Medical Professional's Phone Required. Medical Professional's Fax. Email Required. Athlete Physical Examination This section must be filled out by a licensed medical professional.
Enter Email Confirm Email. This field is required in order for your patient to continue to fill out the athlete portion of this application. If you do not have the patient's email address, you can 1 enter your email address and forward the confirmation to your patient via your messaging system, or 2 enter medical specialoympicsco.
If you do option 2, please notify your patient that you have completed your portion of the application and to contact medical specialolympicsco. Physical Examination Printout. I Understand. Please upload the printout of the athlete's physical examination. Required Drop files here or Select files. If you do not wish to upload a printout, please change your answers above.
Please be aware that we will review the form you are uploading and if it is not filled out correctly or completely we may need further assistance from you or your patient. Height in Inches Required. Please estimate as best as you can if you are unable to officially measure the athlete's height.
Weight in Pounds Required. Please estimate as best as you can if you are unable to officially weigh the athlete. Below Unable to Assess. If needed, please adjust BMI ranges appropriately for age and gender and select the best estimated BMI range for the athlete. O2 Sat Required. Systolic Blood Pressure Required. Diastolic Blood Pressure Required. O2 Sat. Blood Pressure. You must explain why you were unable to assess required items. Foreign Body.
Not Clear. Right Upper Quadrant. Right Lower Quadrant. Left Upper Quadrant. Left Lower Quadrant. Please explain why you were unable to assess any of the above items such as the athlete's lymph nodes, thyroid, and vital organs : Required. Upper Right. Lower Right.
Upper Left. Lower Left. Not Full. Please explain why you were unable to assess the extremities. Please explain the health concerns you identified. Do you have any other health concerns for the athlete? If yes, please describe:. Athlete shows no evidence of neurological systems or physical findings associated with spinal cord compression or Atlantoaxial Instability. Athlete has neurological systems or physical findings that could be associated with spinal cord compression or Atlantoaxial Instability and must receive additional neurological evaluation to rule out the additional risk of spinal cord injury prior to clearance for sports participation.
Alpine Skiing. Cross Country Skiing. Figure Skating. Flag Football. Speed Skating. Acute Infection. Stage II Hypertension or Greater.
Primary Care Physician. Vision Specialist. Hearing Specialist. Physical Therapist. You did not indicate Splenomegaly during the exam above. Please ensure your answers are correct above. You did not indicate Hepatomegaly during the exam above.
Licensed Medical Professional's Signature Required. Click the "refresh" symbol to clear the signature field if you need to start over. Please be careful to not erase the signature by mistake. Please upload the physical examination form completed by a licensed medical professional. If the form does not state this, you will be asked to have the athlete's doctor re-do the athlete's form s.
Unfortunately, Special Olympics International SOI does not accept forms filled out by chiropractors and non-licensed medical professionals. We will be unable to complete this athlete's application until this form is submitted. Athlete Signature: I have read and understand this release. By signing, I agree to this release. Place an order now and get your paper in 8 hours. Our prices depend on urgency and level of study. If you want a cheap essay, place your order with as much time as possible.
Place an order on our website is very easy and will only take a few minutes of your time. Fill the order form with your assignment instructions ensuring all important information about your order is included. Include your contact information so we can reach you if there are issues with your order that need clarification. After placing your order by submitting your assignment instructions, make payments.
Once payment has been made in full, your order will be assigned to the most qualified writer who majors in your subject. The writer does in-depth research and writes your paper to produce high-quality content. The order passes through our editing department after which it is delivered to you. Drop all the files you want your writer to use in processing your order. The files should be uploaded as soon as possible to give the writer time to review and use them in processing your order. In a perfect world, you and your soulmate would bump into each other on the streets of Germany, lock eyes, and fall madly in love the next second.
Dating Profile. Is online dating easier for single female expats in Germany than for their male counterparts? Dating Tips. Register Login Language: English en. Dante's Unexpected Legacy. Orphaned as a teen and left to care for her younger sister, Alisa desperately needs this job to make ends meet and pay for an education that will lead to a better life.
All of her books reached the New York Times bestseller list, many reaching No. As I ran away from my home. The Couple Who My Forbidden Royal Fling by Clare Connelly is an exciting and fast paced adventure told in first person narrative. If you keep a track of books by new authors and love to read them, Free eBooks is the perfect platform for you. In fact, she left school at aged 14, when she was diagnosed as having tuberculosis.
