Principles of Australian Taxation Law

Principles of Australian Taxation Law Sita  Samtani Introduction This paper will critically discuss the proposals made by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) for a mandatory disclosure regime in Australia. In May 2016, the Australian Government sought input into the framing of the recommendations made by the OECD, in its Discussion Paper.[1] Mandatory disclosure rules are examined in the OECDs Final Report of the Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) project.[2] Primarily, these rules seek to combat aggressive tax arrangements, which pose a threat to revenue authorities worldwide. This paper will analyse the purpose and framing of these rules, their advantages and disadvantages and whom and what they should target, having reference to the Discussion Paper and other valuable sources. Additionally, there will be a critical analysis as to whether a mandatory disclosure regime would be an effective addition to Australian taxation legislation and how it may impact solicitors that advise on revenue law. Background Mandatory disclosure rules should be framed having regard to the integrity measures found in current legislation. A key point of distinction is discerning between lawful tax planning activity and unlawful tax evasion. Tax avoidance, which is the focal point of the mandatory disclosure rules, lies between the two polarities. It involves entering into arrangements that exploit loopholes in the legislation.[3] Under Australian taxation law, there are a number of anti-avoidance measures already in place. These include specific anti-avoidance rules (SAARs), general anti-avoidance rules (GAARs) and a promoter penalty regime. There are many types of SAARs that target specific tax avoidance activities, for example, the Personal Service Income (PSI) rules and transfer pricing. On the other hand, GAARs (Part IVA of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 (Cth)) act as safety net or fall back provisions. Justice Pagone highlighted the fact that GAARs occupy a special role in tax law because their ro le is to underpin the effectiveness of the primary operative provisions when those primary provisions fail to achieve their purpose.[4] Additionally, the promoter penalty regime in Divisions 290 and 298B of Schedule 1 to the Tax Administration Act 1953 (Cth) seek to force promoters to disclose potential tax exploitation schemes. The promoter penalty regime bears resemblance to what a mandatory disclosure regime might achieve. Therefore, a key priority will be ensuring that a new regime does not unnecessarily overlap with existing disclosure rules.[5] It is vital to avoid duplication of and inconsistency with other legislation, as well as excess compliance costs on the vast majority of taxpayers who voluntarily comply with their tax obligations.[6] This regime must also be framed not to infringe on Australian legal rights such as confidentiality, legal professional privilege (LPP) and the privilege against self-incrimination.[7] It is essential that such legislation be shaped in a way that balances policy considerations, the integrity of revenue authorities and fundamental rights. Definition of a Mandatory Disclosure Regime A mandatory disclosure regime is a mechanism that requires taxpayers to disclose upfront to the tax administration system of the use of tax avoidance schemes with certain features or hallmarks.[8] According to the OECD, the purpose of mandatory disclosure rules is to require tax advisers to make early disclosure of aggressive arrangements (often before income tax returns are lodged) with the view to providing tax authorities with timely information on arrangements that have the potential to undermine the integrity of the income tax system.[9]This statement provides a useful matrix to ascertain the essential elements of a mandatory disclosure regime.[10] The purpose of a mandatory disclosure regime is to supply prompt information to revenue authorities of possible aggressive tax schemes and to identify the promoters and users of such schemes.[11] The purpose of this detection is to improve the effectiveness of compliance activities of tax authorities.[12] In regards to the core purpose of mandatory disclosure rules, the supply of early information would allows administrators to identify, address and counteract tax avoidance schemes in their initial stages before they escalate and potentially subvert the integrity of the revenue base.[13] This information can also be utilised to enhance and better focus existing audit processes.[14] Mandatory disclosure regimes can enable countries to quickly respond to tax avoidance risks by providing early access to potential avoidance schemes. The Policy Rationale of a Mandatory Disclosure Regime The main policy rationale behind implementing a mandatory disclosure regime in Australia is to bolster the current anti-avoidance mechanisms by allowing the Commissioner of Taxation prompt disclosure of potentially aggressive tax schemes. This in turn will prevent the exploitation of loopholes that exist within the tax system. These rules will provide the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) with information as early as possible in relation to certain tax arrangements that are being designed and promoted by certain advisers and engaged in by certain taxpayers.[15] A further policy rationale of the new rules is to deter advisers and taxpayers from engaging in these types of arrangements in the first place.[16] In Australia, the current series of anti-avoidance legislation is elaborate, there are SAARs, GAARs and promoter penalty regimes which all seek to prevent the erosion of the revenue base. Table 1 of the Discussion Paper details the current legislation. There are a range of income tax disclosure rules in relation to large businesses and multinationals. These include disclosures made by companies both before (e.g. Advanced Pricing Agreements) and as part (e.g. Reportable Tax Positions) of their tax returns.[17] Mandatory disclosure rules should capture not only large entities but also high net-worth individuals or individuals that seek to exploit or promote the exploitation loopholes in the Australian taxation system. This is important to ensure a level playing field for all and so that the regime is ubiquitous. In relation to what activities a mandatory disclosure regime should exclude, it may be useful to look to what the GAARs (Part IVA of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936) do not apply to. The GAARsdo not apply to a typical husband and wife partnership business agreement. Under this set up, the couple conduct a business in partnership and as the relevant Partnership Act provides, share equally in profits and losses, despite the fact that only one party performs the main amount of work.[18] When regard is had to the eight matters in Part IVA, it would not be objectively concluded that the main purpose of the partnership arrangement was to obtain a tax benefit through the equal division of profits and losses.[19] Similarly, it is possible that a mandatory disclosure regime should not apply to these partnership arrangements for the same reasons. A comprehensive disclosure regime in Australia would give rise to several advantages and disadvantages. Firstly, a main advantage would be the expeditious identification of potentially aggressive tax planning schemes. This means that the ATO would have to spend less time and utilise less resources in order reduce tax avoidance.