TEXT 1

                                    When was the first computer unvented?

            The word "computer" was first recorded as being used in 1613 and was originally used to describe a human who performed calculations or computations. The definition of a computer remained the same until the end of the 19th century when people began to realize machines never get tired and can perform calculations much faster and more accurately than any team of human computers ever could.
            In 1822, Charles Babbage began developing the Difference Engine, which was considered to be the first automatic computing engine. It was capable of computing several sets of numbers and making hard copies of the results. Unfortunately, because of funding he was never able to complete a full-scale functional version of this machine. In June of 1991, the London Science Museum completed the Difference Engine Nº 2 for the bicentenni- al year of Babbage's birth and later completed the printing mechanism in 2000.

                                    Fonte: http://www.computerhope.com/issues/ch000984.htm Acesso em: 15/10/2013

Customs enforcement is concerned with the protection of society and fghting trans-national organized crime based on the principles of risk management. In discharging this mandate, Customs compliance and enforcement services are involved in a wide range of activities relating to information and intelligence exchange, combating commercial fraud, counterfeiting, the smuggling of highly taxed goods (especially cigarettes and alcohol), drug traffcking, stolen motor vehicles, money laundering, electronic crime, smuggling of arms, nuclear materials, toxic waste and weapons of mass destruction. Enforcement activities also aim to protect intellectual and cultural property and endangered plants and animal species.
In order to assist its Members improve the effectiveness of their enforcement efforts and achieve a balance between control and facilitation, the World Customs Organisation has developed a comprehensive technical assistance and training programmes. In addition, it has established Regional Intelligence Liaison Offces (RILOs) that are supported by a global database, the Customs Enforcement Network (CEN), to facilitate the exchange and use of information.

The WCO has also developed instruments for international co-operation in the form of the revised Model Bilateral Agreement (MBA); the Nairobi Convention, which provides for mutual administrative assistance in the prevention, investigation and repression of Customs offences; and the Johannesburg Convention, which provides for mutual administrative assistance in Customs matters. The WCO’s Customs Control and Enforcement programme therefore aims to promote effective enforcement practices and encourage co-operation among its Members and with its various competent partners and stakeholders.


(Source: http://www.wcoomd.org/en/topics/enforcement-and-compliance/ overview.aspx, retrieved on 12 March 2014.)

Questions 34 through 38 refer to the following text.

tax deductions proposed by clients. Most of these doggy

deductions don't hunt, but, believe it or not, some do. Could

there be a spot for Sammy and Inky on our 1040?

Scott Kadrlik, a certified public accountant in Eden Prairie,

Minn., who moonlights as a stand-up comedian (really!),

gave me a dog's-eye view of the tax code: "In most cases

our family pets are just family pets," he says. They cannot

be claimed as dependents, and you cannot deduct the

cost of their food, medical care or other expenses. One

exception is service dogs. If you require a Seeing Eye

dog, for example, your canine's costs are deductible as

a medical expense. Occasionally, man's best friend also

is man's best business deduction. The Doberman that

guards the junk yard can be deductible as a business

expense of the junk-yard owner, says Mr. Kadrlik. Ditto the

convenience-store cat that keeps the rats at bay.

For most of us, though, our pets are hobbies at most.

Something's a hobby if, among other things, it hasn't turned

a profit in at least three of the past five years (or two of the

past seven years in the case of horse training, breeding

or racing). In that case, you can't deduct losses—only

expenses to the extent of income in the same year. So if

your beloved Bichon earns $100 for a modeling gig,

you could deduct $100 worth of vet bills (or dog food or doggy

attire).

The IRS Chief Counsel is appointed by the President of the United States, with the advice and consent of the U.S. Senate, and serves as the chief legal advisor to the IRS Commissioner on all matters pertaining to the interpretation, administration, and enforcement of the Internal Revenue Code, as well as all other legal matters. Under the IRS Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998, the Chief Counsel reports to both the IRS Commissioner and the Treasury General Counsel.
Attorneys in the Chief Counsel’s Offce serve as lawyers for the IRS. They provide the IRS and taxpayers with guidance on interpreting Federal tax laws correctly, represent the IRS in litigation, and provide all other legal support required to carry out the IRS mission.
Chief Counsel received 95,929 cases and closed 94,323 cases during fscal year 2012. Of the new cases received, and cases closed, the majority related to tax law enforcement and litigation, including Tax Court litigation; collection, bankruptcy, and summons advice and litigation; Appellate Court litigation; criminal tax; and enforcement advice and assistance.
In Fiscal Year 2012, Chief Counsel received 31,295 Tax Court cases involving taxpayers contesting an IRS determination that they owed additional tax. The total amount of tax and penalty in dispute at the end of the fscal year was almost $6.6 billion.


(Source: Internal Revenue Service Data Book, 2012.)

