vania-janet/multiturn-rag-retrieval-data huggingface dataset:
Having a very high payout ratio is fine if there aren't any sensible investments available for the company, and citi already had their payout ratio somewhere in the 80% range.   The remaining excess is from them reducing the capital bed they were required to hold for the stress tests; cash that was essentially sitting around doing nothing.  [WSJ link](https://www.wsj.com/articles/BT-CO-20170628-711143) for u/LupusSuperius
Most items used in business have to be depreciated; you get to deduct a small fraction of the cost each year depending on the lifetime of the item as per IRS rules. That is, you cannot assume a one-year life for an electronic item  even if it will be obsolete in three months.  Some items can be expensed; you get to deduct the entire cost in the first year but then if you don't stay in business, e.g. you get a job paying wages and are no longer self-employed, you have to recapture this and pay taxes on the amount recaptured in the later year.  With respect to consumer-type electronics such as an iPad or laptop, it helps to have a separate  item for personal use that you can show in case of an audit.
I few years ago my company in the Washington DC area allowed employees to contribute their own pre-tax funds. The system at the time wasn't sophisticated enough to prevent what you are suggesting. The money each month was put on a special credit card that could only be used at certain types of locations. You could load it onto the Metro smart trip card, and use it for many months. Many people did this, even though the IRS says you shouldn't. But eventually the program for the federal employees changed, their employer provided funds were put directly onto their Smart Trip card. In fact there were two buckets on the card: one to pay for commuting, and the other to pay for parking. There was no way to transfer money between buckets. The first day of the new month all the excess funds were automatically removed from the card;and the new funds were put onto the card. If your employer has a similar program it may work the same way. HR will know.
According to PayPal, if he or she used a credit or debit card, then yes.
Tax is due in India as you offered services from India.  So whether the International Client pays via Credit Card, Bank Transfer, Paypal or any other means is not relevant. Even if the International Client pays you in a account outside India; it is still taxable in India.
TL;DR.: Because eventually the CC issuer will pass the fraud bill to the customer, in the form of increased fees and/or taxes. Even with no liability in the case of fraud, the customer should put effort into security measures with their card. The expense from fraud may be the sole burden of the credit issuer / bank as per Ben Miller's answer, but this expense will someday find its way into the customer's pockets: Disclosure, i work at a bank. A banks' best ability probably is risk management. The ones that were bad at this probably went under in the last four decades. With regulations such as SOx, Basilea, and others, it is impossible for a bank to neglect risk management. Every expense, including operational losses, a bank incurs will reflect in increased fees / interest rates for the customers. So in the case of a sharp raise of credit card fraud, the banks will soon take measures to reduce these losses. That may mean canceling the cards of high-risk groups of customers, increasing fees or interest. A particular customer that is often the target of fraud (way more than the average for that customer's demographic) will probably see his card not renewed or even cancelled, or his limits decreased and/or rates/fees going up.
Personally, I think it's a bad practice, because ultimately using cards for such minuscule transactions raises costs for everyone, especially at merchants whose average transaction is small. How does carrying cash improve your personal security? If someone is going to mug you, they do not know in advance whether you have money or not.
&gt; Word to the wise, don't take on debt to basically launch your business.   Can confirm. Was bankruptcy attorney for small business in Ch 11, and have heard recordings of some of its lenders (a family, actually) making not-so-subtle threats on the lives/safety of some of the company's principals. And the background of these guys told me they weren't bluffing.   Just because some prospective lenders appear legit and even own sizable companies, it doesn't mean they're not willing to take less-than-legal routes to collect.
Businesses from food to retail, all assume the risk of spoilage, theft, or any form of lost assets. It's just business. With that said, I'm sure your mom didn't imagine too many ways she could've lost out when opening her nailshop. I'm unsure what the policy is that you're looking for, but my best advice to you would be to cut your losses and learn from this.  Hopefully you and your mother can be sure to check or figure out a system to ensure customers don't lie about their payments. Good luck
"I work with a lot of C-suite executives from medium sized companies to large $4billion+ sized companies.  I cannot imagine a single one of them ""opening mail"".  Many that I know have an assistant go through their mail, toss or re-route anything that doesn't need the executives attention and then they create a bullet-point summary email that addresses anything the executive needs to know or take action on.  Same goes for most executives I know with regards to their email.  Many of them have a ""public"" email that is filtered by their assistant and a ""direct"" email that is used for internal use that goes direct to their phone/laptop."