[20] Targeted groups would not be as likely to exploit loopholes which exist if Australia had a mandatory disclosure regime. This would firstly lead to enhanced audit and compliance activities which would ultimately lead to quicker dispute resolution in cases where tax avoidance is ascertained.[21] The rise of the technology has also lead to the proliferation of real time intelligence. The need for revenue authorities to access real time information is particularly critical in the current technologically advanced world, where transactions and information can be transmitted internationally and almost instantaneously.[22] Thus access to fast and accurate informat ion is vital for revenue authorities to monitor and police such transactions. The main disadvantage of a mandatory disclosure regime would be the difficulty in finding an appropriate balance between enhancing information available to the ATO to crack down on tax avoidance and avoiding unnecessary compliance burdens on tax payers.[23] In this regard, the legislation should be very clear on its face that the mandatory disclosure rules would only be triggered in relation to defined tax arrangements with specific features and the rules are targeted at advisers who are actively involved in these tax arrangements.[24] A tension also exists between legal professional privilege (LPP) and a mandatory disclosure regime.[25] LPP is sacrosanct in Australia and is referred as part of the functioning of the law itself.[26] If an entity is obliged to disclose a document that would be protected by LPP, the function of LPP would be undermined which may in turn be a breach of an Australian civil right. In Australia, there are already rules in place that capture and penalise activity by taxpayers and advisers that results in non-compliance with tax laws, particularly in relation to aggressive tax planning schemes. The mandatory disclosure rules adopted into the Australian tax system would therefore need to complement the other integrity measures already in the system. The Drafting, Framing and Targeting of a Mandatory Disclosure Regime Australias rules must be tailored for Australias circumstances and in particular to complement its pre-existing disclosure and anti-avoidance measures.[27] The introduction of a mandatory disclosure regime should be specifically directed at people who are required at law to disclose to the Australian Federal Commissioner of Taxation in relation to certain tax arrangements.[28] Who should disclose under a Mandatory Disclosure Regime? It is great importance that the legislation sets out the meaning of particular terms. The initial views of the Australian Government are that mandatory disclosure rules should apply primarily to tax advisers involved in the design, distribution and management of aggressive tax arrangements. Moreover, the Government is also of the view that where the relevant tax adviser is offshore, the Commissioner may instead require the taxpayer to make the disclosure.[29] The OECD has advised that the rules could apply to tax advisers, taxpayers or both. The mandatory disclosure rules should be narrow and targeted, so that the scope is not too wide to incorrectly identify the actual perpetrators of tax avoidance schemes.[30] Taxpayers will be caught under the mandatory disclosure rules where they have participated in arrangements that become the subject of mandatory disclosure.[31] However, as taxpayers already have a general obligation to disclose information about arrangements and transactions that give rise to tax implications for them, it is not necessary that a separate obligation to disclose be imposed on taxpayers under these rules.[32] Similar to the UK, the suggestion is that disclosure made should be by promoters of schemes with the onus only shifting to the tax-payer in certain situations. In line with the Australian Governments views, the new rules would have to provide a clear definition of tax advisers or promoters for the mandatory disclosure rules. It is logical that the obligation should be in line with promoter definition under the promoter penalty regime under the Taxation Administration Act 1953 as they already have significant obligations. Thus, it is possible that compelling promoters to disclose relevant information in relation to tax arrangements pertaining to the hallmarks would simply consolidate and extend their existing obligations under the promoter penalty regime. Additionally, the promoters of such schemes would be in possession of the information relevant to formation of such avoidance schemes. If this existing definition of a promoter under the current legislation was utilised, then an entity would be a promoter if: they encourage growth of a scheme, they receive consideration in respect of developing a scheme and if they have a substantial role i n advancing the scheme. It is important to note that an entity should not be regarded as a promoter just because they provide advice about a scheme. This is particularly relevant when it comes to legal professionals providing advice which will be discussed later in the paper. What types of arrangements should be targeted? The effectiveness of any disclosure regime will revolve around the drafting of hallmarks or the trigger points for disclosure.[33] It is impractical for a mandatory disclosure regime to target all transactions that raise tax avoidance concerns. Taxpayers will be obliged to disclose transactions that fall within the descriptions or hallmarks set out in a regime.[34] In the Discussion Paper, there is significant emphasis on the targeting of aggressive tax arrangements. However, there is little reference to what this actually means. Both the Canadian and the UK disclosure regimes target arrangements in which the main (or one of the main) purposes of the arrangement are in order to obtain a tax benefit. Under the general anti-avoidance rules, section 177D in Part IVA of the ITAA 1936 sets out factors relating to the schemes used to obtain tax benefits. This section has often proved difficult in its application because the factors are quite narrow. To avoid issues like this, a lower threshold should utilized under a mandatory disclosure regime. It would be preferable that the test should be whether one of the main purposes of the arrangement is obtaining a tax benefit.[35] This lower threshold would mean that a wider range of schemes could be identified and disclosed.   The Australian mandatory disclosure rules should also have an objective test for disclosure, meaning that the administrator would not have to inquire into the subjective state of mind of the taxpayer.[36] Additionally, the Australian Government may also want to consider whether an aggressive tax arrangement may be in line with the definition of a tax exploitation scheme under the promoter penalty rules.   The definition of a tax exploitation scheme is whether it would be reasonable to conclude that an entity that entered into the scheme has a sole or dominant purpose of acquiring a tax benefit in which it is not reasonably arguable that the benefit sought is or would be available at law.