#All India Congress Committee

[townpostin]

Congress Veteran Ravindra Jha Stakes Claim to Key Jamshedpur Assembly Seats

Ravindra ‘Nattu’ Jha submits candidature for East and West constituencies Former District Congress President Ravindra Jha aims for Jamshedpur East and West seats in upcoming elections. JAMSHEDPUR – Prominent Congress leader Ravindra ‘Nattu’ Jha has officially submitted his candidature for the Jamshedpur East and West Assembly seats in the forthcoming Jharkhand elections. Jha’s biodata was handed…

[mariacallous]

Two things happened this week that got me really worried about AI’s role in the US election:

First, WIRED published a massive story on how voters in India have received over 50 million deepfaked voice calls imitating candidates and political figures. That’s a lot of deepfakes, and voters are confusing them for the real thing.

Second, the Federal Communications Commission announced this week that it’s considering new AI ad rules only a few months after it banned synthetic robocalls. (Synthetic ads are ads that are created or altered with AI.) Excuse me, but why is the FCC the only government entity that’s approved new AI and elections rules this year? The Indian election should be a warning sign for the US to get busy regulating, but the FCC is the only one picking up the phone.

Let’s talk about it.

The US Is Running Out of Time to Stamp Out Deepfake Political Ads

Remember when the Republican National Committee put out an AI-generated ad attacking Biden? Or when Florida governor Ron DeSantis’ super PAC released an AI ad that mimicked former president Donald Trump? It’s almost been a year since both these ads came out, and there aren't any new laws governing AI ads, despite all the outrage at the time.

Last year, Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer started holding meetings with a rotating set of stakeholders and AI industry leaders to develop solutions to issues raised by generative AI. One of the leader’s priorities was to protect US elections from whatever mess the tech may create ahead of November. He has issued a report and pushed senators to turn that guidance into law, but that’s about all that’s happened.

The FCC can’t do as much as Congress can, but it’s done the most out of the two. In February, the agency outlawed using generative AI in robocalls in response to the New Hampshire call impersonating President Joe Biden. On Wednesday, chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel went further, proposing that broadcast television, radio, and some cable political ads disclose when synthetic material is used.

“As artificial intelligence tools become more accessible, the Commission wants to make sure consumers are fully informed when the technology is used,” Rosenworcel said in a statement. “Today, I’ve shared with my colleagues a proposal that makes clear consumers have a right to know when AI tools are being used in the political ads they see, and I hope they swiftly act on this issue.”

This is all great, but voters are probably going to encounter more digital fakes online than over broadcast. And for digital ads, the government hasn’t issued any solutions.

The Federal Election Commission was petitioned by the advocacy group Public Citizen to create rules requiring FCC-like disclosures for all political ads, regardless of the medium, but the agency has yet to act. A January Washington Post report said that the FEC plans to make some decision by early summer. But summer is around the corner, and we haven’t heard much. The Senate Rules Committee passed three bills to regulate the use of AI in elections, including disclosures, earlier this month, but there’s no promise it will hit the floor in time to make a difference.

If you really want to get scared, there are only 166 days until the presidential election. That’s not many days to get something related to AI disclosures over the finish line, especially before the Biden and Trump campaigns, and all the downballot politicians, start dumping even more cash into ads on social platforms.

Without regulations, tech companies will carry much of the responsibility for protecting our elections from disinformation. If it doesn’t sound that different from 2020, I feel the same way! It’s a new issue, but with the same companies leading the charge. In November, Meta said that political ads must include disclaimers when they contain AI-generated content. TikTok doesn’t allow political ads, but it does require creators to label AI content when they share synthetic content depicting realistic images, audio, and video.

It’s something, but what happens if they make a huge mistake? Sure, Mark Zuckerberg and every other tech CEO may get hauled in by Congress for a hearing or two, but it’s unlikely they’d face regulatory consequences before the election takes place.

There’s a lot at stake here, and we’re running out of time. If Congress or an agency were to issue some guidance, they’d need to do it in the next few months. Otherwise, it might not be worth the effort.

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

January 4, 2024

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

JAN 5, 2024

The Democrats on the House Oversight Committee today released a 156-page report showing that when he was in the presidency, Trump received at least $7.8 million from 20 different governments, including those of China, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Kuwait, and Malaysia, through businesses he owned. 

The Democrats brought receipts. 

According to the report—and the documents from Trump’s former accounting firm Mazars that are attached to it—the People’s Republic of China and companies substantially controlled by the PRC government paid at least $5,572,548 to Trump-owned properties while Trump was in office; Saudi Arabia paid at least $615,422; Qatar paid at least $465,744; Kuwait paid at least $300,000; India paid at least $282,764; Malaysia paid at least $248,962; Afghanistan paid at least $154,750; the Philippines paid at least $74,810; the United Arab Emirates paid at least $65,225. The list went on and on. 

The committee Democrats explained that these payments were likely only a fraction of the actual money exchanged, since they cover only four of more than 500 entities Trump owned at the time. When the Republicans took control of the House of Representatives in January 2023, Oversight Committee chair James Comer (R-KY) stopped the investigation before Mazars had produced the documents the committee had asked for when Democrats were in charge of it. Those records included documents relating to Russia, South Korea, South Africa, and Brazil. 

Trump fought hard against the production of these documents, dragging out the court fight until September 2022. The committee worked on them for just four months before voters put Republicans in charge of the House and the investigation stopped. 

