BY DOUG McKENZIEStaff Writer BY DOUG McKENZIE Staff Writer The Matawan Huskies cleared their first major hurdle of the season on Saturday, knocking off Wall Township in a game that was as good as advertised. When Wall’s Rob Brewer lined up for a potential game-winning 42-yard field goal on the final play, Matawan players lined the sidelines, wondering what they had to do to knock off the Crimson Knights. As it turned out, they had already done enough. The field goal landed about 4 yards shy of the goal post, and the No. 2 Huskies had topped the No. 7 Crimson Knights, 11-9, in a critical, early-season contest that give them the early edge in the Liberty Division. Matawan forged ahead 9-7 with an impressive 76-yard, eight-play drive that was capped when Jeremy Fountain found the end zone from 18 yards out in the third quarter. The Huskies later padded the lead when a high snap on a Wall punt attempt resulted in a safety. From there, Matawan’s defense took over and shut down Wall’s final drive attempt with a pair of big stops deep in their own territory, setting up the long field goal attempt as time expired. It was an enormous win for a Matawan team that is entertaining visions of a championship season. Next up is St. John Vianney at 7 p.m. tomorrow at home in Holmdel. The Lancers are coming off a 12-0 win over Monsignor Donovan, Toms River, which was head coach John Amabile’s first win. The Vianney defense stole the show, holding Mon Don to just 135 total yards of offense. The SJV offense got a pair of early touchdowns to hammer down the win. They’ll need a nearly perfect effort tomorrow if they are to surprise the Huskies. The Middletown South Eagles continued to impress, dominating the Neptune Scarlet Fliers to the tune of a 41-14 win. Sophomore Knowshon Moreno was the story once again, scoring four touchdowns (four rushing and one on a 58-yard punt return). His running paced the Eagles en route to a 28-0 halftime lead. Moreno finished with 209 rushing yards on the day while the Eagle defense held Neptune to just nine rushing yards in the first half to set the tone for the day. Next up for South is the 2-0 Long Branch Green Wave in a key early-season Federal Division matchup. Game time is 7 p.m. tomorrow in Middletown.The Raritan Rockets won a thriller over an upstart RBC team, 14-13, Friday night behind the inspired running of sophomore Matt Fitzpatrick. The 5-11, 180-pound sophomore ran for 291 yards on 31 carries en route to the Rockets’ two touchdowns to lead his team to a crucial Liberty Division win. Next up for Raritan is Manasquan, a traditionally strong team that is looking to bounce back from a pair of poor showings in the first two weeks of the season. Game time is 7 p.m. tomorrow in Manasquan. Very little went right for the Middletown North Lions on Saturday as they lost their home opener to Brick Township 28-0. Brick used a punishing ground attack to control the Lions, and even their mark at 1-1. Tomorrow the Lions look to get back on track when they head to Howell for a 7 p.m. start. Holmdel struggled against Manchester, falling 34-19. They will look to get their first win on Friday against winless Monmouth Regional High School, West Long Branch. Game time is 2 p.m. The Mater Dei Seraphs used their bye week to lick their wounds from an opening-day loss to Freehold, and will look to get win No. 1 tomorrow when they travel to Colts Neck for a 1 p.m. start. The Keyport Red Raiders will also be back in action as they take on a Shore Regional team looking to rebound from a tough loss to Rumson-Fair Haven. Game time is 7 p.m. tomorrow in West Long Branch.
