The Threat of Nuclear Power - Free Essay Example

  There is a touching book based on a real story called Sadako and the Thousand Paper Cranes written by Eleanor Coerr. The book is about a two-year-old girl Sadako who survived Hiroshima bombing, but by the age of twelve she was diagnosed with thyroid cancer. She was informed that she had one year to live. The story is about her journey during the last year of her life. The plot is about Sadako making a thousand origami cranes, as the Japanese legend promises one wish to those who can do it.   Her only wish was to live and that gave her hope, but she died before she could finish making a thousand paper cranes. After Fukushima, Chernobyl, Hiroshima and Nagasaki disasters we know a nuclear war can wipe us all out, but despite the public concern for environment, international relations, and the future of our planet it has not made any impact on those in who have the power to stop the madness. It seems like the greed for money and power is the main reason nothing is being done about it. The likelihood of nuclear disaster occurring in one of the power plants somewhere is relatively small, but the aftermath of one is too great of a risk to take. Fukushima is still leaking into the Pacific Ocean seven years after the earthquake, and the area near Chernobyl power station is still uninhabitable thirty-two years later. Nuclear weapons probably pose a greater risk than a nuclear reactor meltdown, still it does not mean we should keep building nuclear power plants. Even though nuclear energy is cleaner than fossil fuels it can still be dangerous.   Nuclear Power is the manipulation of nuclear atomic reactions, using process called nuclear fission. With nuclear fission atoms are split and made into kinetic energy which heats up pipes and produces steam inside the generators which is the converted into electricity. Most Nuclear energy today is retrieved from nuclear fission, which depends on the use of uranium and plutonium. The first nuclear power plant was established in Russia in 1954, then in England in 1956 Nuclear energy was opened for commercial production. Today Nuclear power makes up fourteen percent of the worlds electricity. Even though it is carbon dioxide free, its not pollution free and can still be harmful if used as a weapon, or if a disaster occurred in one of the power plants around the world. The reason nuclear power is so dangerous is because of its radioactive emissions given off by Cesium, plutonium, Strontium, uranium, iodine, tritium and radioactive isotopes called alpha, beta and gamma radiation which dif fer in their relative power and intensity. Gamma radiation is the strongest form of radiation because of its penetrating force which can cause a blast sweeping everything within its range. Alpha radiation does most damage when ingested into living bodies. As contaminated food and water gets into the digestive system it damages cell membranes and kills them causing development of cancer overtime. Beta radiation consists of tiny particles that can pass through skin tissue severely wounding it. While there are some precautions and measures corporations have to take to ensure safety to the public the long-term threat of nuclear energy or weapons still poses a great danger to all living beings. In 2011 on March 11 Japan faced an event that nobody foresaw. Caused by a magnitude nine earthquake followed with a powerful tsunami three reactors of the nuclear power station Fukushima Daichi began to meltdown creating a complete disaster that continues to affect the world to this day. After the backup generators failed to supply cold water to the cores, Uranium rods started to melt within just a couple of hours after the earthquake hit, turning uranium into hot molten lava which made its way through the containment tank and then the concrete floor and eventually into the earth. Now the water from the mountains nearby pours over the reactors and becomes radioactive, making its way into the Pacific Ocean, and contaminating oceanic life and water. Today seven years after the disaster Fukushima is still contaminating the ocean because nobody can get close to the cores to clean up the mess as anyone could be killed by exposure to radiation within minutes. The Chernobyl nuclear power pl ant disaster happened on April 26, 1986 in the city of Pripyat, Ukraine. While Fukuhara occurred due by to a natural geological event The Chernobyl meltdown happened due to poor management and miscommunication. When the meltdown happened the toxic air from the blast drifted over for miles and forced 350,000 people to leave their homes and evacuate. During this incident many people died, and the authorities are the ones to blame for the incompetence and lack of preparation for an event like that. The precise number of casualties is unknown, but according the International Atomic Energy Agency there were fifty-six direct deaths, nine of which were children who died of thyroid cancer. One hundred thirty-three servicemen were hospitalized with acute radiation sickness and twenty-eight of them died within a few weeks after. Casualties of Chernobyl would not happen today because we have better understanding and better safety precautions for situations as such. Another thing that poses dan ger is nuclear weapons. During 1940s and 1950s the United States was preparing for warfare during the Cold War. The nuclear tests took place in Bikini Atoll located in the Republic of the Marshall Islands. They performed twenty-three tests over twelve years, forcing the settlers of the island to relocate due to high levels of radiation. Seventy years later we can still see the aftermath of that operation as many of the inhabitants of the island developed cancer and other diseases