alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
I

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 3343

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal the withholding

of income taxes and to require individuals to pay estimated taxes on

a monthly basis.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

APRIL 25, 1996

Mr. STEARNS (for himself, Mr. ARMEY, Mr. SHADEGG, Mr. STUMP, Mr.

WELDON of Florida, and Mr. NORWOOD) 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 repeal

the withholding of income taxes and to require individuals to pay estimated taxes on a monthly basis.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. REPEAL OF INCOME TAX WITHHOLDING.

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 24 of the Internal Reve5 nue Code of 1986 (relating to withholding from wages)

6 is amended by adding at the end the following new section:

7 ‘‘SEC. 3407. TERMINATION.

8 ‘‘No tax shall be imposed by this chapter on any

9 amount paid after December 31, 1996.’’
2

•HR 3343 IH

1 (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections

2 for such chapter 24 is amended by adding at the end the

3 following new item:

‘‘Sec. 3407. Termination.’’

4 SEC. 2. MONTHLY PAYMENTS OF ESTIMATED TAXES.

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subsection (c) of section 6654 of

6 the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to estimated

7 income tax for individuals) is amended to read as follows:

8 ‘‘(c) NUMBER OF REQUIRED INSTALLMENTS; DUE

9 DATES.—For purposes of this section—

10 ‘‘(1) PAYABLE MONTHLY.—There shall be 12

11 required installments for each taxable year, one for

12 each calendar month.

13 ‘‘(2) TIME FOR PAYMENT OF INSTALLMENTS.—

14 The due date for each required installment shall be

15 the 15th day of the following month.’’

16 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.—

17 (1) Subparagraph (A) of section 6654(d)(1) of

18 such Code is amended by striking ‘‘25 percent’’ and

19 inserting ‘‘8.25 percent’’.

20 (2) Clause (ii) of section 6654(d)(2)(C) of such

21 Code is amended to read as follows:

22 ‘‘(ii) APPLICABLE PERCENTAGE.—The

23 applicable percentage is—

24 ‘‘(I) 7.5 percent for the 1st re25 quired installment, and
3

•HR 3343 IH

1 ‘‘(II) for each installment there2 after during the taxable year, the sum

3 of 7.5 percentage points and the ap4 plicable percentage of the prior in5 stallment.’’

6 (3) Section 6654 of such Code is amended by

7 striking subsection (j) and by redesignating sub8 sections (k) and (l) as subsections (j) and (k), re9 spectively.

10 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by

11 this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after

12 December 31, 1996.

Æ
EXHIBIT 23 

 

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM 

 

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement No. 333-122386 on Form S-3, Registration Statement No. 333-113417 on Form SB-2 and theRegistration Statements No. 33-42457, 33-50332 and 333-111386 on Forms S-8 of RegeneRx Biopharmaceuticals, Inc. of our report dated February 28, 2005, appearing in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-KSB as of and for the years endedDecember 31, 2004 and 2003. 

 

/s/ Reznick Group, P.C. 

 

Bethesda, Maryland 

March 29, 2005
§ 423.1082 Evidence admissible on review. ( a ) The Departmental Appeals Board may admit evidence into the record in addition to the evidence introduced at the ALJ hearing, (or the documents considered by the ALJ if the hearing was waived), if the Board considers that the additional evidence is relevant and material to an issue before it.
( b ) If it appears to the Board that additional relevant evidence is available, the Board will require that it be produced.
( c ) Before additional evidence is admitted into the record— ( 1 ) Notice is mailed to the parties (unless they have waived notice) stating that evidence will be received regarding specified issues; and
( 2 ) The parties are given a reasonable time to comment and to present other evidence pertinent to the specified issues.
( d ) If additional evidence is presented orally to the Board, a transcript is prepared and made available to any party upon request.
Editorial Note on Part 422
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 422 appear at 70 FR 4741, Jan. 28, 2005.

