Call to reaction Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Call to reaction - Essay Example Some of the water from fracking always resurface and should be treated. Fracking affects underground water. The water becomes unfit for drinking due to large amounts of methane dissolved. People who live near the fracking areas are at greater risks. Continuation of the fracking process may lead to higher rates of water pollution in future. Some of the chemicals resulting from the process are carcinogenic and are most likely the cases of cancers may increase in the near future. Carcinogens released from the fracking process may also evaporate and cause air pollution. Pollution in the air may spread to other areas (Spellman 78). Based on the facts gathered about pollution regarding fracking, the cases of cancer will increase. Climate change may also occur as a result of the release of methane gas to the environment. Fracking produces mainly natural gas and oil. It is more expensive to use oil in production of electricity. Natural gas can not be used to fuel cars. It is therefore not ne cessary to boost the production of oil and gas from hydraulic fragmentation (Spellman et al 122). Several measures can be taken to limit the effects of fracking. Wastewater from the fracking process must be properly disposed. The disposal process should also include storm water and other wastes emanating from hydraulic fracturing processes. The waters should not be released to the environment before treatment. Water-treatment technology is recommended as it limits the pollution effects of the fracking process. The major objecting is to carry out the process of fracking in an environment friendly manner (Graves 321). Improved water treating method makes it possible to teat the wastewaters at the fracking sites. This saves the costs involved in transport of the water to disposal wells or water treatment facilities located. During fracking process, large amount of water under high pressure is pumped underground to release oil and gas trapped. Water that flows back to the ground is load ed with remnants of toxic chemicals used to fasten the fracking process and those released from the cracked rocks. This water is often recycled in the fracking process. Eventually, the water can not be recycled anymore. It is therefore necessary to transport the water to treatment plants usually located away from the fracking sites. This is expensive and the spills may cause pollution. At times, the water is injected deep into the ground. The underground injection causes earthquakes in the area. The proposed new technology eliminates the need to transport the water to treatment plants away from the fracking site. The technology works on the principle of desalinization using and low pressures to separate water and salts in the wastewater. The water comes out as vapour leaving behind salts. Waterless fracking technology is used as an alternative process to extract oil and gas trapped in rocks. The method uses a thick gel consisting of propane into the ground. The gel extracted from li quefied propane gas (LPG) turns into vapour while still underground then returns to the ground in a recoverable form. The gel does carry with it the toxic chemicals used in the fracturing process or those released from the cracked rocks. The waterless fracking technology is expensive but can be used as an alternative to the ordinary fracking process due to less impact it has on the environment. The information about the toxic chemicals that have been established to be preset in the cracking process is always hidden from the

Tax avoidance,tax evasion,tax mitigiation Essay

Tax avoidance,tax evasion,tax mitigiation - Essay Example Tax avoidance and Tax evasion are two of the most common terms and concepts used and utilized by the taxpayers in escaping from payment of taxes. Learning and understanding these terms will help the taxpayers avoid criminal and civil liabilities. Tax avoidance is a means to escape from taxation, which is allowed and sanctioned by law. A taxpayer committing this will not be legally held civilly or criminally liable to the government provided it is used in good faith and within the process allowed by law, otherwise the taxpayer will be committing tax evasion which is a crime. The utilization of the means and methods sanctioned by law would enable the taxpayer reduce the amount due to be taxed. Example of tax avoidance is when the taxpayer structures his/her any legitimate transaction to save tax and such transaction is what would really appear in form. And this transaction if the taxpayer is the vendee or payee could declare this as deduction. Tax Evasion on the other hand, is reductio n or elimination of tax due by means outside the law. It is illegally committed and punishable by law. A corporation, individual and other entity may resort to means in order to avoid paying the taxes. And the means employed is always dishonest like declaring less or no income, less profits or no gains than the taxpayer actually earned or it could be committed by inflating deductions. For example, a corporation will evade tax by declaring charitable contributions of $ 2.5 million as deduction although what was actually contributed is $.5 million only. The law does not allow this and anyone caught doing this will be held criminally and civilly liable. The difference between tax avoidance and tax evasion is on the tax itself. In tax avoidance, the taxpayer is legally avoiding the payment of any tax liability that is not in existence at the time. Meaning to say, there is no tax due at the moment of transaction and the taxpayer utilized method within the law so that no tax liability wou ld be incurred later or if there is, it would be less. In tax avoidance, there is already a tax due to be paid and the taxpayer resort to illegal means so that it will not be able to pay the owed tax. This type entails concealment or misrepresentation of earnings that are taxable immediately.. Tax mitigation is also similar to tax avoidance. Both resort to means not prohibited by law. Sometimes, these two concepts are used interchangeably. Tax mitigation is known as tax planning to mitigate or reduce tax liability. It is a conduct made to reduce tax liability without conducting tax avoidance or which is contrary to the intention of the Parliament. There are conducts which are allowed for tax mitigation and which are not in the case of tax avoidance. It is important in distinguishing one from the other, especially the two concepts which are tax avoidance and tax evasion because it will help the taxpayer in understanding the consequences of each conduct to reduce tax liability. Since tax avoidance is a criminal offense punishable by law, knowing the distinction would save one from committing this criminal offense while saving money from taxes without breaking the law. It will help taxpayers to arrange their affairs and keep taxes as low as possible. The tax code is confusing not only for average people but also for those knowledgeable professionals. Hence, it is important to define these two concepts so as not to fall into a criminally punishable offense. The Ramsay Principle: My understanding This principle emanated for two cases : W. T. Ramsay Ltd. v. Inland Revenue Commissioners, Eilbeck (Inspector of Taxes) v. Rawling, [1982] A.C. 300 and IRC v. Burmah Oil Co. Ltd., [1982] S.T.C. 30, H.L.(Sc.)decided by the House of Lords in connection with tax payment and schemes resorted to avoid it. In this case, the company in order to lessen the amount of taxes for the transaction of transfer of assets and payment resorted to scheme by drafting sets of documents,