I'd say the point 5 touched on a subject that was quite relevant.      Large corporations used to kick off massive ERP implementations every 5 or so years.   Huge beasts like SAP, EBS, Seibel, etc... required a massive team of resources to implement.   The consulting organisation needed to provide everything from executive managers and PMO offices to infrastructure engineers. Small consulting firms simply could not play in that market.   Those massive on premise systems are dead.   Companies are only buying SaaS and PaaS solutions with open APIs that can be implemented in much smaller bites and in a modular rollout.   Niche firms are very well suited to this changing systems market.      I wouldn't say the big firms are dead but I would expect their revenues and market share to fall.
Any business that can't generate enough cashflow to pay their employees a living wage is a shity business. Unemployment is down and  minimum wage has gone up and yet there is still a record number of job openings. This disproves your bullshit.  People are not products.
"Yeah, that's pretty much what I read. ""Bloomberg said..."" oh, okay, it must be the EXACT OPPOSITE of what he said. Pretty much.  I can see a need for visas in a few cases. Namely, positions in which the pool is so small that there are not 600 openings in the entire country, LET ALONE 6,000 at one company. I'm talking positions so exclusive that you can list all the candidates in the world in what would pass for an anemic travel brochure at first glance.  Most of these are just companies saying ""We don't want to pay market price for employees, so we'd rather import."" Well, tough shit."
Often the main concern with PhDs in business is taking too long to get results. So if they give you an opening you could talk about what you know of their strategy and  like to get practical results quickly, unlike academia.
Part of the TJ's business model though is that they are almost always placed near a larger full service store.  The idea being, you shop at JT's first to save money, and they only sell items with a higher margin which accounts for the higher wages they can pay.  Then, if you still need a specialty item, you run next door.  The less choice option doesn't work as well in isolation, so saying everyone should sell less items and only high margin items so they can pay more would leave us with stores like Trader Joe's, with the same selection as Trader Joe's.  And a relatively undeserved market.  Once everyone has the same selection again, they have to start competing on price which means someone will open a TJ, pay their people shit and sell the same things as them.
For a small starting plumbing company 1500 is more than enough.  He isnt after anything extremely flashy and doesnt need any extra features really.  Pictures, services, small blog.  Just needs to be clean and easy to follow.  Start small and expand on it later depending on how the company does is usually the best bet.
My grandfather owned a small business, and I asked him that very question.  His answer was that year-end closeout is very time-consuming, both before and after  EOY (end of year), and that they didn't want to do all that around Christmas and New Year.
This is just another business opening in the area, that's all.  The city isn't giving money to the developers, and the course already has been chosen for 2 senior PGA tournaments.  The only point of contention is the city leasing a few acres to the golf course for a century, which is understandably annoying, no question.
Hard work, intelligent purchases, learning to cook and be handy, not giving to every impulse, not gambling, not blowing your money on drugs and alcohol, putting the effort into a small business, and working long hours are also luck, apparently. TIL
"I'm a bot, *bleep*, *bloop*. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit:  - [/r/libertarian] [Senator Richard Blumenthal believes that american small business owners are ""outliers"" who should be ""prosecuted""](https://np.reddit.com/r/Libertarian/comments/72732b/senator_richard_blumenthal_believes_that_american/)  [](#footer)*^(If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads.) ^\([Info](/r/TotesMessenger) ^/ ^[Contact](/message/compose?to=/r/TotesMessenger))*  [](#bot)"
I'm a big fan of indie movie theaters. But I'm going to have to advise you to come up with another idea if you want a for profit business. Many independent theaters are non-profits, others are vanity investments by wealthy owners who don't mind losing money. The rest just go under. Also, if you don't have any industry knowledge you will never make it to opening night.
Reach out to some local small business networks and invite them to have meetings in her shop.  Same for local book clubs, philosophy discussion gropus, etc.  Hit up meetup.com and find groups that would enjoy the space, contact the organizer and get them in.
Indeed, perhaps even businesses that cater to different markets within the same industry could be affected differently. Restaurants in particular, where a smaller cafe or cheap sandwich shop might see more business as a result of more money in people's pockets, but a higher end sit down restaurant might only experience the wage increase without any additional incoming revenue.
One can pay via Indian Credit Card. The card company will convert the USD and charge you in Rupees.  And when there are enough Indian websites that do domain name registering, any specific reason you are looking at eurodns.
"Hopefully the changes truly reflect one's ability to pay debit and not a way to suddenly create millions of new ""credit-worthy"" borrowers and some debt bubble pops 6 years down the road. Businesses will love people using debt to buy stuff for that sweet revenue."