These are the first hard numbers that show how foreign governments funneled money to the president while policies involving their countries were in front of him. The report notes, for example, that Trump refused to impose sanctions on Chinese banks that were helping the North Korean government; one of those banks was paying him close to $2 million in rent annually for commercial office space in Trump Tower. 

The first article of the U.S. Constitution reads: “[N]o Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under [the United States], shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument [that is, salary, fee, or profit], Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.” 

The report also contrasted powerfully with the attempt of Republicans on the Oversight Committee, led by Comer, to argue that Democratic Joe Biden has corruptly profited from the presidency. 

In the Washington Post on December 26, 2023, Philip Bump noted that just after voters elected a Republican majority, Comer told the Washington Post that as soon as he was in charge of the Oversight Committee, he would use his power to “determine if this president and this White House are compromised because of the millions of dollars that his family has received from our adversaries in China, Russia and Ukraine.”

For the past year, while he and the committee have made a number of highly misleading statements to make it sound as if there are Biden family businesses involving the president (there are not) and the president was involved in them (he was not), their claims were never backed by any evidence. Bump noted in a piece on December 14, 2023, for example, that Comer told Fox News Channel personality Maria Bartiromo that “the Bidens” have “taken in” more than $24 million. In fact, Bump explained, Biden’s son Hunter and his business partners did receive such payments, but most of the money went to the business partners. About $7.5 million of it went to Hunter Biden. There is no evidence that any of it went to Joe Biden. 

All of the committee’s claims have similar reality checks. Jonathan Yerushalmy of The Guardian wrote that after nearly 40,000 pages of bank records and dozens of hours of testimony, “no evidence has emerged that Biden acted corruptly or accepted bribes in his current or previous role.”

Still, the constant hyping of their claims on right-wing media led then–House speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) to authorize an impeachment inquiry in mid-September, and in mid-December, Republicans in the House formalized the inquiry. 

There is more behind the attack on Biden than simply trying to even the score between him and Trump—who remains angry at his impeachments and has demanded Republicans retaliate—or to smear Biden through an “investigation,” which has been a standard technique of the Republicans since the mid-1990s.

Claiming that Biden is as corrupt as Trump undermines faith in our democracy. After all, if everyone is a crook, why does it matter which one is in office? And what makes American democracy any different from the authoritarian systems of Russia or Hungary or Venezuela, where leaders grab what they can for themselves and their followers?

Democracies are different from authoritarian governments because they have laws to prevent the corruption in which it appears Trump engaged. The fact that Republicans refuse to hold their own party members accountable to those laws while smearing their opponents says far more about them than it does about the nature of democracy.

It does, though, highlight that our democracy is in danger.

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

[beardedmrbean]

OTTAWA — The capital of one of the world’s most stable democracies is gripped by growing panic about foreign agents working in elected office. A bombshell report by Canadian lawmakers has unnerved Parliament Hill, alleging that unnamed politicians have been covertly working with foreign governments.

The revelation in heavily redacted findings released this week by an all-party national security committee adds intrigue to a separate and ongoing inquiry into foreign interference in Canada’s 2019 and 2021 elections.

The new report from the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians is the first to suggest that lawmakers in Canada’s parliament may have helped foreign actors meddle in political campaigns and leadership races. Heightened anxiety in Ottawa about foreign interference comes in the middle of historic global elections where factors such as artificial intelligence and emboldened foreign powers are testing the resilience of democratic systems.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has been on the defensive since the allegations broke Monday. Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre is calling on the government to name names.

“The national security committee indicates there are members of this House that have knowingly worked for foreign hostile governments,” Poilievre said Wednesday. “Canadians have a right to know who and what is the information — who are they?”

The findings put pressure on Canada's national police force to investigate potential criminal charges. The report also refuels debate on the ability of the federal government’s deterrence mechanisms to curb foreign interference in a country whose political and legal system is considered one of the highest-performing in the world.

The all-party NSICOP said Monday that it has reviewed intelligence that suggests “semi-witting or witting” parliamentarians have worked with foreign missions to mobilize voters during a political campaign; have taken cash “knowingly or through willful blindness” from foreign missions or their proxies; and have shared privileged information with foreign diplomatic officials.

The committee with top-security clearance said it based its findings on more than 4,000 documents and some 1,000 pieces of evidence. Its report said China remains the largest foreign interference threat to Canada with India the second.

The intelligence included a claim that unnamed parliamentarians are taking direction from unnamed diplomats to “improperly influence” their colleagues or parliamentary business to the benefit of a foreign state.

One of the most damaging lines in Monday’s report points out Canada’s failure to address long-standing challenges in how national security information can be used in criminal proceedings. The report says this is one reason why criminal charges for the potentially illegal activities are unlikely.

Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland told reporters Tuesday that she takes the issue seriously. She deflected when asked if Canadians have the right to know the identity of the parliamentarians involved.

“We should recognize this is a new time,” she said, adding that authoritarians want to undermine democracies by sowing public distrust in government.

Freeland would not commit to releasing names, nor did she agree that “sunlight” on the issue would benefit democracy. On Wednesday, after her Liberal party’s weekly caucus meeting, she ignored questions on the topic.

The Trudeau government called an inquiry into foreign interference in September in the wake of claims that the Chinese government helped mobilize voters against a Conservative candidate in western Canada and helped elect another as a Liberal in the Toronto area.

It tasked Justice Marie-Josée Hogue with investigating foreign interference and election meddling, a topic that has also captured the interest of U.S. Congress.

Last fall, Conservative MP Michael Chong appeared before the congressional-executive commission on China to testify about being targeted by Beijing because of his defense of Uyghur issues.