[37] The definition of tax exploitation scheme would likely be very similar to that of an aggressive tax arrangement under the mandatory disclosure regime. It would be most effective if mandatory disclosure rules target arrangements in which one of the main purposes is to obtain a tax benefit that may potentially amount to tax avoidance. This should be an objective test, for example, would a reasonable person believe that the arrangement might be in order to obtain a tax benefit that may potentially amount to tax avoidance? What are the benefits and drawbacks of providing the Commissioner of Taxation a broad discretion to determine what is an aggressive tax planning scheme? There are already a number of mechanisms through which information relating to aggressive tax arrangements is disclosed to the Commissioner. Currently, the Commissioner has the broad administrative powers to require the disclosure of information. However, in the case of the proposed mandatory disclosure rules, the Commissioner can require disclosure to be made without knowing who needs to make the disclosure.[38] It is important the mandatory disclosure rules require the Commissioner to have evidence of the tax arrangements that he intends to be disclosed pursuant to the rules before he can exercise his discretion and make a publication requesting disclosure.[39] Otherwise, if the Commissioners powers are too broad, the process may become ineffective and counter-intuitive. The Commissioner should clearly articulate why the arrangement is an aggressive tax arrangement in line with the objective purpose test.   This will then allow advisers to effectively determine whether they are involved in these arrangements and whether they have an obligation to make a disclosure to the Commissioner. In line with the Australian Governments view, the legislation should make it clear that mandatory disclosure rules would only be triggered in relation to aggressive tax arrangements with specifically described features.[40] This will ensure the disclosure rules can be limited to particular arrangements implemented by a specific targeted cohort, rather than imposing more general disclosure requirements on all taxpayers. What are the implications of early disclosure? An early disclosure regime would provide the ATO with information about aggressive tax schemes as well as the parties to such schemes. In comparison with the United Kingdom, the Disclosure of Tax Avoidance Schemes (DOTAS) regime provides early information to Her Majestys Revenue Customs (HMRC). This information enables HMRC to legislate to amend the relevant taxation legislation to better target anti-avoidance activities.[41] The UK mandatory disclosure regime provides prompt information to the revenue authority allowing for easier identification of the users of anti-avoidance schemes.[42] The United Kingdoms DOTAS regime has successfully eliminated over  £12 billion in tax avoidance schemes and loopholes.[43] This is a strong indicator that such a regime in Australia may have the same effect. The UK regime has lead to over 2500 disclosures and the enactment of 60 different measures contained in the UK Finance Acts.[44] Similarly, a regime in Australia may guide in the legislating of better targeted SAARs and GAARs. It is likely that a similar disclosure regime in Australia would have a similar effect. The implications of early disclosure allow for revenue authorities to either use the information to improve risk assessment systems, review guidance and ruling products to determine suitable and contemporaneity, undertake additional educational programs and undertake case reviews and audits where appropriate or necessary.[45] Would mandatory disclosure rules be a necessary and valuable addition to Australian tax legislation? It is likely that a mandatory disclosure regime would be a necessary and appropriate addition to Australias existing anti-avoidance armoury. This paper weighs the advantages and disadvantages of such a regime and the legislative form that the regime should take. The necessity to acquire early information in regards to aggressive tax schemes is crucial to revenue authorities. While there are several ways that Australia acquires information now, it is possible that a mandatory disclosure regime is a more methodical approach. After researching the current anti-avoidance legislation, it is likely that the introduction of a regime would enhance rather than take the place of the current tax legislation. A key aspect of the implementation of a mandatory disclosure regime is the expeditiousness. These rules will allow for the ATO become aware of participators in aggressive tax avoidance schemes quicker which will in turn will prevent exploitation of the tax system. There are different ways in which tax administrations can use the collected information to alter behaviour and to counteract tax avoidance schemes, for example, risk assessments and changes to legislation.[46] There are arguments for the fact that given the plethora of disclosure rules already contained in the Australian law, there is little need for a mandatory disclosure regime to be introduced into the system. Particularly, the existence of the promoter penalty regime is fundamentally similar to what a mandatory disclosure regime may be like. However, cases such as Commissioner of Taxation v Ludekens Anors,[47]highlights that the scope of promoter penalty regime is quite limited.   In that case, Justice Middleton found that one of the parties was a promoter of the Plan within the meaning of section 290-60, but the other was not. However, it was held that the party that was a promoter did not contravene subsection 290-50(1) because his Honour found that the Plan was not a tax exploitation scheme within the meaning of section 290-65. Taking this into consideration, mandatory disclosure rules would likely assist with uniformity and the defining of certain key terms in the realm of tax-avoidance. Moreover, if a mandatory disclosure regime were introduced, the ATO would likely have early information on such schemes before they would need to be litigated. It may also be argued that Australian taxpayers currently only have limited disclosure obligations in relation to reportable tax positions (RTP) and certain international dealings via the International Dealings Schedule (IDS).[48] The introduction of a mandatory disclosure regime may be superior as a single comprehensive regime which would promote administrative efficiency, reduce compliance costs for taxpayers and avoid duplication with existing laws.[49] The Impact of a Mandatory Disclosure Regime on Legal Advice Mandatory disclosure rules would likely impact solicitors which advise on taxation law. Due to the fact that the term tax adviser is broad and vague, legislation would need precisely defined the term so that it is clear to which people the rules apply and the circumstances in which they would apply. In the past, lawyers who hold themselves out to be experienced in a particular area (for example, revenue law) the scope of their duty is quite wide. In the case of Tip Top Dry Cleaners Pty Ltd v Mackintosh,[50] the lawyer was held to have had a duty to give comprehensive advice to the client which touched on all relevant matters. This duty was held to include a duty not only to advise on whether the proposed transaction might come within the tax deductibility provisions of the legislation but also upon the possible application of the anti-avoidance provisions of the transaction.