Dear Editor,In a letter to the Editor on May 15, 2017, I expressed serious concerns following (then) Minister of Natural Resources Honourable Raphael Trotman’s statement on the Production Sharing Agreement with ExxonMobil whereby it was noted that “ExxonMobil is allowed to recover expenditure as part of the contract, this is easily understood. What is not clear is exactly what expenditure, is it the expenditure to the point of discovery? Do we have a figure of how much it cost ExxonMobil to discover the Liza field well and is that the amount to be recovered by ExxonMobil or is it that we will have to repay all of ExxonMobil’s subsequent costs as they continue to explore?”That was over two years ago, answers were never provided, for no doubt they were dismissed as ‘non-expert’. Sadly, the Government is now asking the International Monetary Fund the same questions. The concluding statement of the 2019 International Monetary Fund (IMF) Article IV Mission to Guyana states: “authorities have indicated their concerns that the absence of a ring-fencing arrangement in the Stabroek Production Sharing Agreement (PSA) could potentially affect the projected flow of Government oil revenues”.The harsh truth is that this omission from the PSA could not be made if the persons negotiating on the behalf of the Guyanese people applied logic, common sense, if you will, and genuine concern for the future wellbeing that oil revenues could provide. The adviser on petroleum to the President, Jan Mangal, now claims to have been absent from negotiations. No special knowledge of ‘oil and gas’ was required; just honest care, we may never know if the negotiations were so poorly done due to negligence, corruption, deficient logic or basic stupidity; what I do know, is that no Administration that cares so little for the future wellbeing of its people, should ever be elected again. The Guyanese people are not incapable of logical thought and we know the clichéd “fool me once” applies in spades.Respectfully,Robin Singh
0Shares0000LONDON, England, January 25 – Carlos Tevez’s long-running dispute with Manchester City has cost the striker £9.3 million ($14.5m) in wages, fines and lost bonuses, according to reports in several British media outlets on Wednesday.The Argentina striker has reportedly not been paid his estimated £200,000-a-week salary since the end of November and has been fined £1.2m for gross misconduct over his unauthorised exile in his homeland. Tevez has appealed against the fine. He is also believed to have forfeited £6m in loyalty bonuses over his repeated requests to leave the club.The 27-year-old has not played for City since apparently refusing to come on as a substitute during a Champions League game at Bayern Munich on September 27, which saw him fined two weeks’ wages for breach of contract.City are seeking to sell Tevez in the current transfer window, but mooted moves to AC Milan, Inter Milan and Paris Saint-Germain have failed to materialise.In a rare move, the club’s chairman, Khaldoon al-Mubarak, spoke out to criticise the conduct of Milan, who Tevez has identified as his preferred destination.“As things stand, AC Milan are not an option for Carlos,” Al-Mubarak told Abu Dhabi’s The National newspaper.“If they want to be a consideration in this transfer window, they would do better to stop congratulating one another and begin to look at how they would meet our terms.“Carlos remains a player with contractual obligations to Manchester City for the next two-and-a-half seasons.“Unless we receive an offer we deem appropriate, the terms of his contract will be enforced.“Inter Milan and Paris Saint-Germain approached discussions with us in good faith. It is always a positive experience to deal with people with a professional approach.”City are believed to be holding out for £25m plus add-ons for Tevez, who joined the club in 2009 after a two-year loan spell at city rivals Manchester United.His current contract is due to expire in June 2014.0Shares0000(Visited 1 times, 1 visits today)
Arsenal may be forced to do without centre-back Shkodran Mustafi for up to three weeks after he picked up an injury against Stoke.The Gunners beat the Potters 3-1 at the Emirates Stadium but the German international was forced from the field after just 25 minutes due to a hamstring issue.“It’s a bad one. The minimum is 21 days,” admitted Arsene Wenger when asked about an initial prognosis.If this is the case, he will miss matches with Everton, Manchester City and West Bromwich Albion. 1 Arsenal defender Shkodran Mustafi
“If they do that in every game they would probably win a lot more games.”Rodgers had no regrets about making seven changes to the side which started in the 1-0 win over Zenit St Petersburg on Thursday night.“Even if we had a full strength side it would have still been difficult,” he said.Wright, whose side finished the day one point behind eighth-placed Dundee, said: “We have had performances like that at other stadiums but not often enough.“We are still unbeaten after playing them twice here and that performance should give the confidence to kick on for the rest of the season.“We will not focus too much on the top six. We are looking to string some results together.“It has been a difficult season for us, it is a stronger league and we have not dealt with injuries as well as we did in previous seasons.” Celtic boss Brendan Rodgers claimed St Johnstone would “win a lot more games” if they performed consistently at the same level they produced at Parkhead on Sunday.The pair drew 0-0 in the Premiership clash – which followed a 1-1 draw at Celtic Park earlier in the season – as the visitors ended a poor run of league form.Tommy Wright’s side had won only one of their previous eight games since beating Rangers at Ibrox in December – against Albion Rovers in the Scottish Cup – before they arrived in Glasgow.Rodgers, who described the result as “fair”, said: “I think there is questions there for Tommy’s players. “Tommy’s a fantastic manager but I am sure he walks away happy with a point but probably really frustrated.“How can you win a game 3-1 at Ibrox in December 16, not win a game right the way through, apart from the Albion game then your next big result is away at Celtic?“So I think the question goes with the St Johnstone players.“Today you’ve seen them organised, committed, fighting, running – doing all of that.