House Approves Higher Debt Limit Without Condition
By JONATHAN WEISMAN and ASHLEY PARKER
Feb. 11, 2014

WASHINGTON - Ending three years of brinkmanship in which the threat of a devastating default on the nation’s debt was used to wring conservative concessions from President Obama, the House on Tuesday voted to raise the government’s borrowing limit until March 2015, without any conditions.
The vote - 221 to 201 - relied almost entirely on Democrats in the Republican-controlled House to carry the measure and represented the first debt ceiling increase since 2009 that was not attached to other legislation. Only 28 Republicans voted yes, and only two Democrats voted no.
Simply by holding the vote, Speaker John A. Boehner of Ohio effectively ended a three-year Tea Party-inspired era of budget showdowns that had raised the threat of default and government shutdowns, rattled economic confidence and brought serious scrutiny from other nations questioning Washington’s ability to govern. In the process, though, Mr. Boehner also set off a series of reprisals from fellow Republican congressmen and outside groups that showcased the party’s deep internal divisions.
During the October 2013 government shutdown, The Times’s David Leonhardt explained the debt limit and how a failure to raise it could have affected the economy both at home and abroad.
"He gave the president exactly what he wanted, which is exactly what the Republican Party said we did not want,” said a Republican representative, Tim Huelskamp of Kansas, who last year unsuccessfully tried to rally enough support to derail Mr. Boehner’s re-election as speaker. “It’s going to really demoralize the base.”
The vote was a victory for President Obama, Democrats and those Senate Republicans who have argued that spending money for previously incurred obligations was essential for the financial standing of the federal government. “Tonight’s vote is a positive step in moving away from the political brinkmanship that’s a needless drag on our economy,” Jay Carney, the White House press secretary, said in a statement.
"A clean debt ceiling is a complete capitulation on the speaker’s part and demonstrates that he has lost the ability to lead the House of Representatives, let alone his own party,” said Jenny Beth Martin, co-founder of the Tea Party Patriots. “It is time for him to go.”
Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the majority leader, commended the speaker and promised to pass the bill as soon as possible. “We’re happy to see the House is legislating the way they should have legislated for a long time,” he said.


(Adapted from http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/12/us/politics/ boehner-to-bring-debt-ceiling-to-vote-without-policy- attachments. html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_2014021 2&_r=0)

Why Is Spain Really Taking Lionel Messi to Tax Court?

By Jonathan Mahler Sep 27, 2013
So Spain has decided to haul Lionel Messi into court for tax evasion, which strikes me as completely insane on pretty much every level.
You may remember the story from a few months back: The greatest soccer player in the world and his father were accused of setting up
a bunch of shell companies in Belize and Uruguay to avoid paying taxes on royalties and other licensing income.

Messi - who makes an estimated $41 million a year, about half from sponsors - reached a settlement with Spain’s tax authorities earlier
this summer, agreeing to pay the amount he apparently owed, plus interest. The matter was settled, or so it seemed. Messi could go
back to dazzling the world with his athleticism and creativity.
Only it turns out that Spain wasn’t quite done with Messi. His adopted country - Messi is Argentine but became a Spanish citizen in 2005
- is now considering pressing criminal charges against him.
Cracking down on tax-evading footballers has become something of a trend in Europe, where players and clubs have been known to
launder money through “image-rights companies” often set up in tax havens. When you need money - and Europe needs money - go to
the people who have it, or something like that. Over the summer, dozens of Italian soccer clubs were raided as part of an investigation
into a tax-fraud conspiracy. A number of English Premier League clubs were forced last year to pay millions of pounds in back taxes.
No one likes a tax cheat, and there’s little doubt that widespread tax fraud has helped eat away at the social safety net in Spain and
elsewhere, depriving schools, hospitals and other institutions of badly needed funds. But Europe is not going to find the answers to its
financial problems in the pockets of some professional soccer players and clubs.
Messi’s defense, delivered by his father, seems credible enough to me. “He is a footballer and that’s it,” Messi’s father Jorge said of his
soccer-prodigy son. “If there was an error, it was by our financial adviser. He created the company. My mistake was to have trusted the
adviser.” Even if Messi is legally responsible for the intricate tax dodge he is accused of having participated in, it’s pretty hard to believe
that he knew much about it.
More to the point, Lionel Messi is probably Spain’s most valuable global asset. What could possibly motivate the Spanish government to
want to tarnish his reputation, especially after he’s paid off his alleged debt? After four years of Great-Depression level unemployment,
have anxiety and despair curdled into vindictiveness?
Here’s another explanation: Maybe this whole case has less to do with money than it does with history. Maybe it’s no coincidence that
the target of the Spanish government’s weird wrath happens to play for FC Barcelona, which is, after all, "mes que un club." It's a symbol
of Catalan nationalism - and a bitter, longtime rival of Spain’s establishment team, Real Madrid.
Too conspiratorial? Prove it, Spain. Release Cristiano Ronaldo’s tax return.

(Adapted form http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-09-27/why-is-spain-really-taking-lionel-messi-to-tax-court-.html)

not valid statement found