Suchergebnisse

Intro -- Contents -- Introduction -- 1. Rewriting the Past in Stone -- 2. Inventing Confederates -- 3. The Loyal Deserters -- 4. Playing the Faithful Slave -- 5. The Soldiers Who Weren't -- Epilogue -- Acknowledgments -- Notes -- Selected Bibliography -- Index.

Recently, a significant debate over the taxation of so-called "carried interest "in private equity funds has received much attention from scholars, the government, commentators, and the media. This debate has focused on whether private equity fund managers who earn a percentage of the returns generated by the fund should be entitled to preferential "capital gain" treatment on such returns. The primary concern in this debate revolves around whether managers are effectively being compensated for services normally taxed at higher rates while receiving the benefit of preferential rates reserved for capital gains. Proponents of reform point to the services being performed by the managers, while proponents of the current system point to the investment exposure to the underlying assets of the fund. In reality, however, both sides are partially correct: carried interest is "blended" in that it represents both a return to services and a return on capital. Since carried interest is blended in this manner, an analogy to either proves less than satisfying. The issue of blended labor/investment returns is not new to the tax laws, however. Historically, one way the law has attempted to address the issue was not by deconstructing such returns into constituent parts, but instead by imposing a "holding period" requirement. Under this approach, not all capital investments are created equal; rather, only capital investments held for an arbitrary period of time while bearing the risk of loss qualify for preferential rates. The current debate over the taxation of carried interest in private equity has failed to incorporate this element into the analysis, i.e., the role that holding period plays in denying preferential rates to blended labor/investment returns, such as carried interest. This Article will do so, concluding that, to the extent any reform of the taxation of carried interest within the existing framework of the income tax is appropriate, a better approach may be through the application of the holding period rules rather ...

In dem Aufsatz werden grundsätzliche Fragen der allgemeinen Sozialpolitik abgehandelt. Dabei werden zunächst die Motive und Ziele für sozialpolitisches Handeln im einzelnen dargelegt. Daran anschließend werden die Funktionen geknüpft, die Sozialpolitik haben kann, und zwar sowohl die beabsichtigten als auch die unbeabsichtigten. Dabei wird u. a. eingegangen auf die Ausnutzungsfunktion und die Lückenbüßerfunktion der Sozialpolitik. Dargestellt werden auch die negativen Auswirkungen eines hohen Sozialschutzes. Darauf folgend werden die wichtigsten sozialphilosophischen Grundsätze angesprochen, die auf eine gesellschafts- und individuenadäquate Aufgaben- und Verantwortungszuweisung zielen. Dabei wird auch untersucht, in welchem Umfang sie die politisch wirksamen Auffassungen zur Sozialpolitik beherrschen. Abschließend wird auf die Sozialpolitik in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland nach 1945 eingegangen. Dieser Teil enthält u. a. eine Auflistung der wichtigsten sozialpolitischen Gesetze der Nachkriegszeit. (GF)