[51] This authority may be applicable if mandatory disclosure regimes come into play because lawyers advising on revenue law may need to provide advice about it. The relationship between a lawyer and a client holds confidentiality in the highest regard so there may be problems in regards to the mandatory disclosure of information. Australias rules must be designed not to infringe established civil rights such as confidentiality, legal professional privilege and the privilege against self-incrimination any more than is necessary or appropriate. In particular, any disclosures made must be on a without prejudice basis so as not to be used as evidence to that effect in proceedings involving the discloser or any other person.[52] Furthermore, there should be strict limits as to the use the ATO may make of the information.[53] There should not be a requirement to disclose previously comprehensively disclosed information and whether a disclosure is comprehensive ought depend upon whether it enables the Commissioner to identify the particular aggressive tax arrangement or the participation of the taxpayer in such an arrangement.[54] Conclusion The implementation of a mandatory disclosure regime in the Australian tax legislation would likely improve Australias anti-avoidance armoury. This new set of rules would improve and support the current mechanisms that are already in place by providing comprehensive and prompt information to the ATO.[55] By drawing upon other regimes such as that in the United Kingdom as well as examining the current views in Australia, this paper has considered how mandatory disclosure rules in Australia should be framed. The framing should take into regards the current tax legislation and also the impact on taxpayers. Furthermore, special contemplation should take place to ensure that the rules do not infringe on Australian civil rights and do not unnecessarily impact legal professionals that provide advise on tax law. A mandatory disclosure regime would significantly increase transparency, a problem faced by many tax jurisdictions. The introduction of mandatory disclosure rules in Australia would need to be incorporated logically into pre-existing legislation to ensure value and efficacy. Overall, it is likely that a mandatory disclosure regime would be a beneficial addition to Australian revenue legislation. Bibliography Articles/Books/Reports Australian Government, OECD Proposals for Mandatory Disclosure of Tax Information Discussion Paper (3 May 2016)https://treasury.gov.au/~/media/Treasury/Consultations%20and%20Reviews/Consultations/2016/OECD%20Proposals%20for%20Mandatory%20Disclosure%20of%20Tax%20Information/Key%20Documents/PDF/OECD_proposals_mandatory_tax_disclosure.ashx> Australian Tax Office, Part IVA: The General Anti-Avoidance Rules for Income Tax (December 2005) https://www.ato.gov.au/assets/0/104/997/1030/6f068803-a0d3-406a-b7bc-4d44615af99f.pdf Australian Tax Office, Promoter Penalty Law (13 September 2016) https://www.ato.gov.au/General/Tax-planning/Promoter-penalty-law/ Carades, Stephanie,   Mandatory Disclosure Is it Necessary? (3 September 2016) http://search.informit.com.au/fullText;dn=310740505898598;res=IELAPA Law Council of Australia, Submission to Australian Government, OECD Proposals for Mandatory Disclosure of Tax Information, 15 July 2016 https://www.lawcouncil.asn.au/lawcouncil/images/3172_-_Mandatory_Disclosure.pdf OECD, OECD/G20 Base Erosion and Profit Shifting Mandatory Disclosure Rules, Action 12: 2015 Final Report (5 October 2015) OECD, OECD/G20 Base Erosion and Profit Shifting Project 2015 Final Reports Frequently Asked Questions (2015)   http://www.oecd.org/ctp/beps-frequently-asked-questions.pdf Oxford University Centre for Business Taxation, The Disclosure of Tax Avoidance Schemes Regime: Paper 2 (3 December 2012) http://www.sbs.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/Business_Taxation/Docs/Publications/Reports/DOTAS_3_12_12.pdf Pagone, G.E, Part IVA: The General Anti-Avoidance Prov

Responsibility Of A Businessman

Responsibility Of A Businessman In the world of business, the paramount responsibility of the businessman has historically been to make profit and increase the shareholder value. In other words the motive of operating business has been the corporate financial responsibility. However in todays competitive world every company is striving to achieve competitive edge in the global market which is not feasible by achieving corporate financial responsibility In this modern era, the drivers of competitive advantage is not restricted to corporate financial responsibility but it also includes other issues such as brand loyalty, staff morale and motivation, reputational risk, environmental sustainability and many other. By keeping this knowledge in mind, in the last decade a movement describing wider concept of corporate responsibilities- for local communities, for ethical responsibility, for the environment, and for working condition, has grown and taken grip. This new driving force is CSR (Corporate Social Responsibility) What is Corporate Social Responsibility? Particularly there is no universal definition of CSR , in general it means transparent business practices which are based on value of ethics along with fulfilling legal requirements and respect for the environment, community and people. Hence company is not responsible for profit only but also for the impact of their operation on people and the planet. Here the term people includes- companys stakeholders: its customers, employees, investors, business partners, vendors, and suppliers, the government and the community [1]. In business world, CSR is alternatively referred to corporate citizenship. According to South China Morning Post, 2002: The desire of companies looking beyond profits to their role in society is generally termed as corporate social responsibility .This term refers to a company linking itself with building employee relations, ethical values, compliance with legal requirements transparency, and all together respect for the communities in which they run. It goes beyond the occasional community service action, however, as Corporate social responsibility is a corporate philosophy that draws strategic decision-making, hiring practices, partner selection, and, ultimately, development of brand.[2] History of CSR The story of social and environment concern about business began with the story of business itself. There are many cases which indicate the presence of Corporate Social Responsibility in long time back. For example we can trace the Commercial logging operations and laws to protect forests around 5000 year back. In Ancient Mesopotamia in 1700 BC, under the rule of King Hammurabia there was a code which says builders, farmers, or innkeepers would put to death if their negligence cause any harm, inconvenience or death to local citizens. In 1622 disgruntled shareholders of Dutch East India Company used to issue pamphlets about the self enrichment and management secrecy. By the 1920s the Corporate Social Responsibility became one of the important issues for discussion this gave the beginning to the morden Corporate Social Responsibility movement [5]. Between 1900 and 1960 the corporate world slowly began to accept and adopt additional responsibilities towards society other than making a profit and obeying the law. Many believed that corporate world has the capability of avoiding social problems. Many legal mandates were designed for business related to product safety, equal employment opportunity, worker