Delinquently

It's a first lady faux pas -- wearing expensive, high-fashion French designer sneakers to a food bank.

Michelle Obama wore the sneakers, made by Lanvin, while helping feed the poor at a Washington food bank on Wednesday. The pricetag on the footwear? A cool $540.

Keds, they're not.

The sneakers, which come in denim and satin, are a favorite of comic Ellen DeGeneres and rapper Kanye West -- and they're "certainly not a reflection of the poor economy," said FOX News' Noelle Watters, host of iMag Style.

"She paired the kicks with a much more reasonably priced cardigan from J. Crew similar to the one she's worn in the past," Watters said. "And quite honestly, the usually well-styled Michelle didn't match. While her over-priced designer sneaks were gray and pink, her sweater was a gold argyle style. A definite fashion faux pas."

According to the New York Daily News, the first lady of style likely got her sneakers through Ikram, the Chicago retailer that usually outfits her.

Obama's style helped catapult her into the 93rd spot of Maxim's "eyeball-searing, fantasy-fulfilling, brain-exploding" Hot 100 list, which was announced Friday.

The first lady's sense of fashion has received considerable media attention. During her trip to Europe last month to accompany President Obama to the G20 summit, her fashion choices and protocol-breaking touch of the Queen of England nearly received as much ink as the summit itself.

Dammit, Janet: The Supreme Court on Monday ordered the Third Circuit to re-examine its ruling in favor of CBS Corp. over Janet Jackson’s “wardrobe malfunction.” The Court ordered the appellate court to consider reinstating the $550,000 fine that the FCC imposed on CBS over Jackson’s breast-baring performance at the 2004 Super Bowl. Click here for the AP story; here for Scotusblog’s roundup of this morning’s activity.

In a statement, CBS stated: “We are confident that in reviewing the case the Third Circuit will again recognize that the Super Bowl incident, while inappropriate and regrettable, was not and could not have been anticipated by CBS. This remains an important issue for the entire broadcasting industry because it recognizes that there are rare instances, particularly during live programming, when despite best efforts it may not be possible to block unfortunate fleeting material.”

Los Angeles police believe a 72-year-old sex offender named John Floyd Thomas Jr. may be one of the most prolific serial killers in California history. His history of rape and murder may go back to the late 1950s. The following is from the Los Angeles Times:

[Authorities] say they have linked John Floyd Thomas Jr., a 72-year-old state insurance claims adjuster who twice has been convicted of sexual assault, to five of the slayings. Detectives also describe him as a suspect in up to 25 more based on the circumstances of those crimes.white seniors, in neighborhoods from Hollywood in the north to Inglewood in the south

"When all is said and done, Mr. Thomas stands to be Los Angeles' most prolific serial killer," said LAPD Robbery-Homicide Cold Case Det. Richard Bengston.

I've been slow to criticize behavioral analysis as it is applied to serial criminals. It has worked in the past, to some degree. However, Thomas's arrest may be yet another signal that it's time to re-think the mythologized art of criminal profiling. Most of his victims were, according to the LAT, "white seniors, in neighborhoods from Hollywood in the north to Inglewood in the south."

For me, that pretty much breaks it - I can't recall off the top of my head how many other serial killers in recent years who have crossed racial lines, but there have been enough of them to make me believe an old saw about serial killers - that they tend to stay intraracial - is just plain wrong. One example - Larry Bright. This Peoria, IL serial killer was a white man who targeted black women. He killed 8 women before he was arrested.

And with John Thomas, profiling didn't even enter the picture, anyway - DNA put him back behind bars. A profiler, however, would have probably told you off the cuff that based on victimology, Thomas was white.

Anyway - John Thomas is behind bars and at this point, any sentence he receives if he's convicted of the murders with which he's been charged will be a life sentence. Hopefully, if behavioral analysis is to evolve as the hybrid art/science it is said to be, he will at least let some profilers talk to him, get inside his head, find out how he managed to get away with his crimes for so long - even though he was a known sexual predator.

The United States and its allies must make sacrifices to close the Guantanamo Bay detention center, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said Wednesday in a high-profile appeal for Europe's help.

Holder spoke to the American Academy in Berlin, not long after telling reporters that the United States had approved the release of about 30 Guantanamo detainees.

[..]

