Questões de Concurso Sobre inglês
Foram encontradas 17.635 questões
Atenção: A questão refere-se ao texto abaixo.
Judges Push Brevity in Briefs, and Get a Torrent of Arguments
By ELIZABETH OLSON
OCT. 3, 2016
The Constitution of the United States clocks in at 4,543 words. Yet a number of lawyers contend that 14,000 words are barely enough to lay out their legal arguments.
That’s the maximum word count for briefs filed in federal appellate courts. For years, judges have complained that too many briefs are repetitive and full of outmoded legal jargon, and that they take up too much of their time.
A recent proposal to bring the limit down by 1,500 words unleashed an outcry among lawyers.
Lawyers in criminal, environmental and securities law insisted that briefs’ lengths should not be shortened because legal issues and statutes are more complex than ever
As a result, the new word limit − which takes effect on Dec. 1 − will be 13,500 words, a reduction of only 500 words. And appellate judges will have the freedom to opt out of the limits.
The new limit may not provide much relief for judges deluged with verbose briefs.
While workloads vary, according to federal court data, the average federal appeals court judge, for example, might need to read filings for around 1,200 cases annually.
That amount of reading − especially bad reading − can thin the patience of even the most diligent judge.
Briefs “are too long to be persuasive,” said Laurence H. Silberman, a judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
In arguing against a reduction of words, the American Academy of Appellate Lawyers urged singling out “bad briefs” rather than only lengthy ones. It advised courts to “post on their court websites short videos outlining how to write a decent brief.”
Robert N. Markle, a federal appellate lawyer, has argued − in his own personal view, not the government’s − that the limit should be reduced to 10,000 words. In a typical case, he said, “nothing justifies even approaching, much less reaching or exceeding 14,000 words.”
Still, he acknowledged that the cut of 500 words “was at least a start.”
(Adapted from http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/04/business/dealbook/judges-push-brevity-in-briefs-and-get-a-torrent-of-arguments. html?_r=0)
Atenção: A questão refere-se ao texto abaixo.
Judges Push Brevity in Briefs, and Get a Torrent of Arguments
By ELIZABETH OLSON
OCT. 3, 2016
The Constitution of the United States clocks in at 4,543 words. Yet a number of lawyers contend that 14,000 words are barely enough to lay out their legal arguments.
That’s the maximum word count for briefs filed in federal appellate courts. For years, judges have complained that too many briefs are repetitive and full of outmoded legal jargon, and that they take up too much of their time.
A recent proposal to bring the limit down by 1,500 words unleashed an outcry among lawyers.
Lawyers in criminal, environmental and securities law insisted that briefs’ lengths should not be shortened because legal issues and statutes are more complex than ever
As a result, the new word limit − which takes effect on Dec. 1 − will be 13,500 words, a reduction of only 500 words. And appellate judges will have the freedom to opt out of the limits.
The new limit may not provide much relief for judges deluged with verbose briefs.
While workloads vary, according to federal court data, the average federal appeals court judge, for example, might need to read filings for around 1,200 cases annually.
That amount of reading − especially bad reading − can thin the patience of even the most diligent judge.
Briefs “are too long to be persuasive,” said Laurence H. Silberman, a judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
In arguing against a reduction of words, the American Academy of Appellate Lawyers urged singling out “bad briefs” rather than only lengthy ones. It advised courts to “post on their court websites short videos outlining how to write a decent brief.”
Robert N. Markle, a federal appellate lawyer, has argued − in his own personal view, not the government’s − that the limit should be reduced to 10,000 words. In a typical case, he said, “nothing justifies even approaching, much less reaching or exceeding 14,000 words.”
Still, he acknowledged that the cut of 500 words “was at least a start.”
(Adapted from http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/04/business/dealbook/judges-push-brevity-in-briefs-and-get-a-torrent-of-arguments. html?_r=0)
Atenção: A questão refere-se ao texto abaixo.
Judges Push Brevity in Briefs, and Get a Torrent of Arguments
By ELIZABETH OLSON
OCT. 3, 2016
The Constitution of the United States clocks in at 4,543 words. Yet a number of lawyers contend that 14,000 words are barely enough to lay out their legal arguments.