Chong discovered through media reports that a Chinese diplomat had been assigned to collect information on him and his family. Canada’s spy agency has warned other Canadian parliamentarians, including NDP MP Jenny Kwan, that they were also being surveilled by China.

An initial report released by Hogue last month observed that the government’s messy handling of foreign interference has undermined the public’s faith in Canadian democracy.

Hogue’s early findings stated that foreign interference did not significantly influence the 2019 or 2021 federal elections in a way that would have changed the fact that Trudeau’s Liberals won back-to-back minority governments.

The Conservatives were initially quiet about this week’s revelations, but on Wednesday Chong pressed the government to identify the parliamentarians alleged to have colluded with foreign state actors.

“We all know that no responsible government would reveal names under these types of confidential circumstances,” Public Safety Minister Dominic LeBlanc responded on the floor of the House of Commons.

LeBlanc remained resolute Thursday against calls to release any names based on preliminary information.

“It's important for Canadians to understand that these names are contained in intelligence reports, in some cases, it's uncorroborated or unverified intelligence information,” he told a parliamentary committee studying foreign interference. “The idea that there's a perfect list of names that is entirely reliable that should be released to the public is simply irresponsible.”

David McGuinty, chair of the NSICOP, which published the buzzy redacted report, said the decision to publicize the names of lawmakers is outside of his control.

McGuinty and the nine other NSICOP members with top-secret security clearance are bound by Canada’s Security of Information Act and risk prosecution if they inadvertently reveal classified information, he said.

He wouldn’t say if he’s bothered by sitting in the same party caucus with potential abettors of foreign interference.

“I'm more concerned about the fact that now the government has to move forward on this,” McGuinty said.

[conferenceineurope]

International Academic Conferences on Distance Education

International Academic Conference is a great way which allows researchers to present their findings to a committee which taking place around the world. An academic conference is a platform where you get a chance to share your research findings and engage in insightful discussions with others on the latest happenings of a particular subject in your field of study. It offers the opportunity to peer over the fence and see what’s going on outside of a particular specialty. It also can be called a research conference, academic congress or symposium. In this field researchers can come together, present their research, comment on each other’s research, network with one another and engage in career development in their profession. Symposium, Seminar, Colloquium and Workshop are the four different types of conferences. Communication, problem solving capacity, leadership and decision making power and many more skills are developed through conferences. 

Distance education is a system of education in which there is no face to face contact of the source of information and the learner, they are separated by time and way of distance but they are linked through correspondence, television, radio talk, phone or computer. The main aim of distance education is to provide quality education to which those cannot access traditional education due to geographical, financial and other constraints. A degree acquired in the distance mode from a UGC-DEB is equivalent to a degree acquired through the regular mode. In distance education there is a flexible schedule, unmatchable accessibility, less cost and reduces travelling pressure. The learning experience must have a clear purpose with tightly focused outcomes and objectives.

Distance education aims to give quality education to all. How to manage it? What is Distance education actually? What are the types of Distance education? Distance education system in India. What is difference between open education and distance education? Who is the father of distance education? What is the benefit of distance education? What are the advantages and disadvantages in distance education? What is online education system? These are the valid point to know about distance learning. Can learning environments must include problem based as well as knowledge based learning. Distance learning is clearer when we attend conference, seminars, workshops, events related to distance education.

[ippnoida]

Jagran New Media launches Marathijagran.com

Jagran New Media has expanded its digital footprint in the state of Maharashtra by launching MarathiJagran.com, a comprehensive news website specifically tailored for the Marathi-speaking community. The website has a wide range of verified and credible content, including news, entertainment, business, lifestyle, and more, in the Marathi language.

Designed to cater to the unique interests and needs of Marathi-speaking readers, Marathi Jagran will offer a comprehensive range of content, including real-time news coverage, in-depth articles, engaging videos, and multimedia features.

Expanding Jagran New Media's digital footprint in Maharashtra, the website will deliver news across various categories such as entertainment, markets, stocks, lifestyle, and astrology, all in the Marathi language. It will ensure timely updates on local news while also providing content with a national perspective. Through this initiative, readers will now gain access to Jagran Group’s extensive news network, featuring factual and investigative reports from Jagran Prime and fact-checked stories from Vishwas News in Marathi, a press release stated.

Eknath Shinde, chief minister of Maharashtra, Devendra Fadnavis, deputy CM, Sharad Pawar, Nationalist Congress Party chief, Uddhav Thackeray, for CM, and Nana Patole, president of Maharashtra Pradesh Congress Committee have welcomed the new website.

Bharat Gupta, CEO, Jagran New Media, said, “Localization continues to be a key element in the digital landscape. With Marathi Jagran, we are expanding our footprint to connect more deeply with local and global Marathi-speaking audiences by providing content in their native language, following our ethos of DEI. This initiative is a part of our broader mission to enhance accessibility and cater to the diverse linguistic preferences of our audience across India with personalization. We’re excited for this launch and will be soon expanding to more and more languages.”

Rajesh Upadhyay, editor-in-chief, Jagran New Media, added, “The launch of Marathi Jagran marks a significant milestone for us in connecting with our audience on a more personal level. MarathiJagran.com will not only provide timely and relevant news to audiences worldwide but also celebrate the rich cultural heritage of Maharashtra. We look forward to engaging with our readers and offering them a platform that reflects their voice and values with content that is data-backed, credible, and verified.”

The Marathi Jagran website offers a user-friendly interface, ensuring that readers can easily navigate and access the content that interests them. The portal aims to become the go-to destination for Marathi-speaking individuals seeking news, entertainment, and lifestyle updates not only in India but internally as well.