So when Laura's father forced her into a marriage against her will with the sexy, hot, arrogant and super rich Jack cooper Jenny steps in to help Laura out of this marriage. The psychological make up of a hunter shows a disturbing lack of compassion and an inflated sense of ego.
Until she had his royal heir! Unexpectedly inheriting the throne is shocking enough. The Tycoon's Shock Heir. She was a delicate child and missed a lot of school. RU provides the foundations needed to upload files from the browser - The rest is up to you. Maya Rodale is the bestselling author of historical romance, young adult, and non-fiction books. Happily married, Lynne has five children. One dance with a stranger and the princess was entranced; one kiss and she was his. Posted on May 7, by admin.
Harlequin The Salvatore Marriage Deal. The mother who says having these two children is the biggest regret of her life. User can listen or read free novels Online. Lucy never thought that covering for a coworker would change her life, but that night she would meet Rafi, a wealthy prince from a small country near the Ural Mountains. Google is still by far the most powerful search engine in the world, it crawls the web at an astonishing rate, indexing everything the bot can get its hands on.
Touch Me Monroe Lucy. But alas, such gifts are not in my power. Downloads: Platform Begovaya. Plus, you can read the first chapter of any book before creating an account. Yet she longed for fairy-tale romance. Rumen Kolev to p. But her employment is quickly at risk thanks to her outspoken nature—and I wish I could send the affections of that perfect stranger via the Royal Mail. Marissasoon feels like a mother to Holt's little girl, but themagnificent cattle baron's guarded heart isn't soeasily won!
Show moreLucy Monroe Uploady - kim. Because gross receipts taxes inherently preclude the possibility of carrying net operating losses backward or forward, the Index treats states with statewide gross receipts taxes as having the equivalent of no NOL carryback or carryforward provisions.
Number of Years Allowed for Carryback and Carryforward. This variable measures the number of years allowed on a carryback or carryforward of an NOL deduction. Generally, states entered FY with better treatment of the carryforward up to a maximum of 20 years than the carryback up to a maximum of three years. States score well on the Index if they conform to the new federal provisions or provide their own robust system of carryforwards and carrybacks.
Caps on the Amount of Carryback and Carryforward. States that limit those amounts are ranked lower in the Index. Two states, Idaho and Montana, limit the amount of carrybacks, though they do better than many of their peers in offering any carryback provisions at all. Of states that allow a carryforward of losses, only New Hampshire and Pennsylvania limit carryforwards. As a result, these states score poorly on this variable. Gross Receipts Tax Deduction s.
Proponents of gross receipts taxation invariably praise the steadier flow of tax receipts into government coffers in comparison with the fluctuating revenue generated by corporate income taxes, but this stability comes at a great cost. The attractively low statutory rates associated with gross receipts taxes are an illusion. Since gross receipts taxes are levied many times in the production process, the effective tax rate on a product is much higher than the statutory rate would suggest.
Effective tax rates under a gross receipts tax vary dramatically by industry or individual business, a stark departure from the principle of tax neutrality.
Firms with few steps in their production chain are relatively lightly taxed under a gross receipts tax, and vertically-integrated, high-margin firms prosper, while firms with longer production chains are exposed to a substantially higher tax burden. The pressure of this economic imbalance often leads lawmakers to enact separate rates for each industry, an inevitably unfair and inefficient process. Two reforms that states can make to mitigate this damage are to permit deductions from gross receipts for employee compensation costs and cost of goods sold, effectively moving toward a regular corporate income tax.
Delaware, Nevada, Ohio, Oregon, and Washington score the worst, because their gross receipts taxes do not offer full deductions for either the cost of goods sold or employee compensation. Texas offers a deduction for either the cost of goods sold or employee compensation but not both. States that use federal definitions of income reduce the tax compliance burden on their taxpayers. Two states Arkansas and Mississippi do not conform to federal definitions of corporate income and they score poorly.
The vast array of federal depreciation schedules is, by itself, a tax complexity nightmare for businesses. The specter of having 50 different schedules would be a disaster from a tax complexity standpoint. One state California adds complexity by failing to fully conform to the federal system. Deductibility of Depletion. The deduction for depletion works similarly to depreciation, but it applies to natural resources. As with depreciation, tax complexity would be staggering if all 50 states imposed their own depletion schedules.
This variable measures the degree to which states have adopted the federal depletion schedules. Alternative Minimum Tax. The federal Alternative Minimum Tax AMT was created to ensure that all taxpayers paid some minimum level of taxes every year.
