alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 25.2207A-2 Effective date. The provisions of § 25.2207A-1 are effective with respect to dispositions made after March 1, 1994. With respect to gifts made on or before such date, the donor may rely on any reasonable interpretation of the statutory provisions. For these purposes, the provisions of § 25.2207A-1 (as well as project LR-211-76, 1984-1 C.B., page 598, see § 601.601(d)(2)(ii)( b ) of this chapter), are considered a reasonable interpretation of the statutory provisions. [T.D. 8522, 59 FR 9656, Mar. 1, 1994]
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 8149 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 8149

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to clarify the tax treatment 
                       of digital asset rewards.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 29, 2024

  Mr. Ferguson (for himself and Mr. Nickel) introduced the following 
      bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to clarify the tax treatment 
                       of digital asset rewards.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. DIGITAL ASSET REWARDS INCLUDED IN GROSS INCOME UPON SALE OR 
              DISPOSITION.

    (a) In General.--Part II of subchapter B of chapter 1 of the 
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the 
following new section:

``SEC. 92. DIGITAL ASSET REWARDS.

    ``(a) In General.--If, pursuant to a blockchain consensus mechanism 
with respect to any digital asset, a person acquires (directly, or 
indirectly through a service provider) a reward of a digital asset--
            ``(1) no income or gain shall result at the time of such 
        acquisition, and
            ``(2) on the disposition of such digital asset in any 
        taxable year, the income or gain (if any) with respect to such 
        asset shall be the income or gain, as the case may be, from the 
        disposition for such taxable year.
    ``(b) Definitions.--For purposes of this section--
            ``(1) Digital asset.--The term `digital asset' shall have 
        the meaning given such term under section 6045(g)(3)(D).
            ``(2) Blockchain consensus mechanism.--The term `blockchain 
        consensus mechanism' means, with respect to any digital asset, 
        a process by which a person commits resources in connection 
        with validating the legitimacy of transactions and related 
        entries in the cryptographically secured distributed ledger to 
        which such digital asset relates.''.
    (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for part II of 
subchapter B of chapter 1 of such Code is amended by adding at the end 
the following new item:

``Sec. 92. Digital asset rewards.''.
    (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2023.
                                 <all>
```
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 155 (Thursday, August 13, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 40833]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-19390]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

U.S. Customs and Border Protection


Approval of Intertek USA, Inc., as a Commercial Gauger

AGENCY: U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland 
Security.

ACTION: Notice of approval of Intertek USA, Inc., as a commercial 
gauger.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to 19 CFR 151.13, 
Intertek USA, Inc., 91-110 Hanua Street <greek-i>204, Kapolei, HI 
96707, has been approved to gauge petroleum, petroleum products, 
organic chemicals and vegetable oils for customs purposes, in 
accordance with the provisions of 19 CFR 151.13. Anyone wishing to 
employ this entity to conduct gauger services should request and 
receive written assurances from the entity that it is approved by the 
U.S. Customs and Border Protection to conduct the specific gauger 
service requested. Alternatively, inquires regarding the specific 
gauger service this entity is approved to perform may be directed to 
the U.S. Customs and Border Protection by calling (202) 344-1060. The 
inquiry may also be sent to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#d9babba9f7b5b8bbb1a899bdb1aaf7beb6af"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="c1a2a3b1efada0a3a9b081a5a9b2efa6aeb7">[email protected]</span></a>. Please reference the Web 
site listed below for a complete listing of CBP approved gaugers and 
accredited laboratories. http://cbp.gov/xp/cgov/import/operations_support/labs_scientific_svcs/commercial_gaugers/.

DATES: The approval of Intertek USA, Inc., as commercial gauger became 
effective on May 20, 2009. The next triennial inspection date will be 
scheduled for May 2012.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anthony Malana, Laboratories and 
Scientific Services, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 1300 
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Suite 1500N, Washington, DC 20229, 202-344-
1060.

    Dated: August 4, 2009.
Ira S. Reese,
Executive Director, Laboratories and Scientific Services.
[FR Doc. E9-19390 Filed 8-12-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-14-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
#### § 31.3308-1 Instrumentalities of the United States specifically exempted from tax imposed by section 3301.

Section 3308 makes ineffectual as to the tax imposed by section 3301 (with respect to remuneration paid after 1961 for services performed after 1961) those provisions of law which grant to an instrumentality of the United States an exemption from taxation, unless such provisions grant a specific exemption from the tax imposed by section 3301 by an express reference to such section or the corresponding section of prior law. Thus, the general exceptions from Federal taxation granted by various statutes to certain instrumentalities of the United States without specific reference to the tax imposed by section 3301 or the corresponding section of prior law are rendered inoperative insofar as such exemptions relate to the tax imposed by section 3301. For provisions relating to the exception from employment of services performed in the employ of an instrumentality of the United States specifically exempted from the tax imposed by section 3301, see § 31.3306(c)(6)-1.

[T.D. 6658, 28 FR 6641, June 27, 1963]
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Andrew R. Decker, Appellant.

[805 NYS2d 751]

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Monroe County (Francis A. Affronti, J.), rendered November 26, 2002. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, criminal possession of marihuana in the fourth degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree (five counts).

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him, following a jury trial, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree (Penal Law § 220.16 [1]), criminal possession of marihuana in the fourth degree (§ 221.15) and five counts of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree (§ 220.03), defendant contends that Supreme *1140Court erred in refusing to suppress a statement that he made to police officers before he was advised of his *Miranda*rights. We reject that contention. As the court properly determined, the statement at issue was merely defendant’s response to a question by the police regarding which key on the key ring opened the door to defendant’s apartment. That question was not designed to invoke an incriminatory response from defendant *(see People v Boyd,*21 AD3d 1428 [2005]; *see generally Rhode Island v Innis,*446 US 291, 300-301 [1980]). In any event, the police had obtained a search warrant for defendant’s apartment and would have entered the apartment legally even in the absence of defendant’s response. Contrary to the further contention of defendant, the court did not abuse its discretion in denying his request for a continuance to review discovery materials *(cf. People v Spina,*275 AD2d 902, 904 [2000], *lv denied*95 NY2d 969 [2000]; *see generally People v Singleton,*41 NY2d 402, 405 [1977]). Finally, defendant failed to preserve for our review his contention concerning the court’s supplemental instruction to the jury *(see*CPL 470.05 [2]), and we decline to exercise our power to review that contention as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice *(see*CPL 470.15 [6] [a]). Present—Green, J.P., Scudder, Kehoe, Martoche and Hayes, JJ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-01-2000             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-04-1999             JAN-03-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-02-1999             OCT-02-1999
<CASH>                                           1,227                   1,227
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   16,804                  16,804
<ALLOWANCES>                                       610                     610
<INVENTORY>                                     20,019                  20,019
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                38,596                  38,596
<PP&E>                                          72,003                  72,003
<DEPRECIATION>                                  39,474                  39,474
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  78,105                  78,105
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           20,435                  20,435
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                         5,400                   5,400
<OTHER-SE>                                      21,128                  21,128
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    78,101                  78,101
<SALES>                                         26,718                  85,728
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                26,718                  85,728
<CGS>                                           21,941                  69,868
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   26,195                  82,442
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 (107)                   (100)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 468                   1,330
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    162                   2,056
<INCOME-TAX>                                        58                     822
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                104                   1,234
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                       104                   1,234
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.02                    0.23
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.02                    0.23


</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

    CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

      Each of the undersigned hereby certifies, in his capacity as an officer of
ACG Holdings, Inc. and American Color Graphics, Inc., (collectively the
"Company") that the Quarterly Report of the Company on Form 10-Q for the period