Townsend’s men now face the gruelling prospect of facing both Russia and the Brave Blossoms just four days apart and must take at least nine points to have any chance of reaching the last eight.But while the majority of Townsend’s top stars have been wrapped up in cotton wool ahead of the do-or-die clash with the hosts this weekend, Barclay will be roughing it up against Russians at the Ecopa Stadium.It was a game he likely thought he would play no part in just three weeks ago but he is refusing to sulk and is ready to use the opportunity to prove he should still be one of the leaders in Townsend’s pack.He said: “The big game for me is Russia, I have no idea what the team will be for Japan. John Barclay found himself relegated to Scotland’s second-string after his Ireland horror show but hopes a stormer in Shizuoka could seal a return to Gregor Townsend’s top team for Sunday’s crucial World Cup showdown with Japan.The Edinburgh flanker started the tournament as the Dark Blues’ first choice openside.But he paid for a sloppy display in Scotland’s dismal Pool A opener against the Irish with his place as he, and Ryan Wilson, were dropped for the clash with Samoa.With Hamish Watson also ruled out injured, that opened the door for Jamie Ritchie, Magnus Bradbury and Blade Thomson to form a new-look back three against the Pacific Islanders and they took their chance with a display brimming with energy during the 34-0 drubbing. “I guess the reality is that the guys who are playing against Russia will be on the outskirts for the next game.“It doesn’t take much to work out. But, equally, for the guys who are playing against Russia there is huge motivation to get involved for that Japan match.“The reality is there will need to be a big performance and I need to prove I deserve to be involved against Japan.“I have been disappointed, I have been frustrated since the Ireland game. The whole game was frustrating, but it’s part of being a rugby player.“It’s the first time I have been left out of the squad since I returned to the fold. It’s been tough, but know all my focus is on Russia.”The emergence of young guns like Ritchie and Bradbury might eventually spell bad news for the 33-year-old Barclay and his Test place. But there was no grudging in his admiration for how they showed up against Samoa.“They were rubbish,” he said with a grin before correcting himself. “They were good, weren’t they? I’ve played enough with Maggie and Jamie at Edinburgh so I know the quality they have, and I know enough about Blade from speaking to the boys at Scarlets about the qualities he has.“It’s one of those when you knew there would a reaction. I didn’t doubt the back row would play well, it was a physical game and the boys played really well I thought.”It took Scotland until the 74th minute to clinch their bonus point against Samoa and Barclay believes patience will be a vital commodity on Wednesday if they are to secure the vital extras again.He said: “I’ve played enough of these games where if you try to score four tries before you score one you can get in a bit of trouble. We’re not thinking about that early on.“If it gets to 70 minutes and we’ve scored one that might become the case but we have to back ourselves and not try to score the fourth before we’ve scored the third.“Back our skills, grind them down, we believe our fitness will be superior to theirs.“We’ll back ourselves and we’re confident, but we’ve seen the trouble they’ve given every team they’ve played, they’re physical, hard at the breakdown, they make things niggly and awkward.“When they have the ball they’re abrasive and direct, and they’re hard. We’re under no illusions about it.”Watch all the action from Rugby World Cup 2019 on the STV Player including live games, catch-up, highlights, full fixtures and behind the scenes extras.
Brand South Africa had a strong and vibrant presence at the 40th Annual Meeting of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, in late January 2010, with a particular focus on the 2010 Fifa World Cup. The following adverts supported the campaign.Click on a thumbnail for a larger image. BRAND SOUTH AFRICA IN DAVOS PART 1 PART 2 PART 3 THE CAMPAIGN More galleries: For more great South African photography, including the Proteas jetting off to the ICC World Cup, grassroots football, Nelson Mandela meeting Bafana Bafana, high-rise office buildings in Sandton, and South Africa’s new ape-man fossil – visit the Media Club South Africa gallery page.