[onlinenotebank]

Quit India Movement

The Quit India Movement or the India August Movement, was a movement launched at the Bombay session of the All-India Congress Committee by Mahatma Gandhi on 8 August 1942, during World War II, demanding an end to British Rule of India. The Cripps Mission had failed, and on 8 August 1942, Gandhi made a call to Do or Die in his Quit India speech delivered in Bombay at the Gowalia Tank Maidan. The…

[livesanskrit]

Send from Sansgreet Android App. Sanskrit greetings app from team @livesanskrit .

It's the first Android app for sending @sanskrit greetings. Download app from https://livesanskrit.com/sansgreet

Sarat Chandra Bose.

Sarat Chandra Bose was an Indian barrister and independence activist. In 1936, Bose became the President of the Bengal Pradesh Congress Committee, and served as a member of the All India Congress Committee from 1936 till 1947. Sarat Bose was arrested after the escape of Subhas the day before he was due to join as Cabinet Minister in the Fazlul Haq government. He was moved to jail in Mercara and then Coonoor where his health suffered. He was released in September 1945 after a 4 1/2 year prison sentence. From 1946 to 1947, Bose would lead the Congress delegation to the Central Legislative Assembly. He strongly supported the formation of the Indian National Army by Subhas Bose, and actively participated in the Quit India movement. Following his brother's reported death in 1945, Bose led efforts to provide relief and aid to the families of INA soldiers through the INA Defence and Relief Committee. In 1946, he was appointed Member of the Interim Government for Works, Mines and Powers – the position of a minister in a national executive council led by Jawaharlal Nehru and Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, and presided over by the Viceroy of India.

#sansgreet #sanskritgreetings #greetingsinsanskrit #sanskritquotes #sanskritthoughts #emergingsanskrit #sanskrittrends #trendsinsanskrit #livesanskrit #sanskritlanguage #sanskritlove #sanskritdailyquotes #sanskritdailythoughts #sanskrit #samskrit #resanskrit #indianmartyrs #freedomfighters #indianfreedomfighter #indianheroes #merabharathmahan #indianfreedom #netaji #netajisubhaschandrabose #subhashchandrabose #netajisubhashchandrabose #indiannationalarmy #indianarmy #celebratingsanskrit #saratchandrabose

[werindialive]

PAC to Investigate SEBI Chief Madhabi Puri Buch Over Conflict of Interest Allegations 

Madhabi Puri Buch, the Chairperson of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI), is under scrutiny after allegations surfaced regarding a conflict of interest during her tenure. The Parliament's Public Accounts Committee (PAC) has initiated an investigation into claims that Buch continued to receive payments from ICICI Bank while holding her regulatory position at SEBI. These payments, which included pensions and Employee Stock Ownership Plans (ESOPs), have raised questions about whether Buch’s financial ties to the bank compromised her impartiality as the head of the market regulator. 

The Congress party has been particularly vocal, accusing Bush of receiving substantial sums from ICICI Bank, amounts that allegedly exceeded her salary during her time at the bank. These payments reportedly varied in amount and frequency, sparking concerns about transparency and Buch’s potential conflict of interest. Congress leader Pawan Khera has pointed out that the bank even paid Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) on her ESOPs, a benefit he claims might not be extended to all employees, further intensifying scrutiny. 

The PAC, chaired by K. C. Venugopal, has added this issue to its agenda following demands from several members during a meeting in late August. They are expected to summon Buch later this month, along with officials from the finance and corporate affairs ministries, to delve deeper into SEBI’s functioning and Bush's involvement with ICICI Bank. 

In addition to these allegations, Buch has been linked to the Adani Group controversy through a report by Hindenburg Research. The report claims that Buch and her husband owned stakes in companies tied to a money syphoning scandal involving the group. These allegations were strongly denied by Buch, who maintains that all required financial disclosures were made to SEBI during her tenure. 

Buch, who became the first woman to lead SEBI in 2022, has built a reputation as a reformist leader, introducing stricter regulatory frameworks for India’s financial markets. However, the controversy surrounding her financial ties to ICICI Bank has cast a shadow over her accomplishments. While her supporters argue that the payments were legitimate retirement benefits, the investigation by the PAC will determine whether any ethical lines were crossed. 

The outcome of this inquiry is likely to have significant implications for Buch’s career and SEBI’s reputation, as the committee seeks to ensure that regulatory bodies maintain integrity and independence.

For more politics news in Hindi, subscribe to our newsletter.

[valkyries-things]

ARUNA ASAF ALI // EDUCATOR

“She was an Indian educator, political activist and publisher: She was an active participant in the Indian independence movement, at one time arrested and held in solitary confinement. On 8 August 1942, Mahatma Gandhi made a speech in the Gowalia Tank Maidan in Mumbai calling on the British to leave immediately. The All India Congress Committee passed the Quit India resolution at the Bombay session. The major leaders were arrested and Aruna Asaf Ali presided over the remainder of the session. On this day she hoisted the Congress flag at the Gowalia Tank Maidan, which marked the beginning of the movement. In old age she was called the 'Grand Old Lady of the independence movement. Post-independence she became Delhi's first mayor.”