That’s the maximum word count for briefs filed in federal appellate courts. For years, judges have complained that too many briefs are repetitive and full of outmoded legal jargon, and that they take up too much of their time.
A recent proposal to bring the limit down by 1,500 words unleashed an outcry among lawyers.
Lawyers in criminal, environmental and securities law insisted that briefs’ lengths should not be shortened because legal issues and statutes are more complex than ever
As a result, the new word limit − which takes effect on Dec. 1 − will be 13,500 words, a reduction of only 500 words. And appellate judges will have the freedom to opt out of the limits.
The new limit may not provide much relief for judges deluged with verbose briefs.
While workloads vary, according to federal court data, the average federal appeals court judge, for example, might need to read filings for around 1,200 cases annually.
That amount of reading − especially bad reading − can thin the patience of even the most diligent judge.
Briefs “are too long to be persuasive,” said Laurence H. Silberman, a judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
In arguing against a reduction of words, the American Academy of Appellate Lawyers urged singling out “bad briefs” rather than only lengthy ones. It advised courts to “post on their court websites short videos outlining how to write a decent brief.”
Robert N. Markle, a federal appellate lawyer, has argued − in his own personal view, not the government’s − that the limit should be reduced to 10,000 words. In a typical case, he said, “nothing justifies even approaching, much less reaching or exceeding 14,000 words.”
Still, he acknowledged that the cut of 500 words “was at least a start.”
(Adapted from http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/04/business/dealbook/judges-push-brevity-in-briefs-and-get-a-torrent-of-arguments. html?_r=0)
Donald Trump on Monday proposed collapsing the federal income tax rate from seven brackets down to three and called for allowing child-care expenses to be exempt from taxation in a speech allies hope will help the GOP presidential nominee turn the page on a tumultuous period some Republicans fear has severely damaged his campaign.
Overall, Trump offered few new details behind his economic vision, which he unveiled as a candidate last year. One notable exception was his call to enable families to "fully deduct" child-care expenses from their taxes. Some such expenses are already deductible; experts say that the additional amounts will largely benefit middle- and upper middle-class families.
On tax rates, business mogul said he would work with House Republicans and use the same three brackets they have proposed: 12 percent, 25 percent and 33 percent. Previously, Trump proposed tax brackets of 0 percent, 10 percent, 20 percent and 25 percent.
"For many American workers, their tax rate will be zero," said Trump.
The GOP nominee continued to leave large question marks about how he would pay for his plans and avoid ballooning the federal budget deficit. He included no new details on how he would limit the cost of his tax reform plan, which analysts have estimated would reduce federal revenues by as much as $10 trillion over a decade. His child-care expense plan would presumably raise that cost even further.
Trump released a tax plan last year that would reduce the top income tax rate from 39.6 percent to 25 percent and bring down the top corporate rate from 35 percent to 15 percent. The plan would eliminate the estate tax and reduce tax rates to 10 percent for households earning $100,000 or less.
Trump also did not spell out any federal spending cuts. In his remarks, Trump said he would offer more details in the coming weeks.
(Adapted from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/08/08/trump-to-call-for-excluding-child-care-costs-from-taxation-as- hetries-to-turn-the-page-on-a-bruising-week/?wpisrc=nl_evening&wpmm=1)
Donald Trump on Monday proposed collapsing the federal income tax rate from seven brackets down to three and called for allowing child-care expenses to be exempt from taxation in a speech allies hope will help the GOP presidential nominee turn the page on a tumultuous period some Republicans fear has severely damaged his campaign.
Overall, Trump offered few new details behind his economic vision, which he unveiled as a candidate last year. One notable exception was his call to enable families to "fully deduct" child-care expenses from their taxes. Some such expenses are already deductible; experts say that the additional amounts will largely benefit middle- and upper middle-class families.
On tax rates, business mogul said he would work with House Republicans and use the same three brackets they have proposed: 12 percent, 25 percent and 33 percent. Previously, Trump proposed tax brackets of 0 percent, 10 percent, 20 percent and 25 percent.
"For many American workers, their tax rate will be zero," said Trump.
The GOP nominee continued to leave large question marks about how he would pay for his plans and avoid ballooning the federal budget deficit. He included no new details on how he would limit the cost of his tax reform plan, which analysts have estimated would reduce federal revenues by as much as $10 trillion over a decade. His child-care expense plan would presumably raise that cost even further.