Unfortunately, it does so by creating a parallel tax system to the standard corporate income tax code. Evidence shows that the AMT does not increase efficiency or improve fairness in any meaningful way. It nets little money for the government, imposes compliance costs that in some years are actually larger than collections, and encourages firms to cut back or shift their investments Chorvat and Knoll, As such, states that have mimicked the federal AMT put themselves at a competitive disadvantage through needless tax complexity.
Deductibility of Taxes Paid. This variable measures the extent of double taxation on income used to pay foreign taxes, i. States can avoid this double taxation by allowing the deduction of taxes paid to foreign jurisdictions.
Twenty-three states allow deductions for foreign taxes paid and score well. The remaining states with corporate income taxation do not allow deductions for foreign taxes paid and thus score poorly.
Indexation of the Tax Code. For states that have multiple-bracket corporate income taxes, it is important to index the brackets for inflation. That prevents de facto tax increases on the nominal increase in income due to inflation. Among the 50 states, there is little harmony in apportionment formulas. Many states weight the three factors equally while others weight the sales factor more heavily a recent trend in state tax policy.
To counter this phenomenon, many states have adopted what are called throwback rules because they identify nowhere income and throw it back into a state where it will be taxed, even though it was not earned in that state. Throwback and throwout rules for sales of tangible property add yet another layer of tax complexity.
States with corporate income taxation are almost evenly divided between those with and without throwback rules. Twenty states do not have them, while 25 states and the District of Columbia do. Section k Expensing. Because corporate income taxes are intended to fall on net income, they should include deductions for business expenses—including investment in machinery and equipment.
Historically, however, businesses have been required to depreciate the value of these purchases over time. Net Interest Limitation. Federal law now restricts the deduction of business interest, limiting the deduction to 30 percent of modified income, with the ability to carry the remainder forward to future tax years. This change was intended to eliminate the bias in favor of debt financing over equity financing in the federal code, but particularly when states adopt this limitation without incorporating its counterbalancing provision, full expensing, the result is higher investment costs.
Thirty-five states conform to the net interest limitation. Historically, states have largely avoided taxing international income. Following federal tax reform, however, some states have latched onto the federal provision for the taxation of Global Low-Taxed Intangible Income GILTI , intended as a guardrail for the new federal territorial system of taxation, as a means to broaden their tax bases to include foreign business activity.
States which tax GILTI are penalized in the Index , while states receive partial credit for moderate taxation of GILTI for instance, by adopting the Section deduction and are rewarded for decoupling or almost fully decoupling from GILTI by, for instance, treating it as largely-deductible foreign dividend income in addition to providing the Section deduction.
Many states provide tax credits which lower the effective tax rates for certain industries and investments, often for large firms from out of state that are considering a move. Policymakers create these deals under the banner of job creation and economic development, but the truth is that if a state needs to offer such packages, it is most likely covering for a bad business tax climate.
Economic development and job creation tax credits complicate the tax system, narrow the tax base, drive up tax rates for companies that do not qualify, distort the free market, and often fail to achieve economic growth. A more effective approach is to systematically improve the business tax climate for the long term. Thus, this component rewards those states that do not offer the following tax credits, with states that offer them scoring poorly.
Investment Tax Credits. Investment tax credits typically offer an offset against tax liability if the company invests in new property, plants, equipment, or machinery in the state offering the credit. Investment tax credits distort the market by rewarding investment in new property as opposed to the renovation of old property. Job Tax Credits. Job tax credits typically offer an offset against tax liability if the company creates a specified number of jobs over a specified period of time.
Even if administered efficiently, job tax credits can misfire in a number of ways. They induce businesses whose economic position would be best served by spending more on new equipment or marketing to hire new employees instead. They also favor businesses that are expanding anyway, punishing firms that are already struggling.
Thus, states that offer such credits score poorly on the Index. In practice, their negative side effects—greatly complicating the tax system and establishing a government agency as the arbiter of what types of research meet a criterion so difficult to assess—far outweigh the potential benefits. The individual income tax component, which accounts for Another important reason individual income tax rates are critical for businesses is the cost of labor.
Labor typically constitutes a major business expense, so anything that hurts the labor pool will also affect business decisions and the economy. Complex, poorly designed tax systems that extract an inordinate amount of tax revenue reduce both the quantity and quality of the labor pool. This is consistent with the findings of Wasylenko and McGuire , who found that individual income taxes affect businesses indirectly by influencing the location decisions of individuals.