[companyknowledgenews]

Hindenburg news: Congress demands Centre to ‘eliminate all conflicts…’; TMC asks ‘will CBI, ED file cases?’ - Notice Global Online https://www.merchant-business.com/hindenburg-news-congress-demands-centre-to-eliminate-all-conflicts-tmc-asks-will-cbi-ed-file-cases/?feed_id=161998&_unique_id=66b83d21e1841 #GLOBAL - BLOGGER BLOGGER Hours after US short-seller Hindenburg Research levelled allegations against Sebi chairperson Madhabi Buch, the Congress on Saturday asked the Central government to immediately eliminate all conflicts of interest in the regulator’s investigation of the Adani Group.Congress general secretary Jairam Ramesh, in an official statement, said the Sebi’s “strange reluctance” to investigate the “Adani mega scam” has been long noted, not least by the Supreme Court’s Expert Committee.“Under public pressure, after the Adani horse had bolted, SEBI’s board reintroduced stricter reporting rules on 28 June 2023. It told the Supreme Court’s Expert Committee on 25 August 2023 that it was investigating 13 suspicious transactions. Yet the investigations never bore fruit,” the Congress leader added.He stated that Hindenburg Research’s revelations on Saturday indicate that Buch and her husband invested in the same offshore funds based in Bermuda and Mauritius, where “Vinod Adani and his close associates, Chang Chung-Ling and Nasser Ali Shahban Ahli, had also invested money obtained from the over-invoicing of power equipment.”“The government must act immediately to eliminate all conflicts of interest in the SEBI investigation of Adani. The fact is that the seeming complicity of the highest officials of the land can only be resolved by setting up a JPC (joint parliamentary committee) to investigate the full scope of the Adani mega scam,” he said.Similarly, Trinamool Congress leader Mahua Moitra also said, “crony capitalism is at its finest”. In a post on X (formerly Twitter), Moitra wrote, “In true Adani style – even SEBI Chairman is investor in his group.”“Crony Capitalism at its finest. @CBiHeadquarters&@Dir_ED – will you be filing POCA and PMLA cases or not?” she asked.Google News What does Hindenburg’s new report say?Hindenburg Research has released an exclusive new report implicating SEBI chairperson Madhabi Puri Buch in the ‘Adani money siphoning scandal.’ This report follows more than a year after Hindenburg first accused the Adani Group of insider trading and other stock market violations—allegations consistently denied by the conglomerate led by Gautam Adani.The latest report highlights an offshore Mauritius fund called IPE Plus Fund, reportedly established by Vinod Adani through India Infoline. It also references the Bermuda-based Global Dynamic Opportunities Fund, which invested in IPE Plus Fund 1. Vinod Adani, a Dubai-based businessman and the elder brother of Gautam Adani, is still connected to the Adani Group.“We had previously noted Adani’s total confidence in continuing to operate without the risk of serious regulatory intervention, suggesting that this may be explained through his relationship with the SEBI Chairperson. What we hadn’t realized: the current SEBI Chairperson and her husband, Dhaval Buch, had hidden stakes in the exact same obscure offshore Bermuda and Mauritius funds, found in the same complex nested structure, used by Vinod Adani,” the report said.Google News What did Hindenburg’s previous report say?Last January, Hindenburg Research, known for shorting companies like electric truck maker Nikola Corp and Twitter (now X), accused the Adani Group of orchestrating “the largest con in corporate history.” The report claimed that the conglomerate used a complex network of offshore companies in tax havens to inflate revenues and manipulate stock prices while accumulating significant debt.Despite the Adani Group’s strong denial of these accusations, the report caused a sharp decline in the group’s stock prices, erasing over USD 150 billion in market value across its 10 listed companies at their lowest point.

However, most of these companies have since recovered their losses.Following the Hindenburg report, the Supreme Court of India directed the market regulator SEBI to investigate and formed an expert panel to examine potential regulatory lapses. The panel did not issue any negative findings against Adani, and the Supreme Court concluded that no additional investigations were necessary beyond SEBI’s ongoing inquiry.SEBI informed the Supreme Court-appointed panel that it was investigating 13 opaque offshore entities holding between 14% and 20% in five publicly traded stocks of the conglomerate. It remains unclear if these two ongoing investigations have since been completed.(With inputs from agencies)Catch all the Budget News , Business News , Breaking News Events and Latest News Updates on Live Mint. Download The Mint News App to get Daily Market Updates.MoreLess“Congress criticied SEBI’s reluctance to investigate the Adani Group, despite ongoing probes into suspicious transactions. Hindenburg’s new report implicates SEBI Chairperson Buch in the Adani money siphoning scandal…”Source Link: https://www.livemint.com/news/india/hindenburg-news-congress-centre-eliminate-all-conflicts-tmc-asks-will-cbi-ed-file-cases-sebi-madhabi-buch-adani-11723337263358.html http://109.70.148.72/~merchant29/6network/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/9100831954_fffef93ae3_o.jpg Hours after US short-seller Hindenburg Research levelled allegations against Sebi chairperson Madhabi Buch, the Congress on Saturday asked the Central government to immediately eliminate all conflicts of interest in the regulator’s investigation of the Adani Group. Congress general secretary Jairam Ramesh, in an official statement, said the Sebi’s “strange reluctance” to investigate the “Adani mega … Read More

[mariacallous]

This week, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Moore v. United States, a case that centers on the mandatory repatriation tax (MRT). The MRT was enacted as part of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) and required corporations to a pay a one-time tax on deferred foreign profits. These are profits that were earned by foreign subsidiaries of American businesses, but not returned home and therefore not yet subjected to U.S. taxation.

The plaintiffs, Charles and Kathleen Moore, argue that a ruling in their favor would ensure Congress could never impose a wealth tax. Many on the right oppose such a tax, most famously proposed by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and thus organizations like Americans for Tax Reform, the Cato Institute, FreedomWorks, and the Manhattan Institute have filed amicus briefs in support of the plaintiffs. In reality, the case has little to do with such a tax.