related to the radiation from the tests. Currently there are 450 nuclear power plants around the world. Annually they produce from 2000 to 2300 metric tons of high-level radioactive waste and a lot of it is not stored safely. Some radioactive elements take minutes to decay while other take thousands of years. For example, Tc-99 takes 220,000 years to decay, I-129 17 million years, Np-237 two million years, and Pu-239 24,000 years. Also, used uranium fuel rods which are extremely dangerous and must be stored in facilities with special water pools to be cooled off with cold water for ten years before they can be safely removed and put into dry storage. Nuclear radiation if not stored properly emits ionizing molecules, the same kind of particles that scatter when a nuclear bomb explodes. Ionizing molecules damage human DNA and kill cells or cause them to mutate which then progress into cancer. The effects of radiation on the food we eat are extremely worrisome. Fukushima radiation leaks into the water, the algae absorb radiati on, crustaceans eat the algae, big fish eats crustaceans, humans eat the fish, and humans get cancer. Were jeopardizing things we depend on, we put toxic waste into the ocean we fish from. After the Fukushima disaster we have been finding radiation in tuna. Radiation gets into the food, then into breast milk, and that results in babies being born with deformities. Increasing rates of cancer at this scale are something weve not had before, and its clearly caused by the toxins put into the environment. Cancer can be linked to pollution and pesticides, but certain cancers like leukemia and thyroid cancers are linked to isotope iodine 131 used in nuclear power plants. Immense numbers of Children have been getting cancers as such at an early age which is something we have not observed before people started to use nuclear power. Everyday forty-three children are born with cancer eight percent of which is leukemia cancer and two percent is thyroid cancer. The UNDP and UNICEF report stated, A well-established increase in thyroid cancer diagnosed in children and adolescents pose a major problem for health services, particularly in Belarus and Ukraine. The populations in the affected regions also suffer from endemic goitre (enlarged thyroid gland) ranging from mild to severe, due to a deficiency of iodine in the diet. Iodine deficiency as well as affect ing the thyroid gland diminishes the. Other diseases can also be caused by the Radiation from nuclear weapons and power plants. They include Cystic fibrosis, hemophilia, diabetes, and Congenital hypothyroid. Constant bombings like the ones in the Bikini Atoll had consequences on the marine life. Now we can see specifically in the Pacific Ocean starfish have been dying in large numbers, starfish with missing limbs and decaying internal organs. What happens to animals happens to us. We cannot assume that Radiation doesnt affect us just because we dont see immediate effects. If Radiation affects wildlife is also affects humans. People dismiss the consequences of Fukuhara, thinking that radiation can be diluted by the Pacific Ocean and that the problem will sort itself out. This is naive and somewhat misleading as the contamination can lead to bioconcentration in the food chain. Possible effects on the future could include the imbalance in food chain and species dying in large numbers causing other larger species to adapt to finding different food, which can cause mass extinctions of species that are useful to us. We must take action and use safer methods to produce electricity. We must maintain neutral international relations with other countries as that would improve the quality of life around the world and reduce the risk of nuclear conflict. Instead of using fossil fuels and nuclear energy we should build cars and houses powered by solar panels. Another alternative could be building more windmills, geothermal, and hydroelectric stations. As individuals we can help by wasting less electricity, be more eff icient, turn off the lights and hang our clothes to dry. In a safe and sustainable future, we wont be using nuclear energy for anything as it is expensive and dangerous. Renewable energy is better for the environment, our health and it is in our interest to use it. If people use Renewable energy there wont be another Chernobyl or Fukushima disaster. Its about time to think about what kind of a planet were leaving future generations with, its unfair to create problems and put them on the shoulders of young people. We have to change the way choose to produce energy and deal with international conflicts so that no more twelve-year-old kids die of thyroid cancer. Works Cited Grady, Denise. Measuring Radioactive Elements and Their Effects. The New York Times, The New York Times, 4 Apr. 2011, www.nytimes.com/2011/04/05/health/05primer.html. Jorgensen, Timothy J., and Health Physics and Radiation Protection Graduate Program. Bikini Islanders Still Deal with Fallout of US Nuclear Tests, 70 Years Later. The Conversation, The Conversation, 10 Sept. 2018, theconversation.com/bikini-islanders-still-deal-with-fallout-of-us-nuclear-tests-70-years-later-58567. Kirk WolfingerAmerica and the nuclear fusion. BBC Documentaries. 2016. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YEuzrfuap64 UNDP and UNICEF with the support of UN-OCHA and WHO. The Human Consequences of the Chernobyl Nuclear Accident A Strategy for Recovery. 6 February 2002. Pg. 36. https://www.iaea.org/sites/default/files/strategy_for_recovery.pdf Coerr, Eleanor. Full Text of Passing, London: F. Warne ; New York : Scribner, Welford, and Armstrong, 2004, archive.org/stream/SadakoAndTheThousandPaperCranes-English/SadakoAndTheThousandPaperCranes-A4-EleanorCoerr_djvu.txt.

