Us Tax Questionnaire: Fill & Download for Free

The London Stock ExchangeLondon Stock Exchange - WikipediaLondon Stock Exchange is a stock exchange located in the City of London, England. As of April 2018, London Stock Exchange had a market capitalisation of US$4.59 trillion. It was founded in 1571, making it one of the oldest exchanges in the world. Its current premises are situated in Paternoster Square close to St Paul's Cathedral in the City of London. It is part of London Stock Exchange Group (LSEG).London Stock Exchange is one of the world's oldest stock exchanges and can trace its history back more than 300 years. London Stock Exchange Group was created in October 2007 when London Stock Exchange merged with Milan Stock Exchange, Borsa Italiana.Global Financial Centres Index - WikipediaThe Global Financial Centres Index (GFCI) is a ranking of the competitiveness of financial centres based on over 29,000 financial centre assessments from an online questionnaire together with over 100 indices from organisations such as the World Bank, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), and the Economist Intelligence Unit. The first index was published in March 2007. It has been jointly published twice per year by Z/Yen Group in London and the China Development Institute in Shenzhen since 2015, and is widely quoted as a source for ranking financial centres.List New York as first, London second. Then the next European ones are Zurich at 9th and Frankfurt at 10th.This article will explain why - Why London won't lose its crown as Europe's financial capitalThere are three reasons for this continued dominance over European financial services:The pre-eminence of the British court system in upholding the rule of law, including the protection of creditor and shareholder rights.The superiority of the UK’s university education in economics and finance over its continental counterparts.The UK’s tax and employment regulation that is conducive to the industry’s health and profits.There is also the human aspect, when the top rate of tax was 50%, Switzerland managed to attract some of the top players in London, but the lifestyle including school system wasn’t conducive for their family life.Or Boring Dublin and provincial Frankfurt won’t steal London’s finance crown

This is an interesting question.I can’t honestly answer for every single country because I don’t have the regulatory and market knowledge on business loans for every country. Let me instead speak to the US market for business lending, which I have researched extensively.Fintech companies and alternative lenders in the US have made the process turn from night into day for a borrower. I have seen the amount of time and administrative headache to US based small businesses continue to creep ever lower since 2007.While there are some that may have you believe that these companies have fundamentally changed credit analysis. That is simply untrue. You are always examining the same four key elements of a possible loan: capacity, collateral, character, and conditions. And this is regardless of what country you are in.US alternative lenders and fintech companies haven’t changed anything about the fundamentals of credit analysis, but they have made a huge impact on application ease and speed of underwriting.These innovations have allowed them to “eat” the lunches of more traditional commercial banks. So much so that several of the majors are now following suit Re: OnDeck/Chase partnership and Wells Fargo FastFlex loans.Here is the progression that I’ve seen followed by a tangible example of how this has worked for one of the most arduous loan processes in the United States.Completely manual process:Collection of documents submitted by borrowerUnderwriting conducted by a personPayments made by checkBorrower needed to contact bank for loan payment statusFunding time from start to finish around 2 to 3 monthsSemi-automated process:Integration points for accounting software, bank statements so most documents can be collected automaticallyUnderwriting partially done by algorithm and sense checked by a personPayments made by lender direct debitInterface for borrower to see status of her loan and payments madeFunding time from start to finish around 2 to 3 weeksFor example, the SBA loan underwriting process is among the longest and most annoying in the US. In some instances, I have seen it tie up a business for 4 months because of the need for a business plan, audited tax returns, bank statements, financial projections, resumes of owners, and asset appraisals (real estate).But now, there is a company called SmartBiz that has reduced the underwriting process for a SBA loan to 2 or 3 weeks, sometimes shorter if you have all your paperwork in order. And there are plenty of examples similar to Smartbiz that have come onto the scene in the US in recent years.For example, here is a comparison table of alternative term loan lenders. Notice that funding times across these lenders is around 14 days or less with only one going up to 30 days. This contrasts well against the standard 2 to 3 month commercial bank loan process.Indeed, my own company Simpler Funding allows a business owner to quickly and easily see among which funding options, whether that is debt, equity, crowdfunding, or otherwise, might be best for an entrepreneur. We do this through a very simple questionnaire that takes into account the criteria of lenders and other funding options.