safety and the environment safety. In addition to this, society began to make expectation out of the corporate world that it would contribute towards the betterment of the society and will voluntarily participate in solving the problems related to the society. This expectation was based on the view that business should extend its responsibility beyond the economic and legal responsibility and should also cover responsibility towards the society. In this way Corporate social Responsibility came into the world of corporate and became one of the major and vital strategy for achieving and maintaing sustainability in this global world [6]. Corporate Governance is not the same as Corporate Social Responsibility There is a very fine line between Corporate Social Responsibility and corporate Governance. These two terms are extremely vital for the company. If the company has well designed Corporate governance programs then it would mostly cover all the issues related to Corporate Social Responsibility. In simple words corporate Governance means the system by which the organizations are directed and controlled. It is the way in which the top management executes their responsibility by using their authority and how they are accountable for it. It is concerned about openness, accountability and integrity in the decision making process of the organization. No doubtable it is important for all the organization regardless of whether is is private or public sector [10]. Need of adopting Corporate Social Responsibility by the companies Companies have start realizing that in order to be competitive, productive and relevant in a changing corporate world, they have to be responsible towards the society. In the world of globalization, how the company is maintaining its relationship with its employees, host communities, and the marketplace greatly affects the sustainability of the organization. To understand the need of Corporate Social Responsibility there are two aspects: moral aspect- business could not survive in isolation they rely on the society in which they exist. Society and business both are interconnected and inter dependent to each other. Business requires the infrastructure and source of employees that society provides. Corporate Social Responsibility is about recognizing the inter dependence between the corporate and society and a means of working on that obligation so as to giving mutual benefit to the business and to the society in which the business operates. It is analyzed on the part the business that for earning profit business do not exist in a vacuum and the success which it enjoy is mainly due to its healthy relationship with the society in which it operates. The motive of a business is not to make a profit, full stop. But the main motive is to make a profit so that the business can contribute for something more or better. That something is only the real justification for the business. It is a moral issue. To mistake the means for the end is to be turned in on oneself, which Saint Augustine called one of the greatest sins. It is useful and important to ask about any organization, If it did not exist, would we invent it? Only if it could do something good or more useful than anyone else would have to be the answer, and profit would be the means to that larger end.[4] Advocate of Corporate Social Responsibility believe that in advance economies the objective of business should be beyond the maximization of profit and efficiency. Society has an expectation out of businesses to have a responsibility and an obligation towards the society in which they operates, their customers and employees. The business should change its attitude towards its objective and should look beyond the narrow concept of shareholder concerns and traditional-bottom line. Business draw benefits from the society in which it operates in some or the other way like infrastructure, safe environment, employees from the society. economic aspect: In todays brand driven market Corporate Social Responsibility is a way of matching business operations with stakeholders demands and values. Its an economic self interest, there are many real economic benefits to businesses which are working upon the Corporate Social Responsibility. The corporations which are pursuing a Corporate Social Responsibility strategy are making there future bright because this will give the competitive and differentiation market advantage to the corporation. Corporate Social Responsibility covers almost all the day to day operations of the corporation. Whatever corporation does is in some way or the other way interact with the interest of stakeholders, the corporation needs to maintain its relationship with all its stakeholders. Success of the company is directly related to its brand royalty. Involving the large amount of money, time, and effort companies put in their brands, a good Corporate Social Responsibility policy is an best means of utilizing that i nvestment and maximizing its impact. 10 commandments of Corporate Social Responsibility Many companies are applying CSR strategy and getting involved in activities which they consider to be the part of CSR. There is a lot of misunderstanding relating to this term, so it is important to have a clear idea about CSR. To make a certain standards for the CSR, there are 10 commandments made for it: make ensure that corrective action is taken before it is required. Every company sets its own standards which should not be against the interest of other communities. Compliance of self imposed standards is always recommended to compliance with those standards which are imposed by constitution. The organization should work to establish industry-wide standards and self regulation. To follow Corporate Social Responsibility the organization should work with affected constituents to solve common problems. When ever if any mistake or some something against the interest of the society is conducted by the organization then it is recommended to publicly admit it because certain things are worse for organisations image than being caught red hand while trying to hide social irresponsible behaviour. Working for the society or doing anything for the society is not the rigt attitude for following Corporate Social Responsibility, what matters is that the organization should indulge itself into a approprita social programs. The organization should contribute in correcting the environment problems. In this global world the especially the developing coutries are changing their social environment, here comes the Corporate Social Responsibilty for the organization to monitor the changing social environment and shaping it in the better way. Corporate Social Responsibilty seeks for the code of conduct, so the organization should establish and enforce proper and clear corporate code of conduct. It is expected out of the organization that in case of social issues the organization should public stand. The organization should not be lost in enforcing the Corporate Social Responsibilty and get distract from its main objective of earning profit. It should try hard to make profit because an organization can not provide social benefit such as employment, if it is not in a condition to make profit on an on going bases [9]. Companies following CSR: Many companies are practicing CSR, they have made it as a integral part of the organization strategy many big companies are practicing the