Trump released a tax plan last year that would reduce the top income tax rate from 39.6 percent to 25 percent and bring down the top corporate rate from 35 percent to 15 percent. The plan would eliminate the estate tax and reduce tax rates to 10 percent for households earning $100,000 or less.
Trump also did not spell out any federal spending cuts. In his remarks, Trump said he would offer more details in the coming weeks.
(Adapted from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/08/08/trump-to-call-for-excluding-child-care-costs-from-taxation-as- hetries-to-turn-the-page-on-a-bruising-week/?wpisrc=nl_evening&wpmm=1)
Donald Trump on Monday proposed collapsing the federal income tax rate from seven brackets down to three and called for allowing child-care expenses to be exempt from taxation in a speech allies hope will help the GOP presidential nominee turn the page on a tumultuous period some Republicans fear has severely damaged his campaign.
Overall, Trump offered few new details behind his economic vision, which he unveiled as a candidate last year. One notable exception was his call to enable families to "fully deduct" child-care expenses from their taxes. Some such expenses are already deductible; experts say that the additional amounts will largely benefit middle- and upper middle-class families.
On tax rates, business mogul said he would work with House Republicans and use the same three brackets they have proposed: 12 percent, 25 percent and 33 percent. Previously, Trump proposed tax brackets of 0 percent, 10 percent, 20 percent and 25 percent.
"For many American workers, their tax rate will be zero," said Trump.
The GOP nominee continued to leave large question marks about how he would pay for his plans and avoid ballooning the federal budget deficit. He included no new details on how he would limit the cost of his tax reform plan, which analysts have estimated would reduce federal revenues by as much as $10 trillion over a decade. His child-care expense plan would presumably raise that cost even further.
Trump released a tax plan last year that would reduce the top income tax rate from 39.6 percent to 25 percent and bring down the top corporate rate from 35 percent to 15 percent. The plan would eliminate the estate tax and reduce tax rates to 10 percent for households earning $100,000 or less.
Trump also did not spell out any federal spending cuts. In his remarks, Trump said he would offer more details in the coming weeks.
(Adapted from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/08/08/trump-to-call-for-excluding-child-care-costs-from-taxation-as- hetries-to-turn-the-page-on-a-bruising-week/?wpisrc=nl_evening&wpmm=1)
Donald Trump on Monday proposed collapsing the federal income tax rate from seven brackets down to three and called for allowing child-care expenses to be exempt from taxation in a speech allies hope will help the GOP presidential nominee turn the page on a tumultuous period some Republicans fear has severely damaged his campaign.
Overall, Trump offered few new details behind his economic vision, which he unveiled as a candidate last year. One notable exception was his call to enable families to "fully deduct" child-care expenses from their taxes. Some such expenses are already deductible; experts say that the additional amounts will largely benefit middle- and upper middle-class families.
On tax rates, business mogul said he would work with House Republicans and use the same three brackets they have proposed: 12 percent, 25 percent and 33 percent. Previously, Trump proposed tax brackets of 0 percent, 10 percent, 20 percent and 25 percent.
"For many American workers, their tax rate will be zero," said Trump.
The GOP nominee continued to leave large question marks about how he would pay for his plans and avoid ballooning the federal budget deficit. He included no new details on how he would limit the cost of his tax reform plan, which analysts have estimated would reduce federal revenues by as much as $10 trillion over a decade. His child-care expense plan would presumably raise that cost even further.
Trump released a tax plan last year that would reduce the top income tax rate from 39.6 percent to 25 percent and bring down the top corporate rate from 35 percent to 15 percent. The plan would eliminate the estate tax and reduce tax rates to 10 percent for households earning $100,000 or less.
Trump also did not spell out any federal spending cuts. In his remarks, Trump said he would offer more details in the coming weeks.
(Adapted from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/08/08/trump-to-call-for-excluding-child-care-costs-from-taxation-as- hetries-to-turn-the-page-on-a-bruising-week/?wpisrc=nl_evening&wpmm=1)
Donald Trump on Monday proposed collapsing the federal income tax rate from seven brackets down to three and called for allowing child-care expenses to be exempt from taxation in a speech allies hope will help the GOP presidential nominee turn the page on a tumultuous period some Republicans fear has severely damaged his campaign.