A rational person would choose to work for another hour. In the aggregate, the income tax reduces the available labor supply. The individual income tax rate subindex measures the impact of tax rates on the marginal dollar of individual income using three criteria: the top tax rate, the graduated rate structure, and the standard deduction s and exemptions which are treated as a zero percent tax bracket. The rates and brackets used are for a single taxpayer, not a couple filing a joint return.
The individual income tax base subindex takes into account measures enacted to prevent double taxation, whether the code is indexed for inflation, and how the tax code treats married couples compared to singles. States that score well protect married couples from being taxed more severely than if they had filed as two single individuals. They also protect taxpayers from double taxation by recognizing LLCs and S corporations under the individual tax code and indexing their brackets, exemptions, and deductions for inflation.
States that do not impose an individual income tax generally receive a perfect score, and states that do impose an individual income tax will generally score well if they have a flat, low tax rate with few deductions and exemptions.
States that score poorly have complex, multiple-rate systems. The six states without an individual income tax or non-UI payroll tax are, not surprisingly, the highest scoring states on this component: Alaska, Florida, South Dakota, Texas, Washington, and Wyoming.
Nevada, which taxes wage income but not unearned income at a low rate under a non-UI payroll tax, also does extremely well in this component of the Index. New Hampshire and Tennessee also score well, because while they levy a significant tax on individual income in the form of interest and dividends, they do not tax wages and salaries.
Scoring near the bottom of this component are states that have high tax rates and very progressive bracket structures. They generally fail to index their brackets, exemptions, and deductions for inflation, do not allow for deductions of foreign or other state taxes, penalize married couples filing jointly, and do not recognize LLCs and S corporations. The rate subindex compares the states that tax individual income after setting aside the four states that do not and therefore receive perfect scores: Alaska, Florida, South Dakota, and Wyoming.
Texas and Washington do not have an individual income tax, but they do tax LLC and S corporation income through their gross receipts taxes and thus do not score perfectly in this component. Nevada has a low-rate payroll tax on wage income.
New Hampshire and Tennessee, meanwhile, do not tax wage and salary income but do tax interest and dividend income. Top Marginal Tax Rate. California has the highest top income tax rate of Other states with high top rates include Hawaii States with the lowest top statutory rates are North Dakota 2. Alabama, Kentucky, Mississippi, New Hampshire, and Oklahoma all impose a top statutory rate of 5 percent.
In addition to statewide income tax rates, some states allow local-level income taxes. In some cases, states authorizing local-level income taxes still keep the level of income taxation modest overall. For instance, Alabama, Indiana, Michigan, and Pennsylvania allow local income add-ons, but are still among the states with the lowest overall rates. Top Tax Bracket Threshold.
This variable assesses the degree to which pass-through businesses are subject to reduced after-tax return on investment as net income rises. States are rewarded for a top rate that kicks in at lower levels of income, because doing so approximates a less distortionary flat-rate system. For example, Alabama has a progressive income tax structure with three income tax rates. States with flat-rate systems score the best on this variable because their top rate kicks in at the first dollar of income after accounting for the standard deduction and personal exemption.
States with high kick-in levels score the worst. The Index converts exemptions and standard deductions to a zero bracket before tallying income tax brackets. From an economic perspective, standard deductions and exemptions are equivalent to an additional tax bracket with a zero tax rate. The size of allowed standard deductions and exemptions varies considerably. Pennsylvania scores the best in this variable by having only one tax bracket that is, a flat tax with no standard deduction.
On the other end of the spectrum, Hawaii scores worst with 13 brackets, followed by California with 11 brackets, and Iowa and Missouri with nine brackets. Average Width of Brackets. Many states have several narrow tax brackets close together at the low end of the income scale, including a zero bracket created by standard deductions and exemptions.
Most taxpayers never notice them, because they pass so quickly through those brackets and pay the top rate on most of their income. On the other hand, some states impose ever-increasing rates throughout the income spectrum, causing individuals and noncorporate businesses to alter their income-earning and tax-planning behavior.
This subindex penalizes the latter group of states by measuring the average width of the brackets, rewarding those states where the average width is small, since in these states the top rate is levied on most income, acting more like a flat rate on all income. Income Recapture. Income recapture provisions are poor policy, because they result in dramatically high marginal tax rates at the point of their kick-in, and they are nontransparent in that they raise tax burdens substantially without being reflected in the statutory rate.
