DOCSLIB.ORG

Case Studies on Access and Benefit-Sharing Compiled and Edited by Robert J

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Case Studies on Access and Benefit-Sharing Compiled and Edited by Robert J Case studies on access and benefit-sharing Compiled and edited by Robert J. Lewis-Lettington and Serah Mwanyiki SWISS AGEN CY FOR DEVELOP M E N T A N D COOPERAT ION SDC The International Plant Genetic Resources Institute (IPGRI) is an independent international scientific organization that seeks to improve the well-being of present and future generations of people by enhancing conservation and the deployment of agricultural biodiversity on farms and in forests. It is one of 15 centres supported by the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR), an association of public and private members who support efforts to mobilize cutting-edge science to reduce hunger and poverty, improve human nutrition and health, and protect the environment. IPGRI has its headquarters in Maccarese, near Rome, Italy, with offices in more than 20 other countries worldwide. The Institute operates through four programmes: Diversity for Livelihoods, Understanding and Managing Biodiversity, Global Partnerships, and Commodities for Livelihoods. The international status of IPGRI is conferred under an Establishment Agreement which, by January 2006, had been signed by the Governments of Algeria, Australia, Belgium, Benin, Bolivia, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Chile, China, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Ecuador, Egypt, Greece, Guinea, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Iran, Israel, Italy, Jordan, Kenya, Malaysia, Mali, Mauritania, Morocco, Norway, Pakistan, Panama, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Senegal, Slovakia, Sudan, Switzerland, Syria, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda and Ukraine. Financial support for IPGRI’s research is provided by more than 150 donors, including governments, private foundations and international organizations. For details of donors and research activities please see IPGRI’s Annual Reports, which are available in printed form on request from [email protected] or from IPGRI’s Web site (www.ipgri.cgiar.org). The geographical designations employed and the presentation of material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of IPGRI or the CGIAR concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Similarly, the views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of these organizations. Mention of a proprietary name does not constitute endorsement of the product and is given only for information. Citation: Lewis-Lettington RJ and Mwanyiki S (editors). 2006. Case Studies on Access and Benefit-sharing. International Plant Genetic Resources Institute, Rome, Italy. ISBN 13: 978-92-9043-721-5 IPGRI Via dei Tre Denari, 472/a 00057 Maccarese Rome, Italy © International Plant Genetic Resources Institute, 2006 This document is one of three reports prepared in the context of the IPGRI project Access and plant genetic resources for food and agriculture: Exploring options to implement the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture and Article 15.2 of the Convention on Biological Diversity. The other two reports are: Lewis-Lettington RJ, Muller MR, Young TR, Nnadozie KA, Halewood M and Medaglia JC. 2006. Methodology for Developing Policies and Legislative Frameworks for Access to Genetic Resources and Benefit Sharing. International Plant Genetic Resources Institute, Rome, Italy. Lewis-Lettington RJ and Dogley D. 2006. Commentary on the Development of the Republic of Seychelles Access to Genetic Resources and Benefit Sharing Bill (2005). International Plant Genetic Resources Institute, Rome, Italy. Contents Contents iii Acknowledgements viii Acronyms used in the text ix Introduction 1 Case studies on legal and policy frameworks for access to genetic resources and benefit sharing 1 Regional workshops 2 Legal expert group 3 Developing draft legislation in Seychelles 4 1. Central America: Costa Rica, Guatemala, El Salvador, Nicaragua and Panama 5 Introduction 5 A regional policy and framework for biodiversity and access to genetic resources 5 A regional framework on industrial property 8 National experiences 9 Costa Rica 9 Access to genetic resources under the Biodiversity Law and its regulation 10 Access procedure 11 Intellectual property and protection of traditional knowledge 13 El Salvador 13 General legislation 14 The draft proposal on elements for a procedure on access to wildlife genetic and biochemical resources 15 Intellectual property laws 15 Guatemala 15 General genetic resources policy framework 15 Nicaragua 19 Legal status of genetic resources and the constitutional framework 19 The National Environmental Policy and Action Plan 19 General Law of the Environment 20 National Environmental Policy and ABS 21 National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (NBSAP) 21 Institutional framework 21 Intellectual property 22 Seed Law and its regulation 23 The draft Law on Biological Diversity 25 Panama 25 Property and domain over biodiversity and its components 25 General Environmental Law 26 General Wildlife Law 27 National Environmental Strategy 27 Biotechnology 27 Intellectual property 27 Protection of traditional knowledge 28 Conclusions 30 2. Costa Rica 33 Legal considerations relating to genetic resources 33 The legal regimen of genetic resources in the country in private, public and indigenous lands 33 About the extent of the concept of goods of public property 35 Indigenous territories 37 Definition of genetic resources 38 Relevant international legal obligations 39 Relevant conventions relating to genetic resources and ratified by Costa Rica 39 Provisions applicable to the protection of traditional knowledge and farmers’ rights 40 Provisions of access and distribution of benefits 41 Specific policies, laws and regulations to regulate access to genetic resources 41 Existing institutional framework for regulating access 41 Main contents of existing regulations relevant to ABS for genetic and biochemical resources 42 Other policies, laws and regulations with potential impact (direct or indirect) on access and distribution of benefits 43 Wildlife Conservation Law and Regulation 43 Law on Phytosanitary Protection 46 CITES regulations and other permits for export of wild fauna and flora 47 Legislation on environmental impact assessment in the Law of Environment and the Law of Biodiversity 49 Law of Promotion of Scientific and Technological Development, No. 7169 of 13 June 1990 49 Law of Biodiversity for SINAC and Law of Establishment of the National Parks Service 49 Fishery Law and Law of Establishment of INCOPESCA 51 Law of Seeds 52 System of intellectual property 52 Current initiatives regarding ABS: description of the Draft Access Regulations 54 Access applications prior to the Biodiversity Law 69 Access applications 69 Access procedure 69 Research agreements in collaboration with industry 70 Agreements with the academic sector 71 Other agreements 71 Access applications after the enforcement of the Biodiversity Law 72 Difficulties of varying nature, legal and other, in the functioning of access regulation mechanisms 73 References 74 3. El Salvador 75 Legal aspects relating to genetic resources 75 Legal situation concerning genetic resources in the country 75 Definition of genetic resources 76 International legal obligations 76 Policies and legislation to implement the obligations set out by the treaty 77 Regulations on access and benefit-sharing 78 Specific regulations, laws and policies on access to genetic resources 78 Existing institutional framework to control access 78 Legal framework on access to and benefit-sharing from biochemical and genetic resources 80 Environmental Law 80 General Regulation on the Environmental Law 80 Wildlife Conservation Law 81 Forestry Law 81 Other policies, laws and regulations with an impact (direct or indirect) on access and benefit-sharing of genetic resources 82 Principal components of the relevant laws and their potential impact 82 Law of Vegetable and Animal Health 82 Seed Law 82 General Law for Legislation and Promotion of Fisheries and Aquaculture 87 Special Law on Protection of El Salvador’s Cultural Heritage 87 Law on National Science and Technology 88 Other normative laws 88 Intellectual property system 88 New initiatives relating to access and benefit-sharing of genetic resources 89 The draft regulation on access 89 Illustrations on the decision-making process on access of to genetic resources 93 Practical experiences and draft regulations on access before and after the General Environmental Law 100 Legal and other challenges in the functioning of the regulations relating to access 101 References 101 4. Ghana 103 Introduction 103 Legal status of genetic resources 103 Definition 103 Ownership 103 Policy framework 105 Relevant institutions 106 International legal obligations 108 Access and benefit-sharing provisions 108 Intellectual property rights 109 Other relevant laws 109 Collaborative initiatives and existing ABS contracts 110 Contractual arrangements 112 Main legal issues related to ABS and conclusion 112 References 113 5. Malawi 115 Procedures and guidelines for access and collection of genetic resources in Malawi 115 Research, material transfer and contractual agreements 115 Agricultural germplasm agreement for use with non-profit collectors 116 Benefit-sharing formula 116 6. Nigeria 119 Introduction 119 Definitions 120 International legal obligations 121 Access and benefit-sharing provisions 121 Other relevant policies, laws and regulations
Load more

