As a sales representative, I am required to travel frequently in the course of my duties. My employer reimburses me $500 each month for the uses of my E-plated car for business purposes. Am I entitled to claim a deduction on the car expenses incurred by me? Are there any order income tax implications? Generally, in respect to salon cars only expenses incurred on Q-plated cars are deductible. The $500 payable by your employer can be viewed from two angles: Round sum allowance at $500 p.m. The amount would be taxable on you with no deduction for car expenses as the car in question is not a Q-plated car. However, the company would enjoy a tax deduction; the payment being additional remuneration payable without any reference to your transport expenses. View Full Article »
Archive for March, 2010
The united shoe decision is worth nothing for at least two reasons. It provides an example of the kind of behavior that courts have taken as sufficient to condemn a monopoly position of under the Sherman act. Further, in giving his opinion, Judge Charles E, Wyzanski, Jr. provided a succinct summary of the development of the law under section 2. The united shoe machinery corporation was formed in 1899 by a merger that combined seven previously independent firms. The government challenged this merger under the Sherman act, but in a 1918 decision the Supreme Court declined to find a violation. From that point on, united shoe machinery dominated the U.S. market for machines used to manufacture shoes. View Full Article »