§ 422.322 Source of payment and effect of MA plan election on payment. ( a ) *Source of payments.* ( 1 ) Payments under this subpart for original fee-for-service benefits to MA organizations or MA MSAs are made from the Federal Hospital Insurance Trust Fund or the Supplementary Medical Insurance Trust Fund. CMS determines the proportions to reflect the relative weight that benefits under Part A, and benefits under Part B represents of the actuarial value of the total benefits under title XVIII of the Act.
( 2 ) Payments to MA-PD organizations for statutory drug benefits provided under this title are made from the Medicare Prescription Drug Account in the Federal Supplementary Medical Insurance Trust Fund.
( 3 ) Payments under subpart C of part 495 of this chapter for meaningful use of certified EHR technology are made from the Federal Hospital Insurance Trust Fund or the Supplementary Medical Insurance Trust Fund. In applying section 1848(o) of the Act under sections 1853(l) and 1886(n)(2)of the Act under section 1853(m) of the Act, CMS determines the amount to the extent feasible and practical to be similar to the estimated amount in the aggregate that would be payable for services furnished by professionals and hospitals under Parts B and A, respectively, under title XVIII of the Act.
( b ) *Payments to the MA organization.* Subject to §§ 412.105(g), 413.76, and 495.204 of this chapter and §§ 422.109, 422.316, and 422.320, CMS' payments under a contract with an MA organization (described in § 422.304) with respect to an individual electing an MA plan offered by the organization are instead of the amounts which (in the absence of the contract) would otherwise be payable under original Medicare for items and services furnished to the individual.
( c ) *Only the MA organization entitled to payment.* Subject to §§ 422.314, 422.316, 422.318, 422.320, and 422.520 and sections 1886(d)(11) and 1886(h)(3)(D) of the Act, only the MA organization is entitled to receive payment from CMS under title XVIII of the Act for items and services furnished to the individual.
( d ) *FFS payment for expenses for kidney acquisitions.* Paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section do not apply with respect to expenses for organ acquisitions for kidney transplants described in section 1852(a)(1)(B)(i) of the Act.
[70 FR 4729, Jan. 28, 2005, as amended at 70 FR 52027, Sept. 1, 2005; 75 FR 44654, July 28, 2010; 85 FR 33908, June 2, 2020; 85 FR 72909, Nov. 16, 2020]
§ 415.178 Anesthesia services. ( a ) *General rule.* ( 1 ) *For services furnished prior to January 1, 2010* , an unreduced physician fee schedule payment may be made if a physician is involved in a single anesthesia procedure involving an anesthesia resident. In the case of anesthesia services, the teaching physician must be present during all critical portions of the procedure and immediately available to furnish services during the entire service or procedure. The teaching physician cannot receive an unreduced fee if he or she performs services involving other patients during the period the anesthesia resident is furnishing services in a single case. Additional rules for payment of anesthesia services involving residents are specified in § 414.46(c)(1)(iii) of this chapter.
( 2 ) *For services furnished on or after January 1, 2010* , payment made under § 414.46(e) of this chapter if the teaching anesthesiologist (or different teaching anesthesiologists in the same anesthesia group practice) is present during all critical or key portions of the anesthesia service or procedure involved; and the teaching anesthesiologist (or another anesthesiologist with whom the teaching anesthesiologist has entered into an arrangement) is immediately available to furnish anesthesia services during the entire procedure.
( b ) *Documentation.* Documentation must indicate the teaching physician's presence during all critical or key portions of the anesthesia procedure and the immediate availability of another teaching anesthesiologist.
[74 FR 62014, Nov. 25, 2009]
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 329 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 329

 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide that the income 
 tax imposed on estates and trusts shall be determined using the rate 
    table applicable to married individuals filing separate returns.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 4, 1995

 Mr. McCrery 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 provide that the income 
 tax imposed on estates and trusts shall be determined using the rate 
    table applicable to married individuals filing separate returns.

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

SECTION 1. INCOME TAX RATE TABLE FOR ESTATES AND TRUSTS.