"Here's another rational reason: Discount. This typically works only in smaller stores, where you're talking directly to the owners, but it is sometimes possible to negotiate a few percent off the price when paying by check, since otherwise they'd have to give a few percent to the credit card company. (Occasionally the sales reps at larger stores have the authority to cut this deal, but it's far less common.) Not worth worrying about on small items, but if you're making a large purchase (a bedroom suite, for example) it can pay for lunch. And sometimes the store's willing to give you more discount than that, simply because with checks they don't have to worry about chargebacks or some of the other weirdnesses that can occur in credit card processing. Another reason: Nobody's very likely to steal you check number and try to write themselves a second check or otherwise use it without authorization. It's just too easy to steal credit card info these days to make printing checks worth the effort. But, in the end, the real answer is that there's no rational reason not to use checks. So it takes you a few seconds more to complete the transaction. What were you going to do with those seconds that makes them valuable? Especially if they're seconds that the store is spending bagging your purchase, so there's no lost time... and the effort really isn't all that different from signing the credit card authorization. Quoting Dean Inge: ""There are two kinds of fool. One says 'this is old, and therefore good.' The other says 'this is new, and therefore better.'"""
"File a John Doe lawsuit, ""plaintiff to be determined"", and then subpoena the relevant information from Mastercard. John Doe doesn't countersue, so you're pretty safe doing this. But it probably won't work. Mastercard would quash your subpoena. They will claim that you lack standing to sue anyone because you did not take a loss (which is a fair point). They are after the people doing the hacking, and the security gaps which make the hacking possible. And how those gaps arise among businesses just trying to do their best. It's a hard problem. And I've done the abuse wars professionally. OpSec is a big deal. You simply cannot reveal your methods or even much of your findings, because that will expose too much of your detection method. The ugly fact is, the bad guys are not that far from winning, and catching them depends on them unwisely using the same known techniques over and over. When you get a truly novel technique, it costs a fortune in engineering time to unravel what they did and build defenses against it. If maybe 1% of attacks are this, it is manageable, but if it were 10%, you simply cannot staff an enforcement arm big enough - the trained staff don't exist to hire (unless you steal them from Visa, Amex, etc.) So as much as you'd like to tell the public, believe me, I'd like to get some credit for what I've done -- they just can't say much or they educate the bad guys, and then have a much tougher problem later. Sorry! I know how frustrating it is! The credit card companies hammered out PCI-DSS (Payment Card Industry Data Security Standards). This is a basic set of security rules and practices which should make hacking unlikely. Compliance is achievable (not easy), and if you do it, you're off the hook. That is one way Amy can be entirely not at fault. Example deleted for length, but as a small business, you just can't be a PCI security expert. You rely on the commitments of others to do a good job, like your bank and merchant account salesman.
Many businesses that accept regular VISA credit cards will not accept VISA purchase cards intended for corporate/gov purchasing departments and able to furnish a more detailed audit trail (purchase order #, lot #, etc.) than a regular credit card.  Other merchants take ONLY VISA purchase cards.
I have heard it recommended on the money radio shows to get a little walking around money in the local currency at your local bank, but look for a credit card that offers low or no fees for international usage.  The credit card company will do all the monetary conversions for you for a smaller fee.
Typically, businesses always charge their 'home' currency, so if the shop is in Canada, you will pay Canadian Dollars. Normally you don't have any choices either. Your credit card company will convert it to your currency, using the current international currency exchange rate (pretty good), plus a potential fee between 0 and 5% - depending on your credit card (not so good). If it is a significant amount, or you plan to do that more than once, and if you have multiple credit cards, check first to see which one has the lowest international fee; 0% is not uncommon, but neither is 3 or 4%. If it's a 10$ thingy, it's probably not worth the time; but 4% of 1000 is already 40$... As of right now, the currency exchange rate is 1.33, so you would pay ~75 USD; plus the potential fee, 0$ - 4$. Understand that this exchange rate is floating continuously; it probably won't change much, but it will change.
Oh look YET ANOTHER POST ABOUT THIS.  There have been probably around a half dozen posts about this start up that I have seen and I don't see everything that gets posted on Reddit.  This particular article is about a month old and has been submitted [eight other times](http://www.reddit.com/submit?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.businessinsider.com%2Fthis-28-year-old-is-making-sure-credit-cards-wont-exist-in-the-next-few-years-2011-11).  There are numerous other sources that have been linked too.  This isn't going to kill credit cards.  It isn't moving $350 million it is projected to reach that point.  The amount of posts about Dwolla is at the level of spam.
Why don't you just put your down payment on one of your credit cards? (Note: I'm not actually suggesting that you do this. Please read on.) There are a few reasons why you wouldn't (or couldn't) do this: The interest rates on the cards you have is very high.  You don't have enough of a credit limit on any one of your cards for the down payment.  These two reasons highlight the answer to your question.  Credit card companies charge very high interest rates. These high rates allow them to make money even when some of their customers default. They know that not everyone will pay them back, so they make sure to make a hefty profit on those who do.  Secondly, credit card limits are often much lower than the amounts of car and home loans. This limits the risk to the credit card company. Sure, you have $100,000 in total credit limit, but this is split among nine different companies.  When a bank offers a traditional loan for a large sum of money at relatively low interest, they need to be able to limit their risk somehow. They do this by ensuring that their customers actually have the ability to pay them back.