States have different definitions of taxable income, and some create greater impediments to economic activity than others. The base subindex gives a 10 percent weight to the marriage penalty , a 40 percent weight to the double taxation of taxable income, and a 50 percent weight to an accumulation of other base issues, including indexation. The states with no individual income tax of any kind achieve perfect neutrality.
Of the other 43 states, Tennessee, Arizona, Idaho, Illinois, Maine, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, and Nebraska have the best scores, avoiding many problems with the definition of taxable income that plague other states. Meanwhile, states where the tax base is found to cause an unnecessary drag on economic activity include New Jersey, California, Ohio, Minnesota, Maryland, Delaware, and New York.
Marriage Penalty. As a result, two singles if combined can have a lower tax bill than a married couple filing jointly with the same income. This is discriminatory and has serious business ramifications. The top-earning 20 percent of taxpayers is dominated 85 percent by married couples. This same 20 percent also has the highest concentration of business owners of all income groups Hodge A, Hodge B. Because of these concentrations, marriage penalties have the potential to affect a significant share of pass-through businesses.
Twenty-three states and the District of Columbia have marriage penalties built into their income tax brackets. Some states attempt to get around the marriage penalty problem by allowing married couples to file as if they were singles or by offering an offsetting tax credit. While helpful in offsetting the dollar cost of the marriage penalty, these solutions come at the expense of added tax complexity.
Still, states that allow for married couples to file as singles do not receive a marriage penalty score reduction. Double Taxation of Capital Income. Since most states with an individual income tax system mimic the federal income tax code, they also possess its greatest flaw: the double taxation of capital income. Double taxation is brought about by the interaction between the corporate income tax and the individual income tax.
The ultimate source of most capital income—interest, dividends, and capital gains—is corporate profits. The corporate income tax reduces the level of profits that can eventually be used to generate interest or dividend payments or capital gains. The result is the double taxation of this capital income—first at the corporate level and again on the individual level.
All states that tax wage income score poorly by this criterion. Tennessee and New Hampshire, which tax individuals on interest and dividends, score somewhat better because they do not tax capital gains.
Five states score poorly because they do not conform to federal definitions of individual income: Alabama, Arkansas, Mississippi, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania. At the federal level, the Alternative Minimum Tax AMT was created in to ensure that all taxpayers paid some minimum level of taxes every year. Unfortunately, it does so by creating a parallel tax system to the standard individual income tax code.
AMTs are an inefficient way to prevent tax deductions and credits from totally eliminating tax liability. This variable measures the extent of double taxation on income used to pay foreign and state taxes, i. States can avoid double taxation by allowing a credit for state taxes paid to other jurisdictions.
One important development in the federal tax system was the creation of the limited liability corporation LLC and the S corporation. LLCs and S corporations provide businesses some of the benefits of incorporation, such as limited liability, without the overhead of becoming a traditional C corporation.
The profits of these entities are taxed under the individual income tax code, which avoids the double taxation problems that plague the corporate income tax system. Indexing the tax code for inflation is critical in order to prevent de facto tax increases on the nominal increase in income due to inflation. Three areas of the individual income tax are commonly indexed for inflation: the standard deduction, personal exemptions, and tax brackets.
Twenty-five states index all three or do not impose an individual income tax; 15 states and the District of Columbia index one or two of the three; and ten states do not index at all. Sales tax makes up The type of sales tax familiar to taxpayers is a tax levied on the purchase price of a good at the point of sale. The sales tax can also hurt the business tax climate because as the sales tax rate climbs, customers make fewer purchases or seek low-tax alternatives.
As a result, business is lost to lower-tax locations, causing lost profits, lost jobs, and lost tax revenue. Typically, a vast expanse of shopping malls springs up along the border in the low-tax jurisdiction.
On the positive side, sales taxes levied on goods and services at the point of sale to the end-user have at least two virtues. First, they are transparent: the tax is never confused with the price of goods by customers. Second, since they are levied at the point of sale, they are less likely to cause economic distortions than taxes levied at some intermediate stage of production such as a gross receipts tax or sales taxes on business-to-business transactions.
The negative impact of sales taxes is well documented in the economic literature and through anecdotal evidence. For example, Bartik found that high sales taxes, especially sales taxes levied on equipment, had a negative effect on small business start-ups.
States that create the most tax pyramiding and economic distortion, and therefore score the worst, are states that levy a sales tax that generally allows no exclusions for business inputs. The ideal base for sales taxation is all goods and services at the point of sale to the end-user. Excise taxes are sales taxes levied on specific goods.
0コメント