"The United States is ready to do its part, and we hope that Europe will join us — not out of a sense of responsibility, but from a commitment to work with one of its oldest allies to confront one of the world's most pressing challenges," he said.

There are currently 241 inmates at the facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and Holder spent the past several days privately asking European leaders in London, Prague and Berlin for help relocating detainees the United States wants to set free.

[...]

At another point, a questioner earnestly asked of those Guantanamo detainees who are believed to be innocent could be put in a hotel somewhere.

"Hotels might be a possibility, it depends on where the hotel is," joked Holder.

Before the speech, Holder met with reporters, saying the United States has made decisions on a group of about 30 detainees, but has not yet decided where it wants to send them.

He said the United States is weeks away from asking certain countries to take detainees.

"We have about 30 or so where we've made the determination that they can be released. So we will, I think, relatively soon, be reaching out to specific countries with specific detainees and ask whether or not there might be a basis for the moving of those people from Guantanamo to those countries," Holder said.

MDR PENALTIES - LATE FILING AND LATE PAYMENT

Taxpayers who do not timely file their returns or timely pay their obligations will be subject to penalties not only at the federal level with the IRS, but also at the state level with the Minnesota Department of Revenue (state).

The state assesses different penalties for taxpayers who are individuals versus businesses. The penalties vary in both severity and in the dates on which returns or payments are due.

Individuals

The penalty for an individual filing a return late is 5% of the unpaid tax. The taxpayer is also subject to an additional delinquency penalty. The delinquency penalty is 5% of the unpaid tax and is assessed if the taxpayer provides no response within thirty days of the state’s demand for an unfiled return. This puts a premium on communicating with the state.

The penalty for paying the tax late is 4% of the unpaid tax. If the taxes are not paid within 180 days from the due date, then the state can assess an additional 5% of the unpaid tax. When the two penalties run together, the individual taxpayer is subject to a total assessment of 19% of the unpaid tax. These are stiff penalties. Although, from a practical standpoint, even though the actual deadline for filing and paying your taxes is April 15, the state will not assess penalties until after October 15. Essentially, this allows the taxpayer a penalty-free grace period to file their return and pay their tax obligation.

Businesses

The penalty for a business filing a late corporate franchise, mining, fiduciary, estate, partnership, or S corporation tax return is 5% of the unpaid tax. The business is also subject to the delinquency penalty of 5% of the unpaid tax. However, the taxpayers filing fiduciary, estate, partnership, or S corporation tax returns receive an automatic six month extension to file their returns and avoid the late-filing penalties. The penalty for a business paying the tax late is 6% of the unpaid tax. If the business does not pay the taxes when it files its return, the state will assess an additional penalty of 5% of the unpaid tax. Whether intentionally or not, the state is making it advantageous for a business to temporarily refrain from filing its return until the business can remit full payment with its delinquently filed return.

Sales, withholding, and MinnesotaCare taxes have different, and often times more severe, penalties for late filing and late payment. The penalty for filing a return late is 5% of the unpaid tax with the delinquency penalty of 5% of the unpaid tax. The penalty for late payment is assessed thirty days after the due date of the payment and is 5% of the unpaid tax. The state can assess this 5% penalty for every thirty-day period that the tax remains unpaid, up to 15% of the unpaid tax. Therefore, making appropriate estimated payments allows businesses with these obligations to avoid being subject to penalty. http://www.irs.gov.

Penalty Abatement

The state, like the IRS, will abate penalties when the taxpayer can demonstrate that he or she had reasonable cause for failing to timely file the return or pay the obligation. Reasonable cause exists when the taxpayer can show that the circumstances that caused the untimely performance were beyond the taxpayer’s control. Some examples of reasonable cause are death or serious illness of the taxpayer or an immediate family member, natural disasters, theft or other criminal activity, or electronic deposit errors on the part of a bank. This is not an exhaustive list. The most important thing to remember when trying to prove reasonable cause is that the circumstances must show that the events were out of the taxpayer’s control.

One major difference between the state and the IRS is that if it is the taxpayer’s first time failing to timely perform, then the state will presume the taxpayer had reasonable cause based upon the taxpayer’s previous good history. However, this presumption can be overcome. If the state believes it would be inequitable to apply this presumption, then the state will not abate the penalties.

« Older Entries