Overall, Trump offered few new details behind his economic vision, which he unveiled as a candidate last year. One notable exception was his call to enable families to "fully deduct" child-care expenses from their taxes. Some such expenses are already deductible; experts say that the additional amounts will largely benefit middle- and upper middle-class families.
On tax rates, business mogul said he would work with House Republicans and use the same three brackets they have proposed: 12 percent, 25 percent and 33 percent. Previously, Trump proposed tax brackets of 0 percent, 10 percent, 20 percent and 25 percent.
"For many American workers, their tax rate will be zero," said Trump.
The GOP nominee continued to leave large question marks about how he would pay for his plans and avoid ballooning the federal budget deficit. He included no new details on how he would limit the cost of his tax reform plan, which analysts have estimated would reduce federal revenues by as much as $10 trillion over a decade. His child-care expense plan would presumably raise that cost even further.
Trump released a tax plan last year that would reduce the top income tax rate from 39.6 percent to 25 percent and bring down the top corporate rate from 35 percent to 15 percent. The plan would eliminate the estate tax and reduce tax rates to 10 percent for households earning $100,000 or less.
Trump also did not spell out any federal spending cuts. In his remarks, Trump said he would offer more details in the coming weeks.
(Adapted from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/08/08/trump-to-call-for-excluding-child-care-costs-from-taxation-as- hetries-to-turn-the-page-on-a-bruising-week/?wpisrc=nl_evening&wpmm=1)
Donald Trump on Monday proposed collapsing the federal income tax rate from seven brackets down to three and called for allowing child-care expenses to be exempt from taxation in a speech allies hope will help the GOP presidential nominee turn the page on a tumultuous period some Republicans fear has severely damaged his campaign.
Overall, Trump offered few new details behind his economic vision, which he unveiled as a candidate last year. One notable exception was his call to enable families to "fully deduct" child-care expenses from their taxes. Some such expenses are already deductible; experts say that the additional amounts will largely benefit middle- and upper middle-class families.
On tax rates, business mogul said he would work with House Republicans and use the same three brackets they have proposed: 12 percent, 25 percent and 33 percent. Previously, Trump proposed tax brackets of 0 percent, 10 percent, 20 percent and 25 percent.
"For many American workers, their tax rate will be zero," said Trump.
The GOP nominee continued to leave large question marks about how he would pay for his plans and avoid ballooning the federal budget deficit. He included no new details on how he would limit the cost of his tax reform plan, which analysts have estimated would reduce federal revenues by as much as $10 trillion over a decade. His child-care expense plan would presumably raise that cost even further.
Trump released a tax plan last year that would reduce the top income tax rate from 39.6 percent to 25 percent and bring down the top corporate rate from 35 percent to 15 percent. The plan would eliminate the estate tax and reduce tax rates to 10 percent for households earning $100,000 or less.
Trump also did not spell out any federal spending cuts. In his remarks, Trump said he would offer more details in the coming weeks.
(Adapted from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/08/08/trump-to-call-for-excluding-child-care-costs-from-taxation-as- hetries-to-turn-the-page-on-a-bruising-week/?wpisrc=nl_evening&wpmm=1)
Goods in transit refers to merchandise and other inventory items that have been shipped by the seller, but have ..I.. been received by the purchaser. To illustrate goods in transit, let's use the following example. Company J ships a truckload of merchandise on December 30 to Customer K, which is located 2,000 miles away. The truckload of merchandise arrives at Customer K on January 2. Between December 30 and January 2, the truckload of merchandise is goods in transit. The goods in transit requires special attention if the companies issue financial statements as of December 31. The reason is that the merchandise is the inventory of one of the two companies. However, the merchandise is not physically present at either company. One of the two companies must add the cost of the goods in transit to the cost of the inventory that it has in its possession.
The terms of the sale will indicate which company should report the goods in transit as its inventory as of December 31. If the terms are FOB shipping point, the seller (Company J) will record a December sale and receivable, and ..II.. include the goods in transit as its inventory. On December 31, Customer K is the owner of the goods in transit and will need to report a purchase, a payable, and must add the cost of the goods in transit to the cost of the inventory which is in its possession.