What was the environment in which you were raised - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 2 Words: 494 Downloads: 1 Date added: 2018/12/18 Category Engineering Essay Type Admission Essay Level High school Did you like this example? Varanasi, a small town in India forms my background where I have been raised and lived together with my family members. Being the first born, life has not been easy following the economic status of parents where my father was only the breadwinner in the family and only worked as a local electrician with the salary of USD 6,500/per year. However, my parents did all their best to ensure we lived better despite the little earnings to support all the family needs. During my childhood, I remained very close to my father which greatly exposed to technology and I developed interests to learn more about. I remember how I engaged my father in the evening to ask about some gadgets and how they can be made since I wanted to learn much about it. However, my parents wanted me to get the education first which they thought was the best rather than focusing on technology which was my curiosity to learn. With the effort of my parents, I got a school around our home area which was a bit expens ive and most of the times I would spend at home due to fees debts. Being the only child who had joined a school in my neighborhood, everyone hated me and they actually celebrated when I was sent home for fees. However, this did not change my life and focus despite most of my friends abandoning me after their parents instructed them to isolate from me in whatever we do. Naturally, I love learning new things which will involve exploring and practical rather than getting what has already been prepared in books and theories. This trait led me to develop a conflict with teachers as I always complained we needed to do much of practical than the notes given in the class. With time I realized this was influence from my father whom I used to watch while doing his electrical jobs at home. Mostly, I preferred leaving the school earlier to watch and interact with my father while using his tools since I was curious to learn the electrical work and the related appliances. On observing my ag gressiveness, my father bought me a computer which I used to practice coding and learning about some new technology in it. My parents did not support me doing these coding with my computer and they encouraged me to focus on my studies little didnt they know computer and technology are sources of my prosperity. Further to this, after getting android which I got from my parents, I became IT expert by developing various applications in the phone which found me being nominated for a programming website competition in our school while in the eleventh standard. Due to my success in this competition both teachers and my parents started believing in me and appreciating what I did. For my neighborhood who heard about my success on the website, a competition was not happy and continued to hate me. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "What was the environment in which you were raised?" essay for you Create order

Biography Of Pablo Picasso s Les Demoiselles D Avignon

Pablo Picasso’s Les Demoiselles D’Avignon is considered by many to be a revolutionary breakthrough in the history of modern art. Demoiselles is a â€Å"great manifesto of modernist painting† as Picasso had abandoned all known form of traditional art, a radical break from the Western tradition that very much led to the Cubism movement (Bishop, 2002). What made Demoiselles revolutionary was that in it Picasso broke away from the two central characteristics of European painting since the Renaissance: the classical norm for the human figure, and the spatial illusionism of one-point perspective (Fry, 1966). Cubism had â€Å"destroyed [†¦] the realist conventions for three-dimensional perspective which had been dominant in art since the Renaissance† (Butler, 2010). While generally credited as the first Cubist painting, art historians such as John Golding have argued that it was only a â€Å"starting point for the history of Cubism† (1958). Indeed, th e picture predicates key characteristics of Cubism like the distortion and break down of objects and figures into distinct shapes, rather than being itself a Cubist painting. This analysis will concentrate on the elements of Cubism in Demoiselles and how it led to the movement. While Picasso’s Demoiselles is not a true Cubist work, it was nonetheless a major step towards Cubism. It features nude figures and background that are so distorted they seem to forgo any spatial depth. The softness of classical female bodies are restructured by Picasso intoShow MoreRelatedPablo Picasso : The Female Complex2868 Words   |  12 PagesPablo Picasso: The Female Complex Many artists develop their works from their most compelling moments in life, whether they are filled with excruciating pain or unspeakable joy. Pablo Picasso creates work based on a multitude of influences in his life, from the suicide of his best friend to the rising of his career (Bio). However, a single theme reoccurs throughout his life that most would argue causes him to create some of the greatest paintings of his time: women. Critics shaped the differentRead MoreThe Andy Warhol Museum Presents Unique And Intellectually Stimulating Exhibitions2058 Words   |  9 Pagesthat month, I got the idea to make screens of her beautiful face the first Marilyns.