corporate and ethical practice. most of the companies are changing their product or innovating them in such a way that new product would be environmental friendly and make the sustainable development. An example of the company which is following Corporate social Responsibility Idea Cellular Ltd: This company is in telecom service, its mission is to delight their customers while meeting their customers communication needs any time and any where. This company is very active in Corporate social Responsibility, its CSR activity is mainly based in the area of education and rural development. This company is a responsible corporate citizen and it try hard to give back to the society in which it operates. The activities which this company has undertaken for Corporate social Responsibility are : Pocket Public Call Office project- this company along with International Finance Corporation has taken a step for making and implementing a Pocket PCO project in India. this will create a mobile phone which would have an additional feature of PCO software embedded in it. This device can be use for double purpose, for personal use and as a PCO for business opportunity. This company has made commitment to improve the lives of individuals by providing better quality access to telecommunication. FICCI-Aditya Birla Corporate Social Responsibility Centre for Excellence- as per the mission and corporate value of the company, this company along with the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry , and other groups companies have launched a Corporate Social Responsibility centre. This purpose of doing this is to create the culture and concept of Corporate Social Responsibility among businesses, industries, institutions, which will benefit employees, their families in short to the whole society through training and welfare programs.[8] Recently this company came up with an idea of conducting Corporate Social Responsibility through advertisements. This new advertisement which mostly talks about democracy, rural development and education is a milestone in the journey of this brand. By doing this Idea cellular Ltd. In India is successfully gaining market share. this company has adopted Corporate Social responsibility because they believe that business sustainability depends largely up on the high ethical standards of the company. An example of the companies which are not to much serious about Corporate social Responsibility Corporate Social responsibility is not mandatory for the organization to adopt and apply it in its day to day working. There are certain companies which are not much bother about the Corporate Social responsibility, they believe that they can survive in the market without it. The companies which are consider as socially irresponsible are bp, Hallibrton, Dow Chemical, Glaxo Smith Kline, MERCK and many others. Kelloggs is consider as socially irresponsible company in its few products. The coco pops of Kelloggs contain 35% sugar which is too unhealthy for the children. The highly sugar concentrated Kellogs Coco pop cereal is unsuitable for the children. The advertisement of this product was done basiclly in front of school and bus stops, the target market were children. In the advertisement a monkey wearing school uniform which was aimed to encourage children to eat a high sugar cereal. Kellogs is a partner of Change 4life, a department of health initiative which help to reduce obesity. This Coco Pop cereal of Kellongs advertisement conflicts with this approach. This carelessness of Kellongs affected its image. But it did not affected to its profit much.[11] Benefits of Corporate Social Responsibility Corporate Social Responsibility is one of the most important business strategies, consumers are interested in buying products of those companies on which they can trust, suppliers want to deal with those companies which are trust worthy and employees prefer to work for those companies for which they have respect. Satisfying these stakeholders of the company would maximize the commitment of the company towards its main stakeholders- investors, who get benefits the most when company meets the expectation of its other stakeholders. In the globalization era only those corporations can succeed who manages to handle conflicting interests of it stakeholders. Avoiding unnecessary resource use and reducing waste does not just protect the environment but also saves the money of the organization. There are many benefits attached to Corporate Social Responsibility: It builds the good reputed image of the organization, this make easy to recruit employees. Generally people want to work in that organization where they can have trust that they will get their pay and other benefits. This may hold back the employess in the organization which would further provide benefit to the organization by reducing the cost of recruitment and training. Corporate Social Responsibility makes the organization active and involve it with other local communities in a positive way, this creates an opportunity to make positive press coverage. Corporate social Responsibility encourage the invertors to invest in the organization, it provide assurity to the investors that the organization is favorite of the public so its save to invest in it. It makes the organization more competitive and also sustain the organization in the market. This reduces the risk of sudden damage to the reputation of the organization [7]. In order to satisfy the wants of present generation without compromising the ability of satisfying the future generation wants and needs is what we call sustainable development. Corporate Social Responsibility contributes for sustainable development of the economy. Cost of Corporate Social Responsibility Sometimes corporate social responsibility is also taken in a negative way or as a costly strategy for the corporation. Taking social responsibility is not economically feasible. Social issues should be some other societys responsibility to handle. Implementing Corporate Social Responsibilty might be expensive. Resources such as people, time, and money need to be allocated and requires training and reporting activities will likely raise the cost of operation. It is kind of burden for the organization, it requires more report works other then financial report now to practice Corporate Social Responsibility the organization has to make non profit report Conclusion Corporate Social Responsibility is a pure voluntary action, which depends on the organization to whether adopt it and follow or do not care for its responsibility towards the society in which it operate. It has gained a lot a attention in last decade, many companies are making non financial report. It is believe that Corporate Social responsibility contribute for sustainable development of the economy. It may at first appear to be a cost burden for the organization but at the end it found to be supportive of brand, sales, investor popularity and employee loyalty Government and non government organization along with the businesses are indulge in constructing a number of frameworks and guidelines which the company can practice to measure their commitment towards Corporate Social Responsibility The bottom line is this the combination of corporate financial responsibility and Corporate Social Responsibility makes the organization to realize its goal and enable it to sustain in the market for the long period..