EditedBefore I get into this long pro-life/pro-healthcare blog (which is largely made up of excerpts), I would like to take this opportunity to dispel some myths.Firstly, opposition to abortion can arise from both an understanding of science and basic human empathy. In my case, it has NOTHING what-so-ever to do with "theology", as at least one writer here has alluded to.Secondly, progressive-leaning Catholics (I am not Catholic) often DO support protecting the most vulnerable among us--the unborn--AND social justice reforms, such as universal healthcare.Thirdly, most in the quite socially conservative Libertarian party are pro-abortion and anti-universal healthcare.So please, let's just stop with the stereotypes.I wrote this post several months back on a pro-life website. I have recently updated this thread considerably.I will start out by clearly stating that Obamacare would NOT be my first choice for a national healthcare system. It continues to make health insurance too expensive for many by allowing “private insurance middlemen" to gobble-up huge amounts of premium-payer money. Most of the deductibles and co-pays associated with ACA plans are outrageous, and discourage people from getting medical care when they need it.IF Obama had included a public option to his plan--as he had originally pledged to do--the costs mentioned above would likely be much less than they currently are.While some paste a very "rosy" picture for healthy people prior to the ACA, they simply refuse to even consider how unregulated private insurance companies treated some of those who needed health care the most.The best parts of the ACA are the patient protections and the Medicaid expansion.Patient protections include barring insurers from excluding those with pre-existing health conditions, or from imposing life-time insurance caps It also requires that mental illnesses be covered, and it requires that pregnancy and childbirth be covered. It also expands the age from 18-22 to 26 that adults can remain on their parent's health insurance. These reforms have helped millions get and retain coverage.The Medicaid-expansion associated with the ACA has ALSO greatly expanded health care access in the states that have adopted it.On balance, Obamacare has saved lives over the 'healthcare system" that was in place before its enactment.Studies show that if Obamacare were straight up repealed and we returned to the pre-ACA era, 22 million people lose insurance, and more than 24,000 preventable deaths would occur each year. [1]"Prior to the ACA, about 12.6 million non-elderly adults were denied coverage due to having a pre-existing condition in the previous three years. This represents 36 percent of all consumers who tried to purchase health insurance directly from an insurance company in the individual insurance market"."Another method for denial was through a process called rescission. This involves applicants with expensive conditions, such as cancer, being denied coverage based on their initial health status questionnaire. Insurers retroactively cancelled applicants’ entire policies if any condition was missed. Policies could be cancelled if medical conditions were unrelated, or applicants weren’t aware of the condition at the time. Entire families’ coverage could have been revoked, as well"."Before the ACA’s start, 35 states offered those consumers denied coverage in the individual insurance market or otherwise unable to obtain insurance a high-risk pool option. This insurance imposed pre-existing condition exclusions for six months to one year. During this time, the actual condition that made someone uninsurable isn’t covered. These insurance options are also typically much more expensive than traditional plans". [2]Below is an example of how rescission worked to prevent even "insured" patients from receiving the life-saving treatment that they needed."Robin Beaton found out last June she had an aggressive form of breast cancer and needed surgery -- immediately.Her insurance carrier pre-certified her for a double mastectomy and hospital stay. But three days before the operation, the insurance company called and told her they had red-flagged her chart and she would not be able to have her surgery. The reason? In May 2008, Beaton had visited a dermatologist for acne. A word written on her chart was interpreted to mean precancerous, so the insurance company decided to launch an investigation into her medical history.Beaton's dermatologist begged her insurance provider to go ahead with the surgery. Still, the insurance carrier decided to rescind her coverage. The company said it had reviewed her medical records and found out that she had misinformed them about some of her medical history.Beaton had listed her weight incorrectly. She also didn't disclose medication she had taken for a pre-existing heart condition -- medicine she wasn't taking when she originally applied for coverage." [3]Remember the talk about "death panels"? Guess what, they are REAL, they are the US private health insurance companies!Now, an example of how lifetime insurance caps were used to deny patients care, sometimes causing DEATHS.Most average-health people likely paid little attention to the $1 million life-time cap that private insurers placed on individuals pre-ACA, unless they or a family member became seriously ill and needed continuing healthcare. Kelly and Tom Treinen were no exception. In fact, they chose their plan because the premiums