Rather, a ruling in favor of the Moores risks upending key elements of the current federal income tax and wreaking havoc on parts of the U.S. economy. As we detail with additional colleagues in an amicus brief in support of the respondent, the federal government, the Court should rule against the Moores and affirm the lower court ruling.

The Moores, shareholders in a manufacturing business based in India, were subject to the MRT on the business’s profits that had not yet been distributed to shareholders. The MRT rate is 15.5 percent if such profits were held in liquid assets such as cash or 8 percent if such profits were illiquid (invested in a factory abroad, for example). The TCJA allows taxpayers to pay the MRT in installments over eight years. The Moores’ MRT liability was approximately $15,000.

At enactment, the MTR was estimated to raise $338.8 billion and was used, in part, to finance the transition to a new system of taxing foreign profits of U.S. multinational corporations. To give a sense of the magnitude involved here: the entire TCJA was estimated to reduce revenue by $1.456 trillion, or just about four times the amount involved here.

Prior to the TCJA, the United States had a “worldwide” corporate income tax with deferred taxation of foreign profits. This meant that profits earned in a foreign country by U.S.-based multinational corporations first faced that jurisdiction’s corporate income tax. If and when those profits were repatriated to the United States, they were subject to additional taxation: the U.S. corporate tax minus a tax credit for any foreign income taxes paid. Because the U.S. corporate tax rate was among the highest in the world (35 percent), any foreign tax credit was almost never sufficient to fully offset additional U.S. tax.

This system created several perverse incentives. Corporations could avoid the additional U.S. tax by holding foreign profits overseas, which led to a significant accumulation of overseas profits. Prior to the TCJA, the Joint Committee on Taxation estimated that there were more than $3 trillion in retained foreign profits. The system also encouraged corporations to shift profits, mobile assets, and their headquarters overseas as strategies to minimize their tax liability.

The TCJA addressed these issues by moving to a “quasi-territorial” system. Under this system, U.S. corporations no longer face an additional U.S. tax when they repatriate earnings. At the same time, the TCJA enacted a minimum tax, without deferral, on foreign profits as a backstop. U.S. corporations now either pay a low-rate U.S. tax immediately on their foreign profits or not at all.

For foreign profits that were earned under the previous system but had yet to face U.S. tax, lawmakers decided that it would be an unfair windfall to completely excuse them from U.S. taxation. These profits had, after all, been earned with the expectation that they would eventually be subject to U.S. tax. And it would have been too complex to require corporations to track two stocks of profits for years or decades: pre-TCJA profits that would face tax when repatriated and post-TCJA profits that face no tax. It was far simpler and fairer to immediately wipe the slate clean with a one-time low tax on all existing unrepatriated profits.

The Moores disagree. They argue that the MRT is “an unapportioned direct tax in violation of the Constitution’s apportionment requirements.” There is an exception to this requirement: the 16th Amendment, which authorizes income taxation without apportionment among the states. But that amendment, they argue, only applies to taxes on realized income, while the MRT taxes unrealized income.

There is, however, no reason to think the MRT is unconstitutional. In fact, the Court need not even consider whether the 16th Amendment applies only to realized income for the simple reason that the MRT is not a direct tax. As an indirect tax, the MRT does not need to be apportioned among the states.

Court precedent clearly does not support the argument that a tax on foreign commerce is a direct tax. Historical sources are clear that all direct taxes are internal. In addition, the MRT is not a direct tax because it is a tax on the use of a certain business entity. Indeed, the Court cited similar grounds when, prior to the adoption of the 16th Amendment, it upheld the corporate income tax as an indirect tax.

Leaving aside any question of constitutionality, a ruling in favor of the Moores risks upending key elements of the income tax. A constitutional requirement that income be realized in order to be subject to tax would increase economic distortions, create policy uncertainty, and reduce federal revenue.

A realization requirement is undesirable because a realization-based tax system is economically incoherent. Economists generally favor one of two coherent tax bases: income or consumption. A realization-based income tax is neither. As a result, it creates economic distortions, such as an incentive to hold on to assets that have gone up in value, as well as unfairness, as equally well-off individuals are taxed differently based on when they buy and sell, and opportunities to avoid paying tax altogether.

A realization requirement would also introduce significant economic uncertainty by calling into question numerous provisions of the income tax that currently deviate from the realization principle. For example, partners in Subchapter K partnerships are taxed on their share of business profits whether or not those profits are distributed. This provision and many more could be subject to years of litigation. During this time, businesses could delay or forgo important investments.

A ruling in favor of the Moores could also put important pro-growth tax policy at risk. The current income tax system deviates from the realization principle by providing depreciation deductions. These provisions allow businesses to deduct the value of an asset prior to its disposal. Under a strict realization requirement, a taxpayer would need to wait until they sold or otherwise disposed of a fixed asset to deduct its cost, similar to how a corporate stock is treated under current law. Many proponents of pro-growth tax reform advocate for the immediate write-off (expensing) of some or all of the cost of these assets as an effective means of lowering the marginal effective tax rate on new investment. In fact, a key provision of the TCJA significantly strengthened this policy. A strict realization rule would risk upending this policy and would raise the effective tax burden on new investment.

A Moore victory could also reintroduce many of the problems with the taxation of multinational corporations that the TCJA sought to address. A realization requirement could undo elements known as Subpart F and GILTI, or global intangible low-taxed income, which tax foreign profits of U.S. multinational corporations without realization. Without these backstops, corporations would have a much greater incentive to shift profits and intellectual property into low-tax jurisdictions.

