Cases
V. Comm’r Case
The case was about the agreement accounted independently; there were the contractor expenses and clients income tax issues by the petitioner, who formed the sole proprietorship, the deficiencies were determined and there was an addition to the tax. The petitioner was not the traveler expert so the records were not mentioned on time; however, it was necessary to pay for the tax return.
The Main Professional Ethics Issue In This Case
The income and expense were less, based on the circumstance and according to the education of the tax payer, it was determined that the taxpayer relied on the professional and the lack of the knowledge that he had; he had to suffer the issues. There were the professional ethics as the clients were guided regarding to the travel expense as there was a theory based on the layman such as the petitioner. The case was in court and the court decided the penalties according under the section of 6662(a). The court considered all the activities, and the arguments that were made by the parties (UStaxcourt, 2016).
Ethical Rationale (Based On Ethical Theory)
The decision by the court was taken accurately, there were the accounting issues, and the information was missing, which mislead the petitioner and the client, the trips that were paid, were not mentioned, due to which the problems occur. However, the court decisions were favorable as both the parties were allowed to give their views and the considerations, the Mr. DeKarver’s advices were difficult to determine. As, the case tell about the facts that, there is need to get the proper education before coming into the business and need to collect the degrees, so that it may be helpful in the future (Weltman, 2011).
In Re Longtop Fin Case
In this case, the pursuant to rules were discussed. The Longtop, have the issues regarding to the documents as the respect to the complaint, there was the pursuant rule because the time for answering about the claim had expired, the case was charged about the documents that nobody come to the court and take the documents.
The Main Professional Ethics Issue In This Case
The documents were not taken or given by the court because of the expiry of time, as the sophisticated decision was taken by the court and the court did the default judgment as stated in the case. With the respect to the complaint the case then was studied by the Longtop, Dr. Hu’s also studied about the event, and discussed about the support that can be give, however the court in connection, has the default judgment; the court was agreed on what was told. Moreover, the default judgment was done by the court (Stanford, 2012).
Ethical Rationale (Based On Ethical Theory)
There is need to investigate about the facts, before taking the decisions because in this case, there could be mismanagement about the aspects, or unfair things can be done the court, the investigation by the court is must. As discussed in the documents that there are the courts of the different countries but the papers or documents were restricted. Moreover, the facts need to focused, the court may be had taken the correct decision because the court knew that offenders are there as the limited time was given and the time was expired, so in these aspects, the courts can retain the decisions (Weltman, 2011).
Johnson V. Siemens AG Case
The cases is about the whistle blowing that is done in the organizations and for the protection of the employees, however, in the case, the segments and the laws regarding the employee whistle blowing protection and the incentives were discussed. The laws or the acts are there o that employees feel protected and should not be weaken or there should not be affecting on the employer.
The Main Professional Ethics Issue In This Case
There are the professional ethics discussed in the case, the case give help to the employees so they do not feel discriminated in the organizations, there are the commission rule by the courts to take the decisions, there are the anti-retaliation, protection. There are the independent analysis discussed the whistle blowing in the government report, taken as the source of the information, there are the penalties, interest showed by the courts (Sec.gov, 2011).
Ethical Rationale (Based On Ethical Theory)
In my point of view, the court has make the good laws to protect the employees, as for every employee, the protection regarding the compensation and the incentives is necessary, because in this way the things cannot be taken wrong, or there can be no discrimination. The employer are need to stand for the whistle blowing and need to become aware of the aspects or the action that are taking place in the organization. The researches show the important relationship between the whistle blowing aspect and the employees, as they are protected, the anti-retaliation protection allows them to speak for themselves. The employee who engaged in bad activities or the complaint is done against him/her, then actions can be taken by court (Maltzman, Spriggs, & Wahlbeck, 2000).
Also Study,
References
- Jennings, M. M. (2012). Business: Its Legal, Ethical, and Global Environment. Cengage Learning.
- Maltzman, F., Spriggs, J. F., & Wahlbeck, P. J. (2000). Crafting Law on the Supreme Court: The Collegial Game. Cambridge University Press.
- gov. (2011). Johnson v. Siemens AG, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35000. Retrieved November 6, 2016, from https://www.sec.gov/litigation/briefs/2014/liu-siemens-0214.pdf
- (2012). In re Longtop Fin. Techs. Ltd. Secs. Litig. Retrieved November 6, 2016, from securities.stanford.edu/filings-documents/1047/…/20131114_r01x_11CV03658.pdf
- (2016). Nebeker v. Comm’r, T.C. Memo 2016-155. Retrieved November 11, 2016, from https://www.ustaxcourt.gov/UstcInOp/OpinionViewer.aspx?ID=10889
- Weltman, B. (2011). K. Lasser’s New Tax Law Simplified 2011. John Wiley & Sons.