were lower than another plan offered to them which offered a $5 million lifetime insurance cap."Then doctors diagnosed their teenage son, Michael, with an aggressive form of leukemia in May 2007. His treatment called for 10 doses of a chemotherapy drug that cost $10,000 per dose. A 56-day stay in an intensive care unit cost about $400,000. Michael reached his $1 million lifetime maximum in less than a year. The Noblesville, Ind., family had to issue a public plea for help after a hospital told them it needed either $600,000 in certified insurance or a $500,000 deposit to continue preparing for a critical bone marrow transplant.The Treinens raised $865,000 in six days. Money came from all over the United States and as far away as Germany. But Michael’s cancer had stopped responding to chemotherapy, and he died May 25 before he could receive the transplant". [4]This 6-year-old boy was luckier, because he was born (prematurely) just SIX DAYS after Obamacare had abolished life-time caps on medical care."He was born seven weeks premature and spent the first six months of his life in the hospital. He still has significant health issues due to a rare genetic disease. He has been under anesthesia more than 45 times". His family had spent more than $2 million during his FIRST hospital stay.His family is lobbying to keep that patient protection in place, while Republicans have given mixed messages about this provision as well as other ACA patient protections. They often speak of leaving them in place, but the House-passed Trump alternative to the ACA--the 'American Health Care Act' would allow big employers to reinstitute lifetime payment limits". [5]There is the uniquely "American" problem of ill individuals aging out of their parent's insurance plans.Before the enactment of the ACA, the cutoff age for young adults being taken off their parent's plan was 18-22. Under the ACA, it is 26, which is STILL not good enough to prevent the deaths and suffering of patients such as Alec Raeshawn.Alec had a very TREATABLE condition, Type 1 Diabetes. He required regular injections of insulin to live. He died of Diabetic ketoacidosis, which is when your body doesn't have get enough insulin."Your blood sugar gets so high that your blood becomes highly acidic, your cells dehydrate, and your body stops functioning".Alec made around 35,000 a year, which was enough to disqualify him from both Medicaid or insurance subsidies in Minnesota."Alec's pharmacist told him his diabetes supplies would cost $1,300 a month without insurance — most of that for insulin".The "best" plan that he could find had a $450 monthly premium, and an annual deductible of $7,600. "Alec decided going uninsured would be more manageable.''Alec was found dead less than a month after going off of his mother's insurance."His family thinks he was rationing his insulin — using less than he needed — to try to make it last until he could afford to buy more. He died alone in his apartment three days before payday. The insulin pen he used to give himself shots was empty". [6]The implications for the mentally-ill would be grim if key provisions of the ACA were repealed, which Trump attempted to do in his first year in office. Not only would people dealing with mental health conditions or drug dependency have had to pay much higher premiums, many may not have been covered at all!States would have been able to get waivers that could have allowed insurance providers to deny coverage of some health services, including mental health and substance abuse treatments. As the article referenced above has pointed out, if those with serious mental health conditions are left untreated, suicides are at serious risk of increasing."Adding to the number of suicides (assisted or not) will be some of the millions of mentally ill people who will be taken off their medication". [7]Since mental illness as a driver of mass shootings, legislation should be proposed to make it easier--rather than HARDER--to access mental health treatment. [8]Owing to the SCOTUS ACA ruling, Medicaid expansion--which was DESIGNED to be nationwide, is left to the option of each state.The only reason possible for many Republican governors--who have the best tax-supported medical care available for themselves and their families--to refuse to implement this life-saving portion of the ACA is their political hatred of former President Obama, period.A new University of Michigan study estimates that 15,600 people nationwide have died because their states refused the Medicaid expansion. The annual rate of such avoidable deaths in Texas alone is 730, according to the studies. [9]Florida is another state refusing the Medicaid expansion. This is the story of how one of Florida's residents--and her now three orphaned children--paid the ultimate price for living on "this" side of the Atlantic, and in a "red" state.Charlene Dill is one of thousands--if not millions--of US citizens that should have been eligible for Medicaid-expansion.She was a 32-year-old mother of three. She made too much income to qualify for Florida's regular Medicaid plan, but too little to qualify for federal subsidies to buy a plan on the ACA's private exchanges.She had a documented heart condition, but went years without the care she needed because she couldn’t afford it. She collapsed and died on a stranger’s floor on one of her THREE jobs when she was attempting to sell a vacuum cleaner. [10]Last, but certainly not least, are