If the terms of the sale are FOB destination, Company J will not have a sale and receivable until January 2. This means Company J must report the cost of the goods in transit in its inventory on December 31. (Customer K will not have a purchase, payable, or inventory of these goods until January 2.)
(Adapted from http://www.accountingcoach.com/blog/what-are-goods-in-transit)
Goods in transit refers to merchandise and other inventory items that have been shipped by the seller, but have ..I.. been received by the purchaser. To illustrate goods in transit, let's use the following example. Company J ships a truckload of merchandise on December 30 to Customer K, which is located 2,000 miles away. The truckload of merchandise arrives at Customer K on January 2. Between December 30 and January 2, the truckload of merchandise is goods in transit. The goods in transit requires special attention if the companies issue financial statements as of December 31. The reason is that the merchandise is the inventory of one of the two companies. However, the merchandise is not physically present at either company. One of the two companies must add the cost of the goods in transit to the cost of the inventory that it has in its possession.
The terms of the sale will indicate which company should report the goods in transit as its inventory as of December 31. If the terms are FOB shipping point, the seller (Company J) will record a December sale and receivable, and ..II.. include the goods in transit as its inventory. On December 31, Customer K is the owner of the goods in transit and will need to report a purchase, a payable, and must add the cost of the goods in transit to the cost of the inventory which is in its possession.
If the terms of the sale are FOB destination, Company J will not have a sale and receivable until January 2. This means Company J must report the cost of the goods in transit in its inventory on December 31. (Customer K will not have a purchase, payable, or inventory of these goods until January 2.)
(Adapted from http://www.accountingcoach.com/blog/what-are-goods-in-transit)
Goods in transit refers to merchandise and other inventory items that have been shipped by the seller, but have ..I.. been received by the purchaser. To illustrate goods in transit, let's use the following example. Company J ships a truckload of merchandise on December 30 to Customer K, which is located 2,000 miles away. The truckload of merchandise arrives at Customer K on January 2. Between December 30 and January 2, the truckload of merchandise is goods in transit. The goods in transit requires special attention if the companies issue financial statements as of December 31. The reason is that the merchandise is the inventory of one of the two companies. However, the merchandise is not physically present at either company. One of the two companies must add the cost of the goods in transit to the cost of the inventory that it has in its possession.
The terms of the sale will indicate which company should report the goods in transit as its inventory as of December 31. If the terms are FOB shipping point, the seller (Company J) will record a December sale and receivable, and ..II.. include the goods in transit as its inventory. On December 31, Customer K is the owner of the goods in transit and will need to report a purchase, a payable, and must add the cost of the goods in transit to the cost of the inventory which is in its possession.
If the terms of the sale are FOB destination, Company J will not have a sale and receivable until January 2. This means Company J must report the cost of the goods in transit in its inventory on December 31. (Customer K will not have a purchase, payable, or inventory of these goods until January 2.)
(Adapted from http://www.accountingcoach.com/blog/what-are-goods-in-transit)
Goods in transit refers to merchandise and other inventory items that have been shipped by the seller, but have ..I.. been received by the purchaser. To illustrate goods in transit, let's use the following example. Company J ships a truckload of merchandise on December 30 to Customer K, which is located 2,000 miles away. The truckload of merchandise arrives at Customer K on January 2. Between December 30 and January 2, the truckload of merchandise is goods in transit. The goods in transit requires special attention if the companies issue financial statements as of December 31. The reason is that the merchandise is the inventory of one of the two companies. However, the merchandise is not physically present at either company. One of the two companies must add the cost of the goods in transit to the cost of the inventory that it has in its possession.
The terms of the sale will indicate which company should report the goods in transit as its inventory as of December 31. If the terms are FOB shipping point, the seller (Company J) will record a December sale and receivable, and ..II.. include the goods in transit as its inventory. On December 31, Customer K is the owner of the goods in transit and will need to report a purchase, a payable, and must add the cost of the goods in transit to the cost of the inventory which is in its possession.
If the terms of the sale are FOB destination, Company J will not have a sale and receivable until January 2. This means Company J must report the cost of the goods in transit in its inventory on December 31. (Customer K will not have a purchase, payable, or inventory of these goods until January 2.)
(Adapted from http://www.accountingcoach.com/blog/what-are-goods-in-transit)
Conheça nossos planos