    (a) In General.--Subsection (e) of section 1 of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to tax imposed) is amended by striking 
``the following table:'' and all that follows and inserting ``the table 
which is applicable under subsection (d) (relating to married 
individuals filing separate returns) for the taxable year.''
    (b) Technical Amendments.--
            (1) Paragraph (1) of section 1(f) of such Code is amended 
        by striking ``(d), and (e)'' and inserting ``and (d)''.
            (2) Paragraph (2) of section 1(f) of such Code by striking 
        ``(d), or (e)'' and inserting ``or (d)''.
    (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 1994.
                                 <all>
```
Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-17-0000917 14-FEB-2018 12:02 PM
# Saudi Arabia

369 items

        -    Department Press Briefing  		Department Press Briefing – February 8, 2021	  Ned PriceFebruary 8, 2021 
        -    Press Statement  		Houthi Attacks Impacting Civilians	  Ned PriceFebruary 7, 2021 
        -    Readout  		Secretary Blinken’s Call with Saudi Foreign Minister Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud	  Ned PriceFebruary 6, 2021 
        -    Department Press Briefing  		Department Press Briefing – February 5, 2021	  Ned PriceFebruary 5, 2021 
        -    Press Statement  		The United States Condemns Attack on Saudi Arabia	  Ned PriceJanuary 24, 2021 
        -    Fact Sheet  		U.S. Security Cooperation With Saudi Arabia	  January 20, 2021 
        -    TIAS  		Saudi Arabia (20-911) – Agreement Regarding Consular Privileges and Immunities	  September 11, 2020 
        -    Report  		2020 Investment Climate Statements: Saudi Arabia	  September 8, 2020 
        -    Report  		2020 Trafficking in Persons Report: Saudi Arabia	  June 25, 2020 
        -    Report  		Country Reports on Terrorism 2019: Saudi Arabia	  June 24, 2020 

previous page1…323334353637next page

Back to Top
###### Editorial Note on Part 422

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 422 appear at 70 FR 4741, Jan. 28, 2005.

#### § 422.576 Effect of an organization determination.

The organization determination is binding on all parties unless it is reconsidered under §§ 422.578 through 422.596 or is reopened and revised under § 422.616.
Home1998 Treaties and Agreements...Dominica (98-1130) – Defense Assistance Agreement

# 									Dominica (98-1130) – Defense Assistance Agreement							

TIAS

Office of Treaty Affairs

November 30, 1998

Defense:  Assistance

Agreement effected by Exchange of Notes at Bridgetown and Roseau November 13 and 30, 1998; Entered into force November 30, 1998.
Download attachment						 [268 KB]

Tags

DefenseDominicaTreaties

## Related Articles

-  											 									
Read more
 

Back to Top
# Bulgaria

111 items

        -    Report  		Country Reports on Terrorism 2019: Bulgaria	  June 24, 2020 
        -    Report  		2019 Report on International Religious Freedom: Bulgaria	  June 10, 2020 
        -    Report  		2019 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Bulgaria	  March 11, 2020 
        -    Report  		Bulgaria	  July 11, 2019 
        -    Depositary Actions - Treaty Affairs  		North Macedonia Protocol – Notification of Deposit of Instrument; Greece and Bulgaria, March 22, 2019	  July 8, 2019 
        -    Report  		Bulgaria	  June 21, 2019 
        -    Report  		Bulgaria	  June 20, 2019 
        -    		Bulgaria	  April 23, 2019 
        -    Report  		Bulgaria	  March 13, 2019 
        -    TIAS  		Bulgaria (19-114) – Memorandum of Understanding Concerning the Imposition of Import Restrictions on Categories of Archaeological Material and Ethnological Material	  January 14, 2019 

previous page1…678910…12next page

Back to Top
#### *J. R. Hagaman *against*G. *W.*Case.

on certiorari.

Book accounts. (a)

*No*price af fixed to the items.

THIS action was brought for a physician’s bill. The state of demand contained a regular account of items and their prices. At the trial the plaintiff below offered his book in evidence, which contained the articles without any price added or annexed thereto. To its admission, the defendant objected, but the objection was overruled, the book admitted, and no other or further proof of price or value given, or any admission made on the subject. This objection was now taken, among others before this court.

*Ewing*for plaintiff in certiorari. *Wall*for defendant.

(a)

 See *Swing vs. Sparks, 2 Hal. 59. Inslee vs. Prall, 3 Zab. 457. Jones vs. DeKay, Pen. *955. Boyles vs. M' Eowen Pen. *677. Bay vs. Cook, 2 Zab. 343. Hedges vs. Boyle, 2 Hal. 68. Smith vs. Dunn, 2 Dutch. 212.*