Undersatnding People Essay -- essays research papers

Different people see the world from different perspectives. In our society, there will always be misunderstandings between people and those people’s reactions will differ. Some choose to mope, groan, and even get angry about the way that themselves or others are treated while some decide to try and do something about it. Still, there are others who think to themselves that maybe the best way to deal with the issues among people is to try and comprehend what they mean and just live by them. As Benedict Spinoza put it, â€Å"I have striven not to laugh at human actions, not to weep at them, nor to hate them, but to understand them.† Authors now try to understand actions that people make instead of ridiculing them. The following explains these authors and how they have been able to identify with others.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã¢â‚¬Å"Under the Influence† is an essay written by Scott Russell Sanders. In this writing he tells how he grew up with an alcoholic as a father. His life was not at all easy. He had to deal with issues that young children should not have to deal with. In this essay he makes the reader understand what an alcoholic is and how the actions of one person who has this disease can affect himself and so many other people. Sanders does this by explaining the horror that he and his family had to go through during the years of his father’s problem. The family was never sure whether they would be happy at the sight of the father or horrified by his presence. As a child, S...

Qualitative Data Collection Essay -- Sociology

Qualitative Research Methods: A Data Collector’s Field Guide (Mack et al 2005) present practical information on qualitative data collection methods. I found this guide very informative, easy to understand, plain and easy to use for collecting data in qualitative research in the field. This guide provides step by step instructions to conduct qualitative research by choosing the most suitable method for that particular situation. This guide enabled me to successfully conduct my interview assignment for qualitative research course. Mack et al (2005) states â€Å"the three most common qualitative methods, participant observation, in-depth interviews, and focus groups and explained the situations where these methods are particularly suited for obtaining a specific type of data, e.g.; †¢ Participant observation is appropriate for collecting data on naturally occurring behaviours in their usual contexts. †¢ In-depth interviews are optimal for collecting data on individuals’ personal histories, perspectives, and experiences, particularly when sensitive topics are being explored. †¢ Focus groups are effective in eliciting data on the cultural norms of a group and in generating broad overviews of issues of concern to the cultural groups or subgroups represented.† Field notes, audio/ video recordings, and transcripts are the different types of data obtained from the qualitative methods discussed above. Open-ended questions and probing questions enabled the researcher to get more in depth information from the participants. While sample is the representation of the whole population by a small group which is chosen randomly or by certain criteria to estimate characteristics of the whole population. The objectives of our research question along ... ...on. The handwritten notes are converted into full narratives and then typed and saved into data file of the project into computer. Data Management Two to three copies of all the data (field notes, voice recordings, and video recordings & observations transcripts) should be made and kept separately from each other in a secure location. Process of transcription of voice and video recordings and typing of field notes should be started as soon as possible and kept together in an organized and systematic fashion. Works Cited Mack, N., Woodsong, C., MacQueen, K., Guest, G., & Namey, E. 2005. Qualitative Research Methods: A Data Collector’s Field Guide. Family Health International, North Carolina, USA. Retrieved from: http://www.fhi360.org/NR/rdonlyres/emgox4xpcoyrysqspsgy5ww6mq7v4e44etd6toiejyxalhbmk5sdnef7fqlr3q6hlwa2ttj5524xbn/datacollectorguideenrh.pdf

Reality of War in Cranes War is Kind and Tennysons Charge of the Ligh

Reality of War in Crane's War is Kind and Tennyson's Charge of the Light Brigade  Ã‚        Ã‚  Ã‚   An overwhelming tendency to fight and battle has plagued humankind since the dawn of the written word. Countless wars have been fought since the dawn of man and most times such conflict exists simply for its own sake with no productive end. Immense human suffering and death can be caused by conflicts that hold little logical justification. Since the birth of the written word, criticism and discussion have persistently followed the topic of war. In exposing the grim reality of war, two works of literature stand out as being both vivid and compelling. Through similar uses of graphic imagery and forceful diction, both Stephen Crane in his "Do Not Weep, Maiden, for War is Kind" and Alfred, Lord Tennyson in his "The Charge of the Light Brigade" evoke strong sentiment on the reality of war. "The Charge" offers a slightly more glorified view of war while still portraying its harsh essence.      Ã‚  Ã‚   Stephen Crane in his "Do Not Weep, Maiden, for War is Kind" uses several methods to convey his perception of war; most strikingly, stark imagery. As the poem begins, a woman cries over the death of her lover who, while left to die on the battlefield, "threw wild hands toward the sky" (2). His posture illustrates the physical pain he experienced as well as the longing he felt for his lover and his lost life (Cady 102). He threw his hands toward the sky in a vain effort to reach out to her and the life that had been taken from him. Crane's next stanza portrays an image of troops marching to their death, men "born to drill and die" (8). Crane endeavors to show the blind trust that soldiers are forced to place in their leaders. The soldiers knew li... ... popular phenomenon when it forces people to make great sacrifices that lead to no sufficiently important goal.       Works Cited    Cady, Edwin H. Stephen Crane. Twayne Publishers. 1980: 100-160 Foltinek, Herbert. "'Their's Not to Reason Why': Alfred Lord Tennyson on the Human Condition." A Yearbook of Studies in English Language and Literature 80 1985-1986: 27-38 Knapp, Bettina L. Stephen Crane. New York: Ungar Publishing Company, 1987. 136-140 Lowell, Amy. "Introduction" in The Black Riders and Other Lines. Vol. VI Russel & Russel. 1963: ix-xxix Pinion, F. B. A Tennyson Comparison: Life and Works. The Macmillan Press Ltd. 1984 Saintsbury, George. "Tennyson." Corrected Impressions: Essays on Victorian Writers. Dodd, Mead and Company. 1985: 21-30. Whitman, Walt. "A Word about Tennyson." The Critic 10 Jan. 1987: 1-2      