CCH Tax Day ReportThe IRS has released proposed regulations relating to the health insurance premium tax credit (premium tax credit) and the individual shared responsibility provision of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA). Beginning in 2014, individuals must have qualifying healthcare coverage (called minimum essential coverage) or make an individual shared responsibility payment. Eligible individuals who purchase coverage under a qualified health plan through an Exchange may claim a premium tax credit, the amount of which is determined in part by projections of the taxpayer’s household income and family size for the taxable year. Taxpayers who receive the benefit of advance credit payments are required to file an income tax return to reconcile the amount of advance credit payments made during the year with the amount of the credit allowable for the taxable year. The proposed regulations provide guidance and clarification on eligibility for the premium tax credit (including guidance on opt-out arrangements), the amount of the tax credit, figuring out the benchmark plan premium, and information reporting. The proposed regulations are generally proposed to apply for tax years beginning after December 31, 2016, though taxpayers may rely on certain provisions of the proposed regulations for tax years ending after December 31, 2013. In addition, several rules are proposed to apply for tax years beginning after December 31, 2018.EligibilityTo avoid repayments of advance credit payments for taxpayers who experience an unforeseen decline in income, the existing regulations provide that if an Exchange determines at enrollment that the taxpayer’s household income will be at least 100 percent but will not exceed 400 percent of the applicable FPL, the taxpayer will not lose his or her status as an applicable taxpayer solely because household income for the year turns out to be below 100 percent of the applicable FPL. The existing regulations also do not require a repayment of advance credit payments for taxpayers with household income within the range for eligibility for certain government-sponsored programs if an Exchange determined or considered the taxpayer or a member of the taxpayer’s family to be ineligible for the program. To reduce the likelihood that individuals who recklessly or intentionally provide inaccurate information to an Exchange will benefit from an Exchange determination, the proposed regulations provide that a taxpayer whose household income is below 100 percent of the FPL for the taxpayer’s family size is not treated as an applicable taxpayer if, with intentional or reckless disregard for the facts, the taxpayer provided incorrect information to an Exchange for the year of coverage. Also, an individual who was determined or considered by an Exchange to be ineligible for Medicaid, CHIP, or a similar program (such as a Basic Health Program) may be treated as eligible for coverage under the program if, with intentional or reckless disregard for the facts, the individual (or a person claiming a personal exemption for the individual) provided incorrect information to the Exchange.Employers occasionally provide their employees with opt-out programs, which can cause issues when determining the affordability of an employer’s offer of eligible employer-sponsored coverage. An opt-out payment is a payment that (1) is available only if the employee declines coverage (which includes waiving coverage in which the employee would otherwise be enrolled) under the employer-sponsored plan, and (2) cannot be used to pay for coverage under the employer-sponsored plan. The IRS has previously determined that it is generally appropriate to treat an opt-out payment that is made available under an unconditional opt-out arrangement in the same manner as a salary reduction contribution for purposes of determining an employee’s required contribution. The proposed regulations provide that amounts made available under conditional opt-out arrangements are disregarded in determining the required contribution if the arrangement satisfies certain conditions (an “eligible opt-out arrangement”), but otherwise the amounts are taken into account. The proposed regulations define an “eligible opt-out arrangement” as an arrangement under which the employee’s right to receive the opt-out payment is conditioned on (1) the employee declining to enroll in the employer-sponsored coverage and (2) the employee providing reasonable evidence that the employee and all other individuals for whom the employee reasonably expects to claim a personal exemption deduction for the tax year or years that begin or end in or with the employer’s plan year to which the opt-out arrangement applies (employee’s expected tax family) have or will have minimum essential coverage (other than coverage in the individual market, whether or not obtained through the Marketplace) during the period of coverage to which the opt-out arrangement applies. For example, if an employee’s expected tax family consists of the employee, the employee’s spouse, and two children, the employee would meet this requirement by providing reasonable evidence that the employee, the employee’s spouse, and the two children, will have coverage under the group health plan of the