† - Andy Warhol (Marilyn) Andy Warhol Biography. Bio.com. AE Networks Television, n.d. Web. 10 Oct. 2016. Museum, The Andy Warhol. Exhibitions. The Warhol:. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Oct. 2016. MoMA Learning. MoMA. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Oct. 2016. Andy Warhol s Marilyn Prints. Andy Warhol s Marilyn Prints. N.p., n.d. Web. 14 Oct. 2016. Part Two: Identify the four roles that artists play that have not changed

Taxation Laws British Reaident in Australia

Question: Discuss about the Taxation Laws for British Reaident in Australia. Answer: Case study 1 Residence and Source: The learning under this case study provides an in depth overview regarding the residential status of an individual. The individual involved in this case is Fred who is a British resident has moved to Australia for a period of eleven month before returning to England. It is worth mentioning that Fred will be held liable for tax as he stayed in Australia for eleven months. Fred also earned an income before staying in France at the time of his employment in England will be taken into the account in the computation of taxable income for his stay in Australia (PATEL 2016). It is important to denote that at the time of assessment of residential status, which is matter of complex affair and is widely dependent on the individual personal state of affairs. In addition to this, an individual cannot exert pressure at the time of computation of residential status (Kirsch 2013). As stated by the Australian tax laws under the domicile test an individual who has lived for a period of 183 days will be held liable for a tax. Therefore, as per the case study Fred will be considered for tax since he has stayed in Australia for a period of 11 months (Chang 2016). A migrant in relation to the terms of visa living in Australia for 183 days is intermittently considered for taxation purpose. The learning has also reflected that Fred has purchased a land on lease for a period of 12 months and has also stayed in Australia with his wife before deciding to return to Australia on account of poor health (Kirsch 2013). As stated by the Australian agency of tax, an individual is pardoned on the condition when he proves the commissioner of tax agency that he or she does not have the plan of rolling himself or herself under the Australian residency. The income tax rulings in compliance with the domicile test gives an account of the country where a person is born before an individual decides to move to other country and choose his domicile as per the personal criteria. As the case study highlights that Fred is understood to be a British Resident and is looking forward to set up his trade in Australia (Woellner et al. 2016). The case study provides the truth of the residential status conducted on the assessor in order to consider the regularity period of the trips done by Fred. It should be noted that the learning did not provides an in depth information regarding his tenure of stay in Australia but it can be predicted that his stay will be longer than his previous stay (Deutsch 2014). The tenure of stay has been predicted to be longer since Fred has also brought up a house on lease. The residential status of Fred is considered based on his stay and he is liable to be taxed under the ITAA 97 for his business relations and family i n Australia. Case study 2 Ordinary Income I. Californian Copper Syndicate Ltd v Harris (Surveyor of Taxes) (1904) 5 TC 159 The following case undertakes the problems regarding the realization of capital assets and either or not the profits generated from the sale of a particular property could be exploited as the sale of minerals was assessable under the heads of ordinary income or considered as capital. Law: The rulings concerning the laws provides the guidance in determining the weather revenue generated from Isolated transactions can be considered as incomes and therefore assessable under subsection 25 (1) of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 (Clark 2014). Under this ruling isolated transaction is defined as those transactions, which occurs outside the ordinary course of business. Arguments: Under this case, the taxpayer spends the majority of its income in the acquisition of copper-bearing land and he