Beowulf - His Last Words :: Epic of Beowulf Essays

Beowulf - His Last Words In the society in which the poem Beowulf takes place, war and kingship are normal factors in daily life. Beowulf's world is a very violent society with wars as a dominant part of daily life. Dragons and monsters are a constant threat to the Danes and the Geats. Warriors are a necessity to this war-like society. Beowulf is a hero and an example of a great warrior. He fights against monsters. In the section of the poem we are about to discuss, Beowulf is ready to fight a dragon with his thane Wiglaf. He is going to fight a dragon . Beowulf has no fear of the dragon, because he has fought many enemies that were much more ferocious. For example one of Beowulf's great battles is the fight with Grendel. No one other than Beowulf is brave enough or strong enough volunteer to fight Grendel. We are now about to enter a new age of Beowulf's life. With all his great achievements, he finally becomes king of his homeland: Geatland. Even in his old age, his code of honor still obligates him to fight against an evil, fiery dragon. For fifty years he has governed his kingdom well. While Beowulf is governing, the dragon "...kept watch over a hoard, a steep stone-barrow" (Norton 55). Under it lays a path concealed from the sight of men. Over centuries no one had disturbed the dragons kingdom until one day when a thief broke into the treasure, laid hand on a cup fretted with gold This infuriated the dragon. "The fiery dragon had destroyed the people's stronghold, the land along the sea, the heart of the country" (Norton 57). Wiglaf is the only person who stays with Beowulf to serve his lord and to fight the dragon. Everyone else becomes cowardly and runs into the forest to hide from the dragon. It turns out that Beowulf's sword can not even penetrate the dragon. The dragon gets the best of Beowulf, he "...seized all his neck with his sharp fangs: he was smeared with life-blood, gore welled out in waves" (Norton 62). Wiglaf, then, summons his wits and they killed the dragon: "The wound which the dragon had dealt him began to burn and swell; at once he felt dire evil boil in his breast within him"( Norton 62). Our hero is finally defeated. Even though he is seriously injured, he still had the strength to break the fifty foot dragon in half.

China As Most Favored Nation Essay example -- essays research papers

What is the debate on weather or not China should retain favored-nation trading status all about? Is it really a decision on what is best economically for the United States, and China. Or is it: the issue of Chinese human rights violations and the fact that if the United States where to revoke the favored nation status of China it would have a profound negative impact on the U.S. economy alone. (+)Most-favored-nation trade status started in the United States as a version of the European preferential trade system. The Carter Administration first granted most-favored-nation trading status to China in 1980, following the historic efforts of President Nixon during the 1970’s to restore diplomatic ties. Historically, a significant difference existed between the unconditional most-favored-nation clause in European trade law and the American version of conditional most-favored-nation. Under unconditional most-favored-nation status, one country's extension of tariff concessions guarantees the same concessions to all nations associated with it through commercial treaties. American conditional most-favored-nation status provided treaty signatories only the opportunity to negotiate most-favored-nation status when most-favored-nation status was extended to another trading partner. Thus meaning that the United States gives significant economic advantages to one nation in the form of most-favored-nation trading status. Under the Trade Act of 1974, most-favored-nation status could only be granted to China through a Sino-American bilateral commercial agreement and satisfaction of the Jackson-Vanik Amendment requirements. The Jackson-Vanik amendment states that the President of the United States may grant a communist country such as China most-favored-nation trade status if it was in conjunction with a trade agreement and upon proper improvement that China would permit emigration. Also China would have to satisfy that they are moving toward improving current policies. The conclusion of the US-PRC commercial accord in July 1979, and the initial waiving of the Jackson-Vanik requirements, and with Congressional approval, most-favored-nation status was granted to China. This action sealed the successful efforts of the Carter Administration to create social and economic ties through Sino-American relations. The renewal of China’s most-favored-nation trade status has been s... ...t-favored-nation status. By giving stats and other figures that show just how this issue has the ability to effect the economies of both the United States and China. Works Cited: (-)Morrison, Wayne M. â€Å"91121: China-U.S. Trade Issues† Updated November 27, 1996 <a href="http://www.fas.org/man/crs/91-121.htm#summ">http://www.fas.org/man/crs/91-121.htm#summ (+)Robertson III , Grayson R â€Å"The China-MFN Controversy: The Case For Maintaining China's MFN Status Part 1† <a href="http://www.china-net.org/CCF94/ccf9409-3.html">http://www.china-net.org/CCF94/ccf9409-3.html (=)â€Å"MARKET ACCESS AND PROTOCOL COMMITMENTS† <a href="http://www.ustr.gov/releases/1999/04/ch-memo.html">http://www.ustr.gov/releases/1999/04/ch-memo.html Delay, Tom â€Å"China-U.S. Trade Issues† <a href="http://www.majoritywhip.house.gov/China/980717CRSTradeRelations.asp">http://www.majoritywhip.house.gov/China/980717CRSTradeRelations.asp Faison, Seth "U.S. And China Reach Late Agreement on Textiles," New York Times, February 3, 1997 <a href="http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/chintex.htm">http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/chintex.htm