ended June 30, 2004 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m) and that the information
contained herein fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.

Date: August 10, 2004                           /s/ Stephen M. Dyott
                                                --------------------------------
                                                    Stephen M. Dyott
                                                    Chief Executive Officer

Date: August 10, 2004                           /s/ Patrick W. Kellick
                                                --------------------------------
                                                    Patrick W. Kellick
                                                    Chief Financial Officer

                                       29
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 154 (Wednesday, August 12, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40609-40610]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-19260]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE


Notice of Lodging Proposed Consent Decree

    In accordance with Departmental Policy, 28 CFR 50.7, notice is 
hereby given that a proposed Consent Decree in United States of America 
v. Union Pacific Railroad Company, No. 2:09-CV-01453 (D. Nev.), was 
lodged with the United States District Court for the District of Nevada 
on August 6, 2009.
    The proposed Consent Decree concerns a complaint filed by the 
United States against Union Pacific Railroad Company, pursuant to 
sections 309(b) and (d) of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1319(b) and 
(d), to obtain injunctive relief and civil penalties against Union 
Pacific Railroad Company for the unauthorized discharge of pollutants 
in Lincoln and Clark Counties, Nevada, in violation of sections 301(a), 
402, and 404 of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1311(a), 1342, & 1344, 
and for failure to timely submit information in violation of section 
308 of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1318. The proposed Consent Decree 
resolves these allegations by requiring Union Pacific Railroad Company 
to restore the impacted areas, to perform mitigation, and to pay a 
civil penalty.
    The Department of Justice will accept written comments relating to 
this proposed Consent Decree for thirty (30) days from the date of 
publication of this Notice. Please address comments to Andrew J. Doyle, 
Trial Attorney, Environmental Defense Section, P.O. Box 23986, 
Washington, DC 20026, and refer to United States v. Union Pacific 
Railroad Company, DJ <greek-i> 90-5-1-1-17847.
    The proposed Consent Decree may be examined at the Clerk's Office, 
United States District Court for the District of Nevada, Las Vegas, or 
via the court's case management and electronic docketing system at 
https://ecf.nvd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/ShowIndex.pl. In addition, the 
proposed Consent Decree may be viewed at

[[Page 40610]]

http://www.usdoj.gov/enrd/Consent_Decrees.html.

Maureen M. Katz,
Assistant Section Chief, Environment & Natural Resources Division.
[FR Doc. E9-19260 Filed 8-11-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
EXHIBIT 31.1




RULE 13a-14(a) CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I, J. Randolph Potter, certify that:





1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Summit Financial Corporation;





2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;





3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;





4. The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:





a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;





b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and





c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and





5. The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):





a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and





b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.










|Date: August 7, 2003 | /s/ J. Randolph Potter                                   
|-------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------
|                     |                                                          
|                     | J. Randolph Potter, President and Chief Executive Officer
| (logo)  WELLS

            FARGO | **Commercial  Mortgage Servicing**D1050-084,  8th Floor  401 South Tryon Street.  Charlotte, NC 28202  1-800-326-1334 |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

** **

** **

**ANNUAL STATEMENT OFCOMPLIANCE**

 

Reference is hereby made to that certainPooling and Servicing Agreement as of October 1, 2015, by and among GS MORTGAGESECURITIES CORPORATION II, as Depositor, WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONALASSOCIATION, as Master Servicer, MIDLAND LOAN SERVICES, A DIVISION OF PNC BANK,NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Special Servicer, PENTALPHA SURVEILLANCE LLC, as OperatingAdvisor, U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Certificate Administrator andTrustee, with respect to Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series2015-GC34 (the "Agreement"). Capitalized terms used herein nototherwise defined shall have the meanings assigned in the Agreement.

 

Pursuant to Section 10.07 of thisAgreement, I, Leslie Hayton, Managing Director of Commercial Mortgage Servicesdo hereby certify that:

 

1.  A review of the activities of theMaster Servicer during the period from January 1, 2018 through December 31, 2018(the “Reporting Period”), and of its performance per the Agreement during suchperiod has been made under my supervision, and

 

2.  To the best of my knowledge, based onsuch review, the Master Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under theAgreement in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period.

  

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the undersigned has executed this Certificate as of the 28th day of February2019.

 

 

/s/ Leslie Hayton

Leslie Hayton 

Managing Director 

Wells Fargo Bank

 

 

| Wells  Fargo Bank, N.A. | (logo) Together we’ll go far |
|-------------------------|------------------------------------|
1 NO. 17-0 984

IN THE

SUPREME COURT

OF TEXAS

IN THE INTEREST OF C.J.L., CHILD

From the First Court of Appeals;

Court of Appeals Cause No. 01 -17- 00283

- CV

Trial Court No. 2016-02236J in the

31 4th District Court in Harris County, Texas

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF FAMILY & PROTECTIVE SERVICES’

WAIVER OF RESPONSE TO PETITION FOR REVIEW

TO THE HONORABLE JUSTICES OF THE SUPREME COURT:

Pursuant to Rule 53.3 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure,

Respondent Texas Department of Family & Protective Services (the

“Department”) waives its right to respond to the Petition for Review filed in th is

proceeding. However, the Department reserves the right to file a response to the

petition for review should this Court request a response. FILED

17-0984

12/21/2017 5:33 PM

tex-21448986

SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

BLAKE A. HAWTHORNE, CLERK2 Respectfully sub mitted,

_ /s/ Michael R. Hull

______________ OF COUNSEL: MICHAEL R. HULL

VINCE RYAN Senior Assistant County Attorney

State Bar No. 24003733

County Attorney 1019 Congress, 15th Floor

Harris County, Texas Houston, Texas 77002

(71 3) 274

- 5138 (telephone)

(713) 437

- 4700 (facsimile)

michael.hull@cao.hctx.net (e

- mail)

ATTORNEY FOR RESPONDENT

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF FAMILY

& PROTECTIVE SERVICES3 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on this 2 1st day of December , 2017 , a true and correct

copy of the foregoing

, Respondent Texas Department of Family & Protective

Services’ Waive r of Response to Petition for Review

, was delivered via electronic

service, facs imile, e

- mail , certified mail, return

- receipt requested, or hand

- delivery

,

to the following:

Counsel for Petitioner J.W.L. :

Donald M. Crane

C RANE L ANE LLP

810 S. Mason Rd., Ste. 350

Katy , Texas 77 450

(281) 392

- 5383 (facsimile)

donmcrane@gmail.com (e

- mail)

Attorney Ad Litem for Child C.J.L. :

Michael F. Craig

1533 W. Alabama St., Ste. 100

Houston, Texas 77 00 6

cps@burlesoncraig.com

_ /s/ Michael R. Hull_______

MICHAEL R. HULL

Senior Assistant County Attorney