spouse’s employer for the period to which the opt-out arrangement applies.Premium Assistance AmountsUnder the current regulations, a month in which an individual who is enrolled in a qualified health plan is a coverage month for the individual only if the taxpayer’s share of the premium for the individual’s coverage for the month is paid by the unextended due date of the taxpayer’s income tax return for the year of coverage, or the premium is fully paid by advance credit payments. The proposed regulations provide that a taxpayer who is eligible for advance credit payments pursuant to an eligibility appeal for a member of the taxpayer’s family who, based on the appeals decision, retroactively enrolls in a qualified health plan, is considered to have met the requirement in for a month if the taxpayer pays the taxpayer’s share of the premium for coverage under the plan for the month on or before the 120th day following the date of the appeals decision. To provide consistency for all individuals who have a coverage month that is less than a full calendar month, the proposed regulations also provide that the premium assistance amount for a month is the lesser of the enrollment premiums for the month (reduced by any amounts that were refunded), or the excess of the benchmark plan premium over the contribution amount for the month. Taxpayers may rely on these rules for all taxable years beginning after December 31, 2013.Benchmark Plan PremiumThe premium assistance amount that an individual can obtain is calculated based on the applicable benchmark plan, which is the second lowest cost silver plan available through the applicable Marketplace that provides self-only coverage or “family coverage,” depending generally on whether the coverage family includes one or more individuals. Insurers are permitted to offer plans that include all essential health benefits except for pediatric dental benefits, if they offer those dental benefits under another, standalone plan. Under the existing regulations, the references to plans that provide self-only coverage and family coverage are interpreted to refer to all qualified health plans offered through the applicable Marketplace, regardless of whether the coverage offered by those plans includes all ten essential health benefits. Because qualified health plans that do not offer pediatric dental benefits tend to be cheaper than qualified health plans that cover all ten essential health benefits, the second lowest-cost silver plan (and, therefore, the premium tax credit) for taxpayers purchasing coverage through a Marketplace in which stand-alone dental plans are offered is likely to not account for the cost of obtaining pediatric dental coverage. The proposed regulations provide that for tax years beginning after December 31, 2018, if an Exchange offers one or more silver-level qualified health plans that do not cover pediatric dental benefits, the applicable benchmark plan is determined by ranking (1) the premiums for the silver level qualified health plans that include pediatric dental benefits offered by the Exchange and (2) the aggregate of the premiums for the silver-level qualified health plans offered by the Exchange that do not include pediatric dental benefits plus the portion of the premium allocable to pediatric dental benefits for stand-alone dental plans offered by the Exchange. In constructing this ranking, the premium for the lowest-cost silver plan that does not include pediatric dental benefits is added to the premium allocable to pediatric dental benefits for the lowest cost stand-alone dental plan, and similarly, the premium for the second lowest-cost silver plan that does not include pediatric dental benefits is added to the premium allocable to pediatric dental benefits for the second lowest-cost stand-alone dental plan. The second lowest-cost amount from this combined ranking is the taxpayer’s applicable benchmark plan premium. The proposed regulations also propose that if there is only one silver-level qualified health plan offered through the Exchange that would cover all members of the taxpayer’s coverage family (whether under one policy or multiple policies), that silver-level plan is used for purposes of the taxpayer’s applicable benchmark plan. Similarly, if there is only one stand-alone dental plan offered through the Exchange that would cover all members of the taxpayer’s coverage family (whether under one policy or multiple policies), the portion of the premium of that plan that is allocable to pediatric dental benefits is used for purposes of determining the taxpayer’s applicable benchmark plan.Information ReportingIf a qualified health plan covers more than one family under a single policy (for example, a plan covers a taxpayer and the taxpayer’s child who is 25 and not a dependent of the taxpayer), the premium tax credit is computed for each applicable taxpayer covered by the plan. In addition, in computing the tax credit for each taxpayer, premiums for the qualified health plan the taxpayers purchase (the enrollment premiums) are allocated to each taxpayer in proportion to the premiums for each taxpayer’s applicable benchmark plan. The existing regulations provide that the Exchange must report the enrollment premiums for each family, but do not specify