours, and who has the legal knowledge and insight to tailor their recommendations to your needs. An attorney may surprise you with his personality, legal knowledge, rhetorical skills, or promises in an initial consultation, but if he is unable or refuses to listen, he will likely pay the price later.

(2) Maintain civil, even better, cordial communication with your ex-spouse.

Sometimes the only way to contain legal costs in a multi-issue divorce is to negotiate a deal directly with your spouse and then have the attorneys draft an agreement. In either case, establishing a postmarital civil relationship with your spouse as soon as possible, particularly when children are involved, can help facilitate commitment, reduce resentments, mitigate anxieties, and most importantly, mitigate legal costs.

(3) Be prepared to compromise.

The parties often lament their spouses’ inability to be reasonable, but just as often are unprepared to compromise. If you are convinced that your liquidation offer is so reasonable that no one could reject it, or you have made an overly generous first offer or are currently unable to weigh the stocks in a balanced way. It’s probably the latter.

(4) Be aware of what is most important to your spouse.

This does not mean that you have to give up exactly what you want. But accept the fact that an agreement will only be possible if you are flexible enough to be in a position to compromise on one or more issues that are critical to your spouse. At the same time, it is equally unrealistic to expect to prevail on all issues that you consider critical to yourself.

(5) Avoid practicing contradictory movements at all costs.

In certain cases, it may be impossible to resolve an interim issue that requires immediate attention without filing a motion, for example, issues such as temporary support or a spouse’s refusal to disclose critical financial information. In that case, you will have no choice but to file a motion with the court. However, if you must take this course, be prepared to incur legal fees that will almost certainly end up in excess of $ 10,000 (the cost of filing a single motion could be as much or more). And furthermore, keep in mind that if you embark on this path, you can make your case in such a confrontational tone that the costs literally multiply.

(6) Never tell yourself that you would rather pay your attorney than your spouse.

You can end up paying for both. It’s a tactic that only makes sense when your spouse’s expectations are through the roof and unlikely to hit the ground anytime soon. Also, the Court may ultimately consider you the unrealistic party, in which case you might even be ordered to pay your spouse’s legal fees.

(7) Help your attorney do your job for you whenever possible.

Most of today’s legal clients are educated consumers, who need not be told that it is prudent to help your attorney work more efficiently for you. But, if you’re allergic to paperwork, pathologically disorganized, or just don’t want such direct involvement in a painful test, you’ll have to pay a premium. Virtually all divorce attorneys charge by the hour, and many areas of divorce practice are time consuming. On the other hand, if you spend hours explaining something to your attorney that he or she could have discerned from the documents, you will achieve the opposite of your goals.

(8) Realistically evaluate costs with your attorney on an ongoing basis.

To do this effectively, you will need to know both the scope and the underlying rationale for the steps your attorney proposes to take. It is not enough to know that your attorney plans to begin by preparing a Summons and Complaint. You need to know what that means and if it will require a few hours or a few days of legal work.

(9) Do not litigate over child-related issues.

If you cannot mutually resolve custody and visitation of your children with your spouse, you will have no chance of avoiding substantial legal costs. This means that while your children are not at risk, if you want or need to control costs, you will have to compromise with scheduling and custody labels. This is not always easy advice to follow. Often, one or both parties mistakenly view parenthood as a battlefield to secure control or a financial advantage over their spouse. If this is the case, it will be very difficult to avoid costly litigation.

Conclution

If you can avoid these nine pitfalls, you have a good chance of avoiding sinking into legal costs, even if that doesn’t mean a $ 399 divorce.

I was thinking about women in law and about a technology-related topic that was specific to female lawyers. You’ve read many articles with a penchant for lawyers, but they could be written about all women: working mothers, managing work-life balance, networking opportunities, support resources, etc. I run a career and a family and I know juggling as well as any woman. I know I couldn’t have done what I have without technology. Technology has allowed me to be in contact with my home when I was traveling and with the office when I was at home; to get more done in less time and reach more people more efficiently. My oldest daughter was born in 1991 and I had a laptop; It was about the size of my current desk, but I was able to check my email from home. It was cutting edge technology! Look where we are almost twenty years later.

So I started to wonder if they ever really played a modern lawyer in a movie or TV series. Oh sure, there are movies and series in which lawyers have leading roles, but I can’t remember the use of technology as an integral part of the character’s daily activities, even though technology has become a necessary tool for all lawyers today.

I can think of various scenarios involving female lawyers and computer technology that could become scenes from a movie, a television series, or even a reality show. Here are some of the possibilities:

1. Lawyer who juggles his wayward kids and answers emails on his blackberry while shopping or attending parent-teacher conferences or watching a football game.

2. The daily drama of a lawyer who works remotely to balance work and family. The drama comes to him from all sides: the old-school lawyer who believes that work can only be done from the office; non-working moms who think their fourth grade bake sale from the grocery store is a false break; her husband feels left out as she works around the clock, even sleeping with her Blackberry in the event of a call or email from a client from outside the country.

3. Watch cameras at home to monitor babysitter and child activity through your iPhone while taking a statement.

4. Struggling with how to efficiently produce (or not produce) inappropriate electronic data. (This could involve several hot scenes!)

5. Constant struggle with IT staff, because they confuse your business passwords with your personal passwords, leading to denial of access to your email, documents, etc.