did not have any sufficient amount of capital left with him to start work on the land. The taxpayer had to sell off the land in consideration of shares and realized substantial amount of profit (Krever and Mellor 2016). The taxpayer also contended that he substituted one capital asset with another capital assets and he had not realized any profit, which would be considered for assessment. Decisions: The court ruled that the taxpayer was assessable for tax on the account of profit arising from the sale of land and it will be treated as income. It was evident that the original intentions of the taxpayer were to make profit from the sale of land. Therefore, the capital, which was available with the taxpayer, was never sufficient to start mining activities on land. It was ruled that the profit on sale of land was not a mere substitution of one investment for another but the selling of land is considered as trending transactions. II. Scottish Australian Mining Co Ltd v FC of T (1950) 81 CLR 188 The case takes into the account the account the issues related to business proceeds and whether or not the subdivision and sale of land has been used by a mining organization will be considered as assessable income or it can be considered as a mere realization of capital asset. Law: Capital Gains Tax: According to Section 108-5 (1) of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 demonstrates that a capital gains assets is any sort of property or a legal right and any gain or capital loss may be derived if any CGT transactions happens to those assets. Arguments: The case states the taxpayer of the company executed the business of mining of 1771 acre of land near Newcastle, which it had purchased during late 1860s. The taxpayer continued its mining activities until 1924 and finally sold off the land when coal had been exhausted from that land. To attract heavy price the taxpayer incurred huge expenditure to subdivide the land by constructing roads, railways station (Boll 2014). Hence, the taxpayer derived huge amount of profit from sale of land and the commissioner assessed the taxpayer on the profit generated from such sales. The commissioner assessed that that taxpayer was assessable under Section 26 (a) either for profit arising from carrying on or carrying or profit from undertaking or Scheme. Decisions: The taxpayer argued he merely realized the capital in an advantageous manner and had not carried on a business that his profits were not assessable. He asserted that extensive work performed on the land was to fetch a best possible price. The court passed the decision that realization of assets was enterprising on the capital account (Tiley and Loutzenhiser 2012). The commonwealth law report shows that the outcome of the case took two long days. The decisions passed by the court stated the fact commercial exercise was treated as the mere realization of the capital asset. III. FC of T v Whitfords Beach Pty Ltd (1982) 150 CLR The above stated case takes into the considerations of issues related to business incomes in order to determine whether the subdivision and sale of land was of capital in nature. Law: The rulings under this case study offers guidance in assessing either the profits from Isolated transactions are treated as income and therefore, assessable under Section 25 (1) of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936. Arguments: The taxpayer was considered as company, which was formed in the year 1954 by the group of fisherman. On 20 December 1967 three development companies subdivided the land and sold out the land along with this they purchased the shares of fisherman in the taxpayer shares of $1.6 million. The commissioner assessed the taxpayer for the profits derived from land and asserted that the taxpayer was assessable under section 25 (1) or under 26 (a) as profits arising from any business undertakings. Decisions: The taxpayer argued that its activities did not result in realization of capital and its profits are not assessable. As per Gibbs CJ, Mason, Murphy and Wilson JJ the taxpayer was assessable under section 25 (1) for the profits derived from the sale of land (Faccio and Xu 2015). The declared that the taxpayer activities consisted of carrying on a business of land development. The court ruled that the taxpayer was company and its objectives were to determine purpose of those controlling the business. The outcomes of this case states that the profits should be assessed as taxpayer assessable income in accordance with the general accounting principles. The profits will be calculated by subtracting the gross proceeds from the value of sale of land. IV. Statham Anor v FC of T 89 ATC 4070 The above stated case raises the questions of net proceeds received from the sale of subdivided sale of land that can be assessable as income either under section 25 (1) or 26 (a) (Kania 2013). Law: Assessable income: It should be noted that sale of land which is originally acquired and used for farming and proceeds derived from carrying out the business activities represented the mere realization of capital assets. Arguments: The taxpayers were trustees of the estate of Charles Ademan who died in 1980 who had acquired a large farm in 1970 to raise his family and engage in some desultory farming. In the year 1976, the deceased decided to sell of the land to his brother in law and enter into the partnership with the intention of raising capital, which remained unfulfilled. The co-owners decided to subdivide the land and sell off the property. The subdivision of land was sold off through real estate and agents between 1980 and 1986 (Kania 2013). The commissioner considered the net proceeds as the sale of the subdivided land as the assessable income under section 25 (1) or 25 (a). Decisions: The taxpayer contented that the land was not used for business purpose and the deceased did not enter into any profit-making scheme. The taxpayer asserted that the land was merely realized and the net proceeds should not be treated for assessable income. The court ruled that the manner in which the subdivision of land took place which indicated that the taxpayers were not engaged in business or any profit making scheme (Faccio and Xu 2015.). The outcome of this case states that the degree of realization does not cover any business undertakings however, the scale of realization is a relevant matter which should be taken into the account in determining the nature of realization of such land. V. Casimaty v FC of T 97 ATC 5135 The above stated case study determines the sale of parts of property assessable under section 25 (1) or 25 A. Law: Assessable income: The law states that the sales of subdivided land originally acquired and utilized for farming activities. Revenue generated from carrying on a business represented a meager realization of capital assets. Arguments: The taxpayer originally acquired 988 acre of land to conduct the activities of farming and fencing based on Action view. However, his business could not grow due to drought, increasing debt and poor health. By 1970, it was evident that the taxpayer could not sustain interest on mortgage and had no alternative but to sell of portions of land from time to time to reduce his burden of debt. The commissioner assessed that the payer derived profit from the sale of subdivided block of land under Income Tax Assessment Act 1936. Decisions: The Federal court ruled that the subdivision and sale of parts of land was not assessable under the either Section 25 (1) or 25A. The federal court ruled that the Action View has been acquired by the taxpayer with the objective that no profit is assessable from the sale of land in compliance to the first limb of section 25A (1). Nor did the second Limb of the sub-section have any implication as because sales of land did not took place in the due course of business or from any profit undertakings. VI, Moana Sand Pty Ltd v FC of T 88 ATC 4897 The case study takes into the consideration that whether Section 25 (1) or 26 (a) in applied to assess the taxpayer income in regard to the value received by the taxpayer on subtracting the cost to generate profits which is generated from the sale of land. Law: The law provides the guidance in assessing whether the profits from Isolated Transactions are considered as assessable income under Section 25 (1) of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936. The rulings does not consider the applicability of the section 25A regarding the capital gains and capital losses under Part IIIA or Division 6A of Part III (Woellner et al. 2016). Arguments: The taxpayer acquired the land with the two-folded objective of working and selling surplus and holding the land until it is appropriate to sell the land on profit. After several years, the land was sold off for $500,000 and the commissioner included the value for assessment by subtracting the cost of land and other expense (Clark 2014). The taxpayer argued that no part of land was assessable under section 25 (1) or 25 (a). The taxpayer argued that the decision in FC of T v The Myer Emporum Ltd did not have any implications. Decision: Sheppard, Wilcox and Lee JJ of federal court held that for the year 30 June 1980 both the section 25 (1) and 26 (a) is applied to consider the taxpayer income for assessment and the amount of $370,000 received by the taxpayer during the year is the profit arising from land (Hayes 2015). The court passed its verdict that the profit was considered as income to ordinary concepts and the decision in FC of T v The Emporium Ltd 87 ATC 4363 is considered as assessable income under section 25 (1). VII. Crow v FC of T 88 ATC 4620 The case raises the question whether under Subsection 25 (1) or sec 26 (a) of the ITAA 1936 functions to