uninsured/underinsured women with unplanned pregnancies. Before the ACA became law, sometimes even INSURED women discovered that their private health insurance plans specifically EXCLUDED pregnancy care and childbirth!This Patheos article explains why pro-lifers should favor KEEPING--and EXPANDING--the Medicaid expansion portion of Obamacare."The cost of an uncomplicated vaginal birth is about $9600. The cost of an uncomplicated Cesarean is about $15800.24 million people will lose their healthcare if the Republicans get their way (If all or major portions of the ACA are repealed). If that happens, and if any of these 24 million people happen to be female and fertile, chances are many of them are going to get pregnant anyway. When they do, they’ll face a choice. Are they going to find a way to cough up between ten and sixteen thousand dollars and hope it doesn’t cost more? Or are they going to find a way to cough up about five hundred dollars, the average cost of an abortion?"Neither Crisis pregnancy centers, nor churches, are not financially equipped to pay women's pregnancy and delivery costs. They rely on referring women without medical insurance to Medicaid, or to Obamacare plans that include financial subsidies. [11]"Tuley-Lampke says she's seen several women decide to continue their pregnancies after learning that their medical care would be provided. After pregnant women get basic health care, she says, they can then focus on their education and career". [12]As briefly as I can, I will respond to some commonly heard criticisms regarding the government getting involved with health care.Some bring up the issue of 'medical tourism’ into the US because our healthcare is thought to be so "envied" around the world. Even "if" the health care in the US does “exceed all others" (which is a highly questionable assumption), that is little comfort to Americans who cannot ACCESS it.I will also note that many US citizens go abroad for affordable medical care each year. Some are even SENT abroad by their insurance companies! [13]When it comes to prescriptions, many Americans and even state medical systems are turning towards our Canadian neighbors."Some US states are proposing to import medicines in bulk from Canada, where many drugs are cheaper thanks to government price controls (emphasis mine)". [14]Another argument concerning the ACA is that some people were forced to change their healthcare plans owing to the fact that Obamacare mandated that all health insurance plans had to meet certain standards (discussed above), just as many other life-and-death industries do.I do not relish having to defend the ACA for the reasons that I already stated, but I cannot ignore such mind-numbing distortions of reality.The insurance policies that were "lost" under the new ACA standards were usually 'junk' plans to begin with that did not include such necessities as pregnancy care, eye care, prescriptions, etc. REAL, compliant, health insurance plans were then made available to those individuals. [15]I will touch upon the subject of health care costs.Regardless of the anti-guaranteed healthcare propaganda that has been drummed into people via conservative media, most countries with universal healthcare pay LESS per-capita for health care than the US does, AND they have better outcomes."Despite spending more on health care, Americans had poor health outcomes, including shorter life expectancy and greater prevalence of chronic conditions"."Even though the U.S. is the only country without a publicly financed universal health system, it still spends more public dollars on health care than all but two of the other countries"."Finally, despite its heavy investment in health care, the U.S. sees poorer results on several key health outcome measures such as life expectancy and the prevalence of chronic conditions". [16]Finally, this tragic death.Deamonte Driver was a 12-year-old, homeless child, who died an AVOIDABLE death in 2007, from an abscessed tooth. That is correct, something as treatable as an abscessed tooth!His family's Medicaid coverage had lapsed, and his mother had difficulty finding a dentist that would treat him. [17] If the US had universal healthcare, Deamonte--like everyone else--would automatically be covered.References:[1] The GOP plan for Obamacare could kill more people each year than gun homicides[2] Before the ACA, 1 in 7 people were denied coverage because of pre-existing conditions[3] Because Fox Asked, Here Are Examples Of People Who Were Denied Health Care[4] Health Insurance Caps Leave Patients Stranded[5] A 6-year-old, whose life depends on the ACA, heads to Capitol Hill[6] Insulin's High Cost Leads To Lethal Rationing[7] Trumpcare Will Be Catastrophic For People With Mental Health[8] Republicans say mental healthcare prevents mass shootings. They've tried to gut mental healthcare[9] "How many people die because Texas refuses Medicaid Expansion"?[10] 32-Year-Old Florida Women Is Dead Because Her State Refused To Expand Medicaid[11] The American Healthcare Act Is Not Pro-Life[12] How Crisis Pregnancy Center Clients Rely On Medicaid[13] 1.4 Million Americans Will Go Abroad for Medical Care This Year[14] States consider bringing prescription drugs from Canada to US as costs soar[15] White House tweet wrongly says Obamacare led to fewer insurance options[16] U.S. Health Care from a Global Perspective[17] Twelve-Year-Old Died in 2007 From Abscessed Tooth After His Family's Medicaid Lapsed