Why would a company have a physical headquarters in one state but file for incorporation in another state? O Employees pay income taxes based on the rates of the chartering state, so a company may choose to charter in a state with lower income taxes. O Customers trust large companies, so a company may choose to charter in a separate state to give the appearance of being a national company. O Interstate litigation is very complex, so a company may choose to charter in a separate state to make it more difficult to sue the company. O States vary in the laws that govern corporations, so a company may choose to charter in a state with more favorable corporate laws.

Why would a company have a physical headquarters in one state but file for incorporation in another state? O Employees pay income taxes based on the rates of the chartering state, so a company may choose to charter in a state with lower income taxes. O Customers trust large companies, so a company may choose to charter in a separate state to give the appearance of being a national company. O Interstate litigation is very complex, so a company may choose to charter in a separate state to make it more difficult to sue the company. O States vary in the laws that govern corporations, so a company may choose to charter in a state with more favorable corporate laws.

SWFT Comprehensive Volume 2019

42nd Edition

ISBN:9780357233306

Author:Maloney

Publisher:Maloney

Chapter24: Multistate Corporate Taxation

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 2BCRQ

See similar textbooks

Similar questions

Question: Suppose a state imposes a higher tax on out-of-state companies doing business in the state than it imposes clause if the only reason for the tax is to protect the local firms from out-of-state competition? in-state companies. Is this a violation of the equal protection Explain your answer thouroughly and in a manner that a person with no prior knowledge of the situation would understand it fully. For this I need more details all I can answer is .....Yes. The tax would limit the liberty of some persons (out-of-state businesses), so it is subject to a review under the equal protection clause. Protecting local businesses from out-of-state competition is not a legitimate government objective. Thus, such a tax would violate the equal protection clause.
Suppose a state imposes a higher tax on out-of-state companies doing business in the state than it imposes on in-state companies. Is this a violation of the equal protection clause if the only reason for the tax is to protect the local firms from out-of-state competition?
What would be the advantages of having companies formed at the federal level? Do you think these advantages outweigh the advantages of having entities formed at the state level?
Which of the following is most accurate regarding the formation of a US corporation? O Corporations are formed under the laws of a particular state. Corporations are formed under Federal law only. Corporations are formed without state or Federal action but are formed by contractual arrangement by the shareholders. Corporations are formed under Delaware law only by US Constitutional authority. O
Which of the following is true? Non-profit corporations are exempt from corporate income tax. Domestic corporations shall choose ether MCIT or RCIT. Whenever MCIT is payable, there is a Net Operating Loss Carry-Over. MCIT does not apply to foreign corporations.
Which of the following statements is false about the taxation benefits of incorporation? Incorporation is always the best business organization for tax purposes at the federal level. Federal tax reform has removed some of the tax benefits of incorporation. Federal tax reform has changed the taxation of businesses, making all types of businesses have similar tax rules. Shareholders still benefit from delayed taxation because of incorporation. Tax reform has changed the tax benefits of incorporation.
Do those who are unable or unable to operate under a conventional corporation's limitations have a predisposition toward starting their own business? Is there a reason for this or not?
In the United States, there are three legal categories of firms: sole proprietorships, partnerships, and corporations. Which of the following is an advantage for corporations? O A. Corporations have control by an owner. B. Corporations have no layers of management. Oc. Corporations have no double taxation of income. D. Corporations have greater ability to raise funds. O E. Corporations have unlimited personal liability. Which of the following is a disadvantage for corporations? O A. Corporations have no stockholders. B. Corporations are costly to organize. c. Corporations have no ability to share risk. D. Corporations have unlimited personal liability. O E. Corporations have limited ability to raise funds. O O O O
In its filings with the State of Ohio, Soft Serve Ice Cream, Inc. states as its corporate purpose, “the distribution and sale of ice cream and other dairy products.” Seeing an opportunity to increase revenues, the chief executive approves the use of corporate funds to of Soft Serve to open a gaming venue called SS Gaming. This would be a case of: a. An ultra vires act b. Piercing the corporate veil c. Establishing a de facto corporation d. An alter ego of the corporation
If a foreign corporation has to qualify to do business in a specific state, all of the following except which of these is required?
True/False. In their Articles of Incorporation, corporations that want to maintain flexibility about future business ventures they might engage in often state a very generic corporate purpose (e.g., “engage in any activity that is lawful for domestic corporations”) or do not include a purpose at all if listing a purpose is optional.
A corporation formed for the purpose of manufacturing, buying, selling, and dealing in drugs, chemicals, and similar products contracted to purchase, under authority of its board of directors, the land and building it occupied as a factory and store. Collins, a shareholder, sues in equity to restrain the corporation from completing the contract, claiming that as the certificate of incorporation contained no provision authorizing the corporation to purchase real estate, the contract was ultra vires. Can Collins prevent the contract from being executed? Why or why not?