include in the assessable income of the taxpayer profit derived from the sale of land near Hobart (Feld et al. 2016). Law: Assessable income: Sale of subdivided land acquired for farming and profits derived are assessable for realization of capital asset. Argument: Under the case the farmer had borrowed five blocks of land over a period of ten years and used for agricultural activities but it was eventually subdivided. After two years the taxpayer sold off the land for a net profit of 388,288. The taxpayer income was assessable for the profits derived by him, as he was carrying business for land development (Golosov et al. 2013). The intention of the taxpayer was to sell of the land as he was financially committed to pay his creditors. Decisions: The federal court held that the land taxpayer was assessable under the ITAA 1936 for profit derived by on execution of business activities of land development. It is evident that the court acknowledged that in the initial stages, the land was used for farming but the amount of debt compelled the taxpayer to sell of the land (Hayes 2015). The court also held that the transactions were of repetitive in nature, which had the characteristics of continuing business of land development. VIII. McCurry Anor v FC of T 98 ATC 4487 The case raises the question of profit generated from the sale of land assessable under Section 25 (1). Law: Assessable income: The taxpayer is assessed under the Section 25 (1) of ITAA 1936 on the earnings generated from the sale of land. Arguments: The taxpayers were brothers in this case and used their funds along with bank loan to construct townhouse on the land. The taxpayers later sold off the land during December 1988 which resulted in net profit of $75,811 to each of the tax payers (Hayes 2015). The tax payers denied that they engaged in any profit making activities by arguing that the sold the units due to financial difficulties. Decisions: The court ruled that the taxpayers income was assessable under the section 25 (1) in the form of profit making scheme from commercial undertakings. The outcomes of the court stated that the venture was in the form of trading venture and derived the anticipated profits (Harding 2013). Therefore, the taxpayer entered into commercial venture and eventually engaged in the development of land. Reference List: Boll, K., 2014. Mapping tax compliance: Assemblages, distributed action and practices: A new way of doing tax research.Critical Perspectives on Accounting,25(4), pp.293-303. Burkhauser, R.V., Hahn, M.H. and Wilkins, R., 2015. Measuring top incomes using tax record data: A cautionary tale from Australia.The Journal of Economic Inequality,13(2), pp.181-205. Chang, J., 2016. Foreign resident CGT withholding.Taxation in Australia,50(11), p.664. Clark, J., 2014. Capital gains tax: historical trends and forecasting frameworks.Economic Round-up, (2), p.35. Deutsch, R.L., 2014. Australian Tax Handbook 2006. Faccio, M. and Xu, J., 2015. Taxes and capital structure.Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis,50(03), pp.277-300. Feld, L.P., Ruf, M., Schreiber, U., Todtenhaupt, M. and Voget, J., 2016. Taxing away MA: The effect of corporate capital gains taxes on acquisition activity.Available at SSRN. Golosov, M., Troshkin, M., Tsyvinski, A. and Weinzierl, M., 2013. Preference heterogeneity and optimal capital income taxation.Journal of Public Economics,97, pp.160-175. Gordon, R.H. and Kopczuk, W., 2014. The choice of the personal income tax base.Journal of Public Economics,118, pp.97-110. Harding, M., 2013. Taxation of Dividend, Interest, and Capital Gain Income. Hayes, D.J., 2015. Changes in Iowa's Capital Gains Tax.Iowa Ag Review,4(1), p.4. Kania, B., 2013. Capital Gains Tax. InSteuerstandort Grobritannien(pp. 128-156). Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. Keuschnigg, C. and Nielsen, S.B., 2014. Start-ups, venture capitalists, and the capital gains tax.Journal of Public Economics,88(5), pp.1011-1042. Kirsch, M.S., 2013. Revisiting the Tax treatment of citizens abroad: reconciling principle and practice. Krever, R. and Mellor, P., 2016. Australia, GAARsA Key Element of Tax Systems in the Post-BEPS Tax World.GAARsA Key Element of Tax Systems in the Post-BEPS Tax World (Amsterdam: IBFD, 2016), pp.45-64. Marian, O., 2013. Jurisdiction to Tax Corporations.BCL Rev.,54, p.1613. PATEL, D.J.I., 2016. Residential Status and Tax Incidence Under The Income Tax Act, FEMA and Companies Act.International Journal of Scientific Research,4(5). Tanzi, V., 2014. Inflation, indexation and interest income taxation.PSL Quarterly Review,29(116). Tiley, J. and Loutzenhiser, G., 2012.Revenue Law: Introduction to UK Tax Law; Income Tax; Capital Gains Tax; Inheritance Tax. Bloomsbury Publishing. Woellner, R., Barkoczy, S., Murphy, S., Evans, C. and Pinto, D., 2016.Australian Taxation Law 2016. Oxford University Press.