The Taney court case that redefined the contract clause to give greater power and independence to the states against the Federal government is the Charles River Bridge v. Warren Bridge case. This case expanded the states' authority and limited the extent of contract protections against state regulation, signaling a shift towards a more balanced relationship between the federal government and the states.
In the Charles River Bridge v. Warren Bridge case, Chief Justice Roger B. Taney and the Supreme Court issued a landmark decision in 1837 that reinterpreted the contract clause of the United States Constitution. The case involved a dispute between two bridge companies: the Charles River Bridge Company, which held an exclusive charter to build and operate a bridge between Boston and Cambridge, and the Warren Bridge Company, which sought to build a competing bridge nearby. The Charles River Bridge Company argued that the new bridge violated their contract rights and that the state of Massachusetts had unlawfully impaired their charter.
However, Chief Justice Taney and the Court ruled in favor of the Warren Bridge Company, stating that the contract clause did not grant perpetual monopoly rights to private corporations. The decision emphasized the principle of public interest and the power of the state to promote competition and economic development over private contract rights.
Learn more about court case here:
brainly.com/question/31024354
#SPJ11
if the tax law changes to reduce or eliminate the deductibility of state and local taxes, what is the impact on tax free municipal bonds for high tax rate individuals?
If the tax law changes to reduce or eliminate the deductibility of state and local taxes, it will increase the appeal of tax-free municipal bonds for high tax rate individuals.
What are tax-free municipal bonds?
Tax-free municipal bonds are issued by state and local governments to fund public projects. The interest earned on these bonds is not subject to federal income tax and may not be subject to state and local taxes if the investor resides in the state in which the bond was issued.
Tax-free municipal bonds are attractive to high-tax-rate individuals because they offer a higher after-tax yield than taxable bonds. For example, an investor in the top tax bracket (37%) would need to earn a yield of 5.87% on a taxable bond to receive the same after-tax yield as a tax-free municipal bond yielding 3.7%.
Impact on tax-free municipal bonds:
If the tax law changes to reduce or eliminate the deductibility of state and local taxes, it will increase the appeal of tax-free municipal bonds for high tax rate individuals. This is because the tax-free nature of municipal bond interest becomes more valuable as the tax benefits of other investments decrease.
The change in tax law will increase the demand for tax-free municipal bonds, resulting in higher prices and lower yields. This, in turn, will make the bonds more expensive for issuers to sell and will result in fewer projects being funded by municipal bonds.
Learn more about municipal bonds:
https://brainly.com/question/28091744
#SPJ11
in a dual agency situation, if it is permitted by state law, a broker may represent both the seller and the buyer in the same transaction provided a) the broker informs either the buyer or the seller of this fact.
b) the buyer and the seller are related by blood or marriage.
c) both parties consent in writing to the dual agency.
d) both parties are represented by attorneys.
In a dual agency situation, if it is permitted by state law, a broker may represent both the seller and the buyer in the same transaction provided both parties consent in writing to the dual agency.
A dual agent is a real estate agent who works for both the buyer and the seller in the same transaction. Dual agency occurs when a real estate broker represents both parties in a single transaction. The dual agency may occur when the buyer and seller have the same real estate agent or when both parties have agents who work for the same broker. Dual agency is only allowed with the consent of both parties in most states.
The real estate agent who serves as a dual agent is required by law to inform both the buyer and seller of the dual agency, as well as obtain written consent from both parties if the law permits dual agency. A written disclosure must be signed by both the seller and the buyer before the transaction can proceed. In conclusion, in a dual agency situation, if it is permitted by state law, a broker may represent both the seller and the buyer in the same transaction provided both parties consent in writing to the dual agency.
To learn more about Dual agency visit here:
brainly.com/question/28222956
#SPJ11
_____ law is based on the previous decisions of higher courts as applied to the same or similar circumstances.
Precedent law is based on previous decisions of higher courts as applied to the same or similar circumstances, providing a foundation for legal consistency and predictability.
Precedent law, also known as case law or common law, is a legal system where judicial decisions from higher courts serve as binding or persuasive authority for future cases with similar circumstances. Under this system, judges are expected to follow the legal principles established in previous cases and apply them to the current case at hand.
Precedent law is essential in providing consistency, predictability, and stability in legal interpretations and outcomes. It allows for the development of legal principles and standards over time as courts build upon and refine previous decisions. Precedents play a crucial role in shaping the legal landscape, as they serve as a guide for judges and lawyers in determining the appropriate legal reasoning and outcome in new cases. Hence, precedent law is based on the previous decisions of higher courts as applied to the same or similar circumstances, providing a foundation for legal interpretations and outcomes.
Learn more about Precedent law here:
https://brainly.com/question/25440253
#SPJ11