Besides introducing new economic distortions, a realization requirement could threaten a significant amount of federal revenue. The direct effect of a ruling would be a loss of hundreds of billions of dollars in revenue due to invalidation of the MRT. On top of that, the federal government also risks losing much more depending on the breadth of the ruling. Economist Eric Toder at the Tax Policy Center estimates that the federal government could lose more than $87 billion in 2024 and more than $124 billion by 2028 and every year thereafter. Congress may respond to this lost revenue by enacting taxes that are even more distortionary or by incurring even larger, and less sustainable, budget deficits.

Economists have long understood that whether or not income is realized, it is still income. Nevertheless, it is reasonable and prudent for administrative and other reasons for Congress to distinguish between realized and unrealized income in some situations. For example, measuring income from the appreciation of certain closely held businesses or other illiquid assets is difficult and Congress has reasonably decided not to subject those gains to tax until they are realized. On the other hand, the current tax treatment of partnerships is appropriate to avoid obvious tax avoidance: Such taxpayers could otherwise park their income in their business to avoid tax. It could also be reasonable for Congress to design a system to tax unrealized gains that are easy to measure, such as those that arise from the appreciation of publicly traded assets.

Finally, there is an additional, and somewhat peculiar, aspect to this case. The Moores and several amici argue that the realization requirement they believe is inherent to the 16th Amendment means that a wealth tax, unless apportioned, would also be unconstitutional. It appears as if this logic has served to motivate much of the support behind them.

While we agree that any plausible wealth tax would likely be unconstitutional, there are obvious problems with the Moores’ claim that the MRT is nothing like a wealth tax. A wealth tax applies to the full value of an asset each year. As such, it would not matter whether an asset appreciates or not: A taxpayer would be subject to tax as long as the asset had positive value. In contrast, the MRT applies to earnings and profits of a foreign enterprise, not the value of the foreign enterprise. If the Moores’ foreign business earned no profit or if prior profits had already been repatriated, they would have owed no additional tax.

Given the risks and economic shortcomings of a realization requirement, the Supreme Court should not enshrine it in the Constitution. Instead, Congress should be free to decide whether and how to tax unrealized income.

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

Matt Davies :: Newsday Opinion

* * * * *

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

July 26, 2023

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

Yesterday a team of international researchers confirmed that human-caused climate change is driving the life-threatening heat waves in the U.S. and Europe. The U.S. has broken more than 2,000 high temperature records in the past month, and it looks like July will be the hottest month on Earth since scientists have kept records. 

Another study published yesterday warns that the Atlantic currents that transport warm water from the tropics north are in danger of collapsing as early as 2025 and as late as 2095, with a central estimate of 2050. As Arctic ice melts, the cold water that sinks and pulls the current northward is warming, slowing the mechanism that moves the currents. The collapse of that system would disrupt rain patterns in India, South America, and West Africa, endangering the food supplies for billions of people. It would also raise sea levels on the North American east coast and create storms and colder temperatures in Europe.

On Sunday and Monday, the ocean water off the tip of Florida reached temperatures over 100 degrees Fahrenheit (37.8 Celsius), the same temperature as an average hot tub. According to the Coral Restoration Foundation, a nonprofit organization in Florida’s Key Largo that works to protect coral reefs, the hot water has created “a severe and urgent crisis,” with mortality up to 100%. The Mediterranean Sea also hit a record high this week, reaching 83.1 degrees Fahrenheit (28.4 Celsius).

An op-ed by David Wallace-Wells in the New York Times today noted that more land burned in Quebec in June than in the previous 20 years combined; across Canada, more than 25 million acres burned. And most of Canada’s fire season is still ahead. 

Professor Ian Lowe of Australia’s Griffith University told The Guardian that he recalled reading the 1985 report that identified the link between greenhouse gasses and climate change, and worked to draw public attention to it. “Now all the projected changes are happening,” he said. “I reflect on how much needless environmental damage and human suffering will result from the work of those politicians, business leaders and public figures who have prevented concerted action. History will judge them very harshly.”

Former vice president Mike Pence, who is running for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination, today unveiled his economic proposal. It calls for eliminating the Environmental Protection Agency and the Biden administration’s incentives designed to address climate change. 

In that, he is in line with Republican lawmakers. Earlier this month, Mike Magner in Roll Call noted that at least four of the bills released so far by the House Appropriations Committee for 2024 include cutting funding to address climate change that Congress appropriated in the Inflation Reduction Act. Project 2025, which has provided the blueprint for a Trump presidency, says “the Biden Administration’s climate fanaticism will need a whole-of-government unwinding,” and calls for more use of fossil fuels. 

A new report from the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and Columbia University says that court cases related to climate change have more than doubled in five years. Thirty-four of the 2,180 lawsuits have been brought forward on behalf of children, teens, and young adults.  

And therein lies a huge problem for today’s Republican Party. A recent poll of young voters shows they care deeply about gun violence, economic inequality, LGBTQ+ rights, and climate change. All of those issues are only becoming more prominent. 

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

[pooma-education]

Quit India Movement

The Quit India Movement, also known as the August Movement, was a pivotal event in the Indian struggle for independence from British rule. Launched on August 8, 1942, by the Indian National Congress under the leadership of Mahatma Gandhi, the movement marked a significant escalation in the efforts to end British colonialism.