the manner in which the Exchange must divide the enrollment premiums among the families enrolled in the policy. The proposed regulations clarify that when multiple families enroll in a single qualified health plan and advance credit payments are made for the coverage, the enrollment premiums reported by the Exchange for each family is the family’s allocable share of the enrollment premiums, which is based on the proportion of each family’s applicable benchmark plan premium.Comments RequestedComments on the proposed regulations should be submitted to CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG-109086-15), Room 5203, Internal Revenue Service, P.O. Box 7604, Ben Franklin Station, Washington, D.C. 20044.Proposed Regulations, NPRM REG-109086-15, 2016FED ¶49,704Other References:Code Sec. 36BCCH Reference – 2016FED ¶4196CBCCH Reference – 2016FED ¶4196FBCCH Reference – 2016FED ¶4196IBCCH Reference – 2016FED ¶4196LBCCH Reference – 2016FED ¶4196RBCode Sec. 5000ACCH Reference – 2016FED ¶34,962HBCCH Reference – 2016FED ¶34,962LBCCH Reference – 2016FED ¶35,129SBCCH Reference – 2016FED ¶35,125DTax Research ConsultantCCH Reference – TRC HEALTH: 3,250CCH Reference – TRC HEALTH: 3,100
For the launch of the new generation of vPro™ processors, Intel has prepared an environment for IT professionals to test their abilities and compete for a trip to Brazil as well as an HP Elite Book Folio 9470m Ultrabook™. That is how the “Invisible Agent – Ultimate IT Challenge” was born – a cultural contest in the best secret agent style.For that reason, an exclusive site that mixes fantasy and reality was created for the project. When the participant enters the site he gets the illusion it’s a common site but soon suffers a hacker invasion and a mysterious voice explains what is going on and launches the challenge: Check out how Intel® vPro™ can help you improve your work, put an end to hacker invasions and become an Invisible Agent. That way, each participant gets the chance to live his days of special agent and neutralize hacker actions reestablishing order and productivity inside a major corporation. All his work is, naturally, enabled by the resources of Intel® vPro™ technology.The Contest has two phases: the first one to be initiated by 10/15. In order to participate, just access the action site – ultimateitchallenge.intel.com – take part in the dynamics, watch the videos and answer the question: “How can computers equipped with smart processors change the routine in your company?”. The author of the most creative answer wins a week-long trip to Brazil for two besides a brand new Ultrabook™.
You’ve got mail: Bhim Bahadur Tamang at the borderHistory may have been created with the ancient Silk Route from China being thrown open to trade between the two countries, but for 48-year-old Bhim Bahadur Tamang life remains just the same.Even on D-day as it rains and the chill sets in,You’ve got mail: Bhim Bahadur Tamang at the borderHistory may have been created with the ancient Silk Route from China being thrown open to trade between the two countries, but for 48-year-old Bhim Bahadur Tamang life remains just the same.Even on D-day as it rains and the chill sets in with the festive mood unabated and the loudspeakers blaring songs in Mandarin and Punjabi, Tamang, sporting a baseball cap and clutching a small brown plastic package, shuffles about impatiently. He occasionally crinkles his eyes and turns his weather-beaten face towards a barbed-wire fence looking into the mist. He is with India Post but, he’s no ordinary postman.Sikkim”Come rain or snow, my job is to deliver mail,” he says. At Nathu La pass, wedged at a height of 14,400 ft in the Himalayas, there is plenty of both. When it rains, it freezes. When it snows, it feels as if your head is stuck in an icebox. But for Tamang it’s always business as usual.At 9 a.m. every Monday and Thursday, an Indian Army soldier unhooks a piece of barbed-wire on the border. Tamang walks the 250-metre distance over a grassy knoll to the Chinese outpost where he signs a register and hands over the mail from India to China. It is the entire mail from the country, averaging around 40-50 letters. He gets to spend exactly three minutes on Chinese soil.Communication is brief and is mostly a friendly nod and an exchange of “Tashi delek” (Tibetan greeting) and “Nihow” (Chinese for how do you do) and then it is a 7 km downhill trek back home to his wife and two children in Sherethang village.advertisementFor four decades, 44 years to be precise, this has been the only exchange between the two sides. However, with border trade opening up now, things are likely to change. But Tamang is too busy to take in such historical milestones. What he does tell you with a tinge of envy is that his counterpart in China, smartly attired “in a uniform with stars on it” drives up to the post in a motorcycle.Tamang has no uniform to boast of and could pass off as just another local on foot. With the advent of telephones and the Internet his mailpacket has thinned considerably over the years. A satchel has turned into a hand-held packet, sealed and sent to him from New Delhi.”Some day his mailbag might disappear altogether,” a soldier at the post observes. A day without mail? Unthinkable, for this high-altitude postman.