Kirkpatrick C. J.

This book ought not to have been admitted in evidence. It is not a regular book of account. The price or value ought always to be annexed to the article charged. If it be not so, a door is opened to frauds of the most alarming nature.

Rossell J. *Absen.*

Southard J..

One of two things is manifest in this case; either the state of demand was not a copy of the plaintiff’s account, and therefore faulty, or this testimony was not proper to support the state of demand. If the book was at all admissible, it could only be, to shew that the articles charged, had been received by the defendant; but this was not enough; some proof ought to be given of the value of those articles. A jury is not to be left to guess on that subject. There was therefore a failure of evidence and the court should so have informed the jury, and no verdict should have been rendered in favour of the plaintiff.

Judgment reversed.
Editorial Note on Part 414
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 414 appear at 60 FR 50442, Sept. 29, 1995, and 60 FR 53877, Oct. 18, 1995.

§ 414.1235 Cost measures. ( a ) *Included measures.* Beginning with the CY 2016 payment adjustment period, costs for groups and solo practitioners subject to the value-based payment modifier are assessed based on a cost composite comprised of the following 6 cost measures (only the measures identified in paragraphs (a)(1) through (5) of this section are included for the value-based payment modifier for the CY 2015 payment adjustment period): ( 1 ) Total per capita costs for all attributed beneficiaries.
( 2 ) Total per capita costs for all attributed beneficiaries with diabetes.
( 3 ) Total per capita costs for all attributed beneficiaries with coronary artery disease.
( 4 ) Total per capita costs for all attributed beneficiaries with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.
( 5 ) Total per capita costs for all attributed beneficiaries with heart failure.
( 6 ) Medicare Spending per Beneficiary associated with an acute inpatient hospitalization.
( b ) *Included payments.* Cost measures enumerated in paragraph (a) of this section include all fee-for-service payments made under Medicare Part A and Part B.
( c ) *Cost measure adjustments.* ( 1 ) Payments under Medicare Part A and Part B will be adjusted using CMS' payment standardization methodology to ensure fair comparisons across geographic areas.
( 2 ) The CMS-HCC model (and adjustments for ESRD status) is used to adjust standardized payments for the measures listed at paragraphs (a)(1) through (5) of this section.
( 3 ) The beneficiary's age and severity of illness are used to adjust the Medicare Spending per Beneficiary measure as specified in paragraph (a)(6) of this section.
( 4 ) Beginning with the CY 2016 payment adjustment period, the cost measures of a group and solo practitioner subject to the value-based payment modifier are adjusted to account for the group's and solo practitioner's specialty mix, by computing the weighted average of the national specialty specific expected costs and comparing this to the group's actual risk adjusted costs. Each national specialty-specific expected cost is weighted by the proportion of Part B payments incurred by each specialty within the group.
( 5 ) The national specialty-specific expected costs referenced in paragraph (c)(4) of this section are derived by calculating, for each specialty, the weighted average of the risk-adjusted costs computed across all groups, where the weight for each group is equal to the number of beneficiaries attributed to the group, times the number of eligible professionals in the group with the relevant specialty, times the proportion of eligible professionals in the group with the relevant specialty.
[78 FR 74821, Dec. 10, 2013, as amended at 79 FR 68007, Nov. 13, 2014; 80 FR 71383, Nov. 16, 2015]
#### 

      - Home
      - Overview
      - Board Leadership
      - Committees and Councils
      - Annual Plans and Reports
      - Calendar of events
      - Combined Federal 			Campaign
      - Useful Links
      - Emergency Planning and Response
      - Federal Government Jobs
      - Members Agency Websites
      - Contact

 

 

 

 

## Annual Report  

*(click on below link for report)*
 
Home | 		Overview |		Board | 		Calendar |		Committees |		Reports |		Links |		Emergency | 		Jobs |		Emergency |		Members
**Exhibit
      32.2**




**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO**


**18
      U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**


**SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**




In