Corey Rockafeler is president of Vaalk Consulting Group. He is also small business financing expert and part of leadership team at Bell Funding Solutions in New York City. Some of the city’s top businesses regard him as their first choice when it comes to securing growth and expansion capital. He offers complete financing solutions for growing business. His custom solutions include everything from multi-year terms, lines of credit, asset and collateral based loans, factoring and receivable financing to SBA and SBA bridge loans. When asked about his key to success, Corey stated, “It’s all about passion
This doesn't make any sense. For the people who ask you this, suggest that they borrow the money to invest with you. They can use their bitcoins as collateral for the loan. That way, they get the same benefit and your company doesn't go out of business if the price of bitcoin drops, even temporarily, because the loan becomes unsecured. If they want to try to use a volatile asset as collateral and have to figure out how to cover when the price drops temporarily, great. But why should they put that risk on your other investors who may not be so crazy? Also, this obviously won't meet the investor's concerns anyway. Say the price of bitcoin goes up but you lose 10% of the money you borrowed. Clearly, your investors can't have an interest that worth as much as they would have if they held bitcoin since you lost 10%.
You're really confused.  You need to go back to finance 101 about the concept of corporation and shareholders  This is too much to take apart (i.e.: contribution is not a loan, and can't be called.  Shareholders are not partners......).  Sorry bro, not trying to burst your bubble, but any academic business finance 101 book or OpenCourseWare will cover this and more.
but I can't help but feel that these low rates are somehow a gimmick   to trick people into taking out loans Let me help you: it's not a feeling. That's exactly what it is. Since the economy is down, people don't want to jeopardize what they have, and keep the cash in their wallets. But, while keeping the money safe in the pocket, it makes the economy even worse. So in order to make people spend some money, the rates go down so that the cost of money is lower. It also means that the inflation will be on the rise, which is again a reason not to keep money uninvested. So yes, the rates are now very low, and the housing market is a buyers' market, so it does make sense to take out a loan at this time (provided of course that you can actually repay it over time, and don't take loans you can't handle). Of course, you shouldn't be taking loans just because the rates are low. But if you were already planning on purchasing a house - now would be a good time to go on with that.
Really no different than the subprime mortgage crisis in a way, you have people who have been given lines of credit that they can just barely afford when things are going well, and then now as soon as business takes a hit for the first time they're up shit creek.  I feel a bit sorry for some of the people caught up in this, I understand that some of these immigrants don't neccesarily have the means to do anything else, and many of them I'm sure don't have the intelligence/education to understand the matter fully (i.e. the 76 year old guy who didn't sell his medallion, dumb move). But at the end of the day you did it to yourself, nobody in this country is forced to take loans at gunpoint.
1.) The majority of credit and loans do not go to publicly traded companies.   2.) Companies can and do trade commodities with paper.   3.) Can't keep up with all the crazy you are spouting.   Smart people lose their shirt in commodities all the time, it's not a fun place to play. If you really believe the majority of publicly traded companies are going to lose their value, then invest in them when they do. Money always has to go somewhere. Insurance, pensions, governments, businesses, don't like to just have cash sit there because nothing happens (you can point to Apple, etc but they're making acquisitions) anyways, they need to buy and sell and will always have to do it.   My last piece of advice, look up the Hunt brothers.
&gt;That doesn't exist any more.  This is false.  The GSE Sallie Mae buys student loans from other banks, meaning the banks offload their risk to Sallie Mae.  If Fannie/Freddie has taught us anything, is that the government will [come to the rescue](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_takeover_of_Fannie_Mae_and_Freddie_Mac) if things go south.  In a way, the bailouts have shown that the government is backing *all* loans.  Second, students cannot discharge their student loans through bankruptcy, as easily as other loans.  As long as this is true the risk is reduced for the creditors.  If that were allowed, and students began defaulting on their loans (at the expense of their credit), then the assets tied to those loans become worthless, and the banks holding the loans go under, which will probably prompt some massive government/Fed bailout.  &gt;Student homes are not like home loans  Every bubble is different, but they all end the same way.  Cheap credit created by the government results in malinvestments and loans that cannot be paid back.  The bubble will pop and the lenders will not get paid back.  See [Austrian Business Cycle Theory](http://www.slideshare.net/ManAgainstTheState/austrian-business-cycle-theory)
I heard somewhere that the average cycle for people who take out payday loans is 8 loans. Like they have to keep taking out loans to pay for the last one, and it goes around 8 times before you can get out of it. Granted that's dependent on how much you take out. I'm just wary of them now.