Background

The backdrop of the Quit India Movement was the growing dissatisfaction with British rule in India, exacerbated by World War II. The British decision to involve India in the war without consulting Indian leaders fuelled widespread anger. The failure of the Cripps Mission in March 1942, which proposed limited self-government after the war, further deepened the discontent.

Gandhi, who had long advocated for non-violent resistance, believed that the time had come for a decisive push towards independence. He called for the British to "Quit India" immediately, arguing that their departure was essential for India's welfare and global peace.

Launch of the Movement

On August 8, 1942, at the Bombay session of the All India Congress Committee, Gandhi gave his famous "Do or Die" speech, urging Indians to take up the struggle for freedom through non-violent means. The Quit India resolution was passed, demanding an end to British rule in India. Gandhi's call resonated deeply with the masses, and the movement quickly spread across the country.

Response and Repression

The British government responded swiftly and harshly to the Quit India Movement. Almost all of the top Indian leaders, including Gandhi, Jawaharlal Nehru, and Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, were arrested. The Congress Party was declared illegal, and the movement was met with brutal repression. Despite the crackdown, the movement sparked widespread protests, strikes, and acts of civil disobedience throughout India.

Ordinary citizens, students, and even workers joined in large numbers. In some areas, the protests turned violent, with attacks on government buildings, communication networks, and other symbols of British authority. The British used excessive force to quell the uprisings, leading to thousands of deaths and arrests.

Impact and Significance

Although the Quit India Movement was crushed within a few months, its significance was far-reaching. It demonstrated the widespread desire for independence and the Indian people's willingness to make sacrifices for their freedom. The British realized that their hold on India was weakening, and the movement intensified the resolve of Indian leaders to achieve independence.

The repression of the movement also led to increased international criticism of British policies in India. By the end of World War II, the British government was more inclined to negotiate with Indian leaders, setting the stage for India's eventual independence in 1947.

Conclusion

The Quit India Movement stands as a testament to the power of mass mobilization and the indomitable spirit of the Indian people. It was a critical step in the long journey toward India's independence, highlighting the resolve of the Indian masses and their leaders to end colonial rule. The movement remains a symbol of India's struggle for freedom and its enduring commitment to justice and self-determination. Jai hind!

(About the writer: Ms Priya Durairaj, The UN women designate)

[trustednewstribune]

Ex-Waqf House Panel Chief Rahman Khan Criticizes New Waqf Bill, Welcomes Joint Committee Review

K Rahman Khan, a veteran Congress leader and former Union minority affairs minister, has raised significant concerns about the new Waqf Amendment Bill introduced by the Narendra Modi government. Khan, who led a Joint Parliamentary Committee on Waqf in the late 1990s and early 2000s, believes the new legislation could undo key reforms established by the Waqf Act of 1995 and its 2013 amendments.

Background and Concerns

The new Bill, introduced in the Lok Sabha, has sparked controversy and opposition from various quarters. Critics, including Khan, argue that the government has bypassed essential consultations with stakeholders, including the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) and other organizations crucial to Waqf affairs.

In an interview with The Indian Express, Khan expressed his discontent with the lack of stakeholder engagement, noting that the previous amendments in 2013 were well-received by the Muslim community and addressed numerous issues related to Waqf properties. The 2013 amendments aimed to curb illegal encroachments and made them criminal offenses, improvements Khan feels are now under threat.

Key Issues with the New Bill

Khan outlined several major issues with the new Bill:

Reversal of Reforms: The proposed legislation seems to roll back the progress made by the 1995 Act and the 2013 amendments. Khan criticized the move to abolish Waqf Tribunals and the requirement for all Waqf properties to re-register, which he believes will lead to significant administrative challenges and potential exclusion of properties without formal deeds.

Impact on Waqf Boards: The Bill removes provisions that allowed Waqf Boards to independently register properties and introduces non-Muslims into Waqf Boards, which Khan argues is inappropriate for managing Muslim charitable and religious affairs.

Government's Stance and Future Review

The BJP argues that the Bill will increase transparency and ensure better representation of women in Waqf Boards. However, Khan disputes these claims, questioning the rationale behind including non-Muslims in Waqf Board management.

Despite his criticisms, Khan welcomed the decision to send the Bill to a Joint Committee of Parliament for detailed discussion. He views this as a positive step, allowing for a thorough examination of the Bill and ensuring that various stakeholders can present their perspectives before the legislation moves forward.

Khan’s comments highlight the ongoing debate over the Waqf Amendment Bill and underscore the need for comprehensive dialogue and consideration of all viewpoints before enacting significant changes to existing laws.

[livesanskrit]

Send from Sansgreet Android App. Sanskrit greetings app from team @livesanskrit .

It's the first Android app for sending @sanskrit greetings. Download app from https://livesanskrit.com/sansgreet

Quit India Movement.

The Quit India Movement (translated into several Indian languages as the Leave India Movement), also known as the August Movement, was a movement launched at the Bombay session of the All India Congress Committee by Mahatma Gandhi on 8 August 1942, during World War II, demanding an end to British rule in India.

#sansgreet #sanskritgreetings #greetingsinsanskrit #sanskritquotes #sanskritthoughts #emergingsanskrit #sanskrittrends #trendsinsanskrit #livesanskrit #sanskritlanguage #sanskritlove #sanskritdailyquotes #sanskritdailythoughts #sanskrit #resanskrit #quitindiamovement #quitindiamovementday #indianfreedom #augustmovement #aicc #mahatmagandhi #gowaliatank #inc #indianfreedomstruggle #freedomindia #august8 #celebratingsanskrit #incredibleindia #greatindia #worldwar2