      connection with the Quarterly report of Capital Gold Corporation (the “Company”)
      on Form 10-QSB/A for the quarter ended April 30, 2007 as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,
      Christopher Chipman, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
      2002, that:





(1)
      The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





(2)
      The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.




/s/ Christopher ChipmanChristopher
                    Chipman
                  Chief
                    Financial Officer
                  June
                    15,
                    2007
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED FE BRUARY 28, 2013

NO. 03

- 12

- 00727

- CV

Wal

- Mart Stores, Inc. and Robert William Sykes, Appellant s

v.

Pamela K. Fisher and Jesse G. Fisher, Jr., Appellee s

APPEAL FROM 146TH DISTRI CT COURT OF BELL COUNTY BEFORE JUSTICES PURYEAR, PE MBERTON AND ROSE DISMISSED ON AGREED MOTION

-- OPINION BY JUSTICE PEMBERTON

THIS DAY came on to be submitted to this Court the parties’ agreed motion to dismiss the

appeal in the above cause, and the Co urt having fully considered said motion, and being of the

opinion that same should be granted: IT IS THEREFORE considered, adjudged and ordered

that said motion is granted, and that the appeal is dismissed. It is FURTHER ordered that each

party shall pay the costs of the appeal incurred by that party, both in this Court and the court

below; and that this decision be certified below for obs ervance

.
HomeDipNote...U.S. Assistance Helps Destroy Excess and Obsolete Ammunition in Mauritania

# 									U.S. Assistance Helps Destroy Excess and Obsolete Ammunition in Mauritania							

DipNote: Arms Control and Nonproliferation

Emil Deon Nelson

Bureau of Political-Military Affairs

July 26, 2022

In Mauritania, the U.S. Conventional Weapons Destruction (CWD) program is helping the Mauritanian Army to safely destroy its excess and obsolete stockpiled ammunition.  This May, U.S. implementing partner Mines Advisory Group (MAG) assisted the Mauritanian Army to destroy 30 metric tons of obsolete stockpiled ammunition in Zouerate.  Some of the stored ammunition was in poor condition or had exceeded its safe storage life, so it was deemed essential to destroy to reduce the risk of an unplanned explosion in a populated area that could harm civilians and damage critical infrastructure.  This project is part of a larger U.S.-funded cooperative effort to help Mauritanian security services strengthen their capacity to manage ammunition, reduce their stockpiles of excess and obsolete ammunition, and build new storage capacity for serviceable ammunition.  

Zouerate is a city located in northern Mauritania with an approximate population of 44,650.  Most of Mauritania is in the Sahara Desert with remote areas that can be used for the illicit trafficking of small arms and light weapons (SA/LW) into the Sahel region and beyond.  U.S. investment in CWD has helped Mauritanian security forces properly manage weapons and ammunition in secure facilities to prevent them from falling into the wrong hands.  From 1999 to 2021, the United States invested more than $9.1 million in Mauritania to reduce excess SA/LW and conventional munitions stockpiles, (including man-portable air-defense systems or MANPADS), implement best practices for physical security and stockpile management at secure storage facilities, and train personnel in stockpile management. 

The United States is the world’s single largest financial supporter of global CWD efforts, which promote international peace and security by addressing humanitarian hazards from landmines and unexploded ordnance in post-conflict communities.  We also partner with nations worldwide to reduce the availability of and access to excess, poorly-secured, or otherwise at-risk SA/LW.

Since 1993, the United States has invested more than $4.2 billion for the safe clearance of landmines and explosive weapons of war as well as the securing and safe disposal of excess SA/LW, including at-risk MANPADS and munitions in more than 100 countries and territories.  In 2021, the United States funded CWD efforts in 62 countries with more than $265 million.

*About the Author: Emil Deon Nelson is an Assistant Program Manager for Africa in the Bureau of Political-Military Affairs, Office of Weapons Removal and Abatement at the U.S. Department of State.*

Tags

Bureau of Political-Military AffairsDipNoteMauritania

## Related Articles

-  											 													DipNote			
Read more
 

Back to Top