Don't run from adversity — run towards it
Avi-Yonah: Should Large Partnerships Be Taxed as Corporations?
Reuven Avi-Yonah (Michigan) has a new Tax Notes column evaluating a recent policy paper from the Tax Law Center and the Hamilton Project on taxing pass-through entities as corporations. Here is the underlying policy paper and here is the column, which begins as follows:
The Tax Law Center at New York University School of Law and the Hamilton Project recently released a paper proposing that tax large or complex passthrough entities as C corporations. This thorough proposal deserves serious consideration by policy makers, given the complexities of large partnership structures that present major challenges for the IRS. The proposal draws from a long series of similar proposals. Ultimately, however, it does not address a more fundamental question: Why should we tax legal entities to begin with?
Opt Out October. Let’s Take Control of Our Data and Our Devices
EFF: “Big tech companies are hell-bent on taking away our agency and forcing us to use their surveillance-based services, apps, and devices. It’s hard to fight against, and it often feels much easier to give in, accept their walled gardens, and move on with our lives. But we don’t have to stand in the middle of the information super highway and let companies run us over.
With a little work, we can stand our ground and take control over what happens with our data. This month—Opt Out October—we’re walking through some of the steps to do just that. Last year, we detailed 22 daily tips to trim down the amount of data that’s collected about you or available online, throwing sand in the gears of corporate surveillance. Those steps are still worth taking.
This year we’re looking to abandon those gears altogether and cut that data collection off at the head. Below find links for guides to tell artificial intelligence (AI) tools they can’t train on your data, as well as tips to find alternative software, social media, and even new operating systems that provide stronger privacy and better ways to control how your data is used. Opting out isn’t about disengaging with computers or the internet.
It’s about finding alternatives that align with your values and needs. But it takes effort. The major tech companies have tried to suck all the air out of the room by claiming that it’s inevitable you’ll use their platforms. They’ve installed their own software and made it difficult to change the defaults. This can make it difficult to find alternatives. But not impossible. While EFF does not endorse specific products, we can be a guiding light towards your options…
Doxxing Jane Doe
The Verge, no paywall – X and Substack aren’t doing anything to stop users from harassing women they believe are connected to the rape case — and the women who aren’t: “Who is Jane Doe? Online vigilantes have tried to expose the Cornell University student who filed a lawsuit accusing seven fraternity members of gang rape, and in so doing have invited a torrent of abuse on several other women.
Her lawyers say three women have been falsely identified and harassed — and the real Jane Doe is being inundated with threats, too. “She’s not doing well,” her attorney Thomas Guiffra told CNN on Sunday. “She’s under siege on social media, where people are trying to identify her.” The fact several women are now facing a torrent of online abuse in connection to Jane Doe’s lawsuit isn’t surprising. Targeted harassment and intimidation campaigns were a hallmark of the backlash to #MeToo. These targeted harassment campaigns were once organized on websites like Kiwi Farms and 4chan.
But the effort to unmask Jane Doe — and to terrorize any woman they believe to be Jane Doe — is happening right in the open, on mainstream social media platforms that aren’t doing anything to stop it. Jane Doe’s identity isn’t a total secret: It’s known to her attorneys, the judge presiding over the case, the seven men she’s accusing of rape, and their attorneys, too.
In civil cases, a plaintiff’s anonymity is ultimately up to the judge, who weighs several factors, including whether identifying the plaintiff by name will put them at risk of physical or mental injury. “In New York, there’s no automatic right to proceed anonymously,” said Annie Seifullah, a founding partner at the victims’ rights firm Incendii Law.
Still, “the law recognizes that survivors’ lives are routinely put on trial, and that forcing them to sue under their real names would keep many victims of sexual violence from coming forward at all.” Similarly, journalistic ethics guidestypically suggest showing sensitivity to victims of alleged sex crimes, and reporters will often allow people alleging abuse to do so anonymously, so long as their identity can be independently corroborated…”
See also The Grudge Report “The Good Guy With the Text” fallacy…There were 57 sons, 57 men on the group text. I’m going to say something about fraternity brothers that many of you will immediately begin to qualify with counter examples. No frat bro, not even “one of the good ones,” is calling the cops on his friends. No frat bro is in any way intimating that he in any way disapproves of anything his fellow frat bro says, no matter how racist or misogynistic or homophobic or outright fucking rape-announcing. Here’s why…”
See also Source paper – Treat, T. A., Corbin, W. R., Papova, A., Richner, K., Craney, R., & Fromme, K. (2021). Selection and socialization accounts of the relation between fraternity membership and sexual aggression. Psychology of addictive behaviors : journal of the Society of Psychologists in Addictive Behaviors, 35(3), 337–350. https://doi.org/10.1037/adb0000662
Analyses revealed three key findings. Fraternity membership was prospectively correlated with sexual aggression in years one and two of college (socialization effect), controlling for selection effects, when the two prospective paths were constrained to be equivalent. Second, more frequent binge drinking and sociosexual attitudes prior to college prospectively correlated with an increased likelihood of joining a fraternity (selection effect), and both selection variables indirectly correlated with future sexual aggression via fraternity membership. Third, fraternity membership was associated with increased binge drinking and perceived peer sexual aggression (socialization effects).”…
Trump’s Cascade of Canceled Corporate Enforcement Against Over 200 Corporations
These enforcement actions include investigations, enforcement lawsuits, and other accountability measures for alleged lawbreaking by many of the largest and most powerful corporations, from Amazon to Zoom and hundreds in between. This updated analysis documents the extent of Trump’s retreat from enforcement against corporate crime and lawbreaking. Key Findings
- So far, the Trump administration has canceled enforcement actions inherited from the Biden administration against 205 corporations. The canceled enforcement actions include federal investigations, enforcement lawsuits, prior settlements, and other accountability measures for alleged lawbreaking.
- Corporations with ties to Trump and/or the administration make up 44% (90 out of 205) of those benefiting from enforcement cancellations, and include:
- 53 corporate gift givers that contributed to Trump’s inaugural committee, pro-Trump super PACs, the demolition of the East Wing of the White House, and other Trump priorities;
- 32 Trump crony employersthat hired a Trump-allied lobbyist, lawyer, or official to curry favor with the administration;
- 15 corporate business partners that have or have had deals with Trump’s private businesses; and
- 8 former employers of executives, employees, and/or investors selected for leadership roles within the Trump administration.
- The 212 canceled enforcement actions against 205 corporations include:
- 80 closed investigations(including 10 criminal investigations);
- 67 dismissed enforcement lawsuits the federal agencies were actively litigating (including 10 criminal cases); and
- 54 canceled consequences in which the Trump administration terminated or reversed enforcement actions that were resolved before Trump’s second term, including 14 pardons of corporations and executives and five canceled corporate leniency deals…”