6. Your electronic data review for a multitude of cases: Corrupt Government Episode, Serial Killer Episode, Ponzi Scheme Episode, Bank Crash Episode, Job Discrimination Episode, National Security Episode, while multitasking and also check your children’s book reports. article on scientific projects and news. (Imagine the confusion they could cause if they were intertwined!)

7. The stories and drama of several hired attorneys who are assisting with the review of an electronic mega document, as they deal with the school bully who is coercing their 3rd grader’s lunch money.

8. Episode on how to involve a jury with technical knowledge, even though the courtroom was built and equipped in 1960.

9. Test scenes using high-tech courtroom technology, but PC fails, no backup in place; embarrassing moments when even though you know how to use the latest technology in courtrooms, you don’t cooperate; night sessions in the war room struggling with the computer to get everything ready.

10. The daily struggles of someone who juggles so much and depends so much on technology can communicate the most complex legal issues in court, but cannot understand a word that IT staff is saying to them.

Maybe Hollywood hasn’t developed these stories because they don’t think it will get the ratings. Or maybe they don’t see the need to weave these tech details into their lawyer characters. Like it or not, these technological details are intertwined in the real life of lawyers. For the most part, we find these tools useful. But maybe after living it every day, we really don’t want to spend our precious minutes of downtime watching what we do all day, every day after all.

If you are forming a corporation, you may be surprised to learn that a “C” corporation has many tax benefits. While this article is not intended to replace the advice of a good tax professional, it can serve to open your eyes to the value of a “C” corporation.

“Corporation C

The “C” in the C corporation has some legal ramifications, but is a primary designation for tax purposes. Put simply, the designation simply means that the corporation will act as its own fiscal entity. In contrast, an “S” corporation acts as a pass-through tax entity, taking its finances to the shareholder who reports the information on their personal tax returns.

The Internet Revenue Code sets the law on taxes and contains some juicy provisions for corporations. Let’s take a look at one of the advantages.

Incorporating

When one party transfers something of value to another, the IRS takes an interest. Consider that the receipt of something of value is a taxable event. In simple terms, if I get paid to form a corporation, I have to file and pay taxes on the money. Since a C corporation is an independent tax entity, what happens when you buy shares?

You have arranged to form a “C” corporation. Now you have to buy shares to become a shareholder. If you exchange money or property for the stock, the IRS takes the position that no taxable event occurred. In essence, this means that the corporation will not have to report your contribution as part of its income. If the money is not considered part of corporate income, no tax is due on it.

The exact rules for financing a corporation are a bit more complex. With any tax issue, you can expect there to be approximately fifty exceptions and qualifiers. For example, if you were trading services instead of money for shares, the above example would not apply. Be sure to speak with a tax professional to handle your particular situation correctly.

In conclusion

Many people choose a business entity without considering all the relevant aspects. Taxes are definitely one of these aspects. Be sure to research them before making a decision.

Hell has no rage like a despised woman. This is something ‘Bob’ learned the hard way a few years ago when a jilted lover sprayed his face and upper body with acid. She cleverly lured him into a trap by asking him to drop her off to pick up some things at the Sun ‘N’ Sand Beach hotel in Kikambala, near the Mombasa-Malindi highway. He had done his homework well and knew that to get to the hotel, which is quite inland from the road, they would pass through dark and deserted areas. Love affairs are hard to read from the outside, so whether the lady in question was actually planted or not is something that no one except the two of you can know for sure. But I don’t think anyone deserves an acid bath for some reason.

They met around 8:00 am and left for the hotel. In the most deserted stretch, the lady poured the acid on the left side of her face and upper body. She stabbed him too, but luckily the knife didn’t touch any vital organs. It was the burning and the realization that he was staring death in the face in a dark, deserted place that was really getting to him. It stayed there burning for about two hours. Fortunately he survived. He was rescued by a tourist and travel van driver who came from the hotel and was rushed to the hospital where he remained for months undergoing reconstructive treatment. His face was permanently disfigured when he left the hospital.

According to reports I have read, an acid bath initially feels like hot water on the skin. Then there is stinging and a burning sensation that gets worse and worse as the acid eats away at the meat. The victim feels that his face is melting. Many victims of this heinous and cowardly crime die shortly after the attack, but those who survive require months of hospitalization and reconstructive surgery. It is as if the acid also continued to devour the victim’s flesh long after the treatment began. Some have to rebuild their faces piece by piece over time. Either way, they carry the physical and emotional scars for life. The psychological trauma of permanent disfigurement is immense, and considering that most attackers target the face, permanent blindness is common.

This cowardly but terrifying phenomenon is not as common in Kenya as it is in countries like Cambodia and Nigeria, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen. Acid assault cases reported at Kenyatta National Hospital, for example, range from 4 to 5 per month. In the Nairobi women’s hospital they are few and far between, but when they are brought in, they are of such magnitude that they are not easily forgotten. Acids and other corrosive substances belong to laboratories and industries but they are very easy to acquire. Sulfuric and hydrochorolic acids, which are the most used by attackers, are available without a prescription at 500 Kshs per liter. You can even get it from auto repair shops for a pittance. Although Kenya has signed three UN conventions regulating the sale of acids and other corrosive agents, it has not yet adopted this law in the country.

Acid killers are just as bad as gun criminals, and just like we have gun controls, we need regulation on the sale of acids and other corrosive substances.