Recommended publications
  • TANGIBLE PROPERTY TAX RETURN (REVENUE FORMS 62A500, 62A500-A, 62A500-C, 62A500-L and 62A500-W)
    INSTRUCTIONS TANGIBLE PROPERTY TAX RETURN (REVENUE FORMS 62A500, 62A500-A, 62A500-C, 62A500-L and 62A500-W) Classification of Property—Real property includes all lands within Definitions and General Instructions this state and improvements thereon. Intangible property consists of any property or investment that represents evidence of value or The tangible personal property tax return includes instructions to the right to value under law or customs. Tangible personal property assist taxpayers in preparing Revenue Forms 62A500, 62A500-A is every physical item subject to ownership, except real and intan- and 62A500-W. These instructions do not supersede the Kentucky gible property. Constitution or applicable Kentucky Revised Statutes. Depreciable Assets—List depreciable assets on the appropriate Taxpayer—All individuals and business entities who own, lease schedule(s) at original cost. Apply appropriate factor(s) to obtain or have a beneficial interest in taxable tangible property located reported value. Do not use book depreciation for computing the within Kentucky on January 1 must file a tangible property tax fair cash value of depreciable assets. Do not include noncommer- return. All tangible property is taxable, except the following: cial aircraft, documented boats, non-Kentucky registered watercraft and assets used in farming. See line-by-line instructions for details. personal household goods used in the home; crops grown in the year which the assessment is made and in the Lessors and Lessees of Tangible Personal Property—Leased hands of the producer; property must be listed by the owner on Revenue Form 62A500, tangible personal property owned by institutions exempted under regardless of the lease agreement’s terms regarding tax liability.
    [Show full text]
  • What Is So Special About Intangible Property? the Case for Intelligent Carryovers Richard A
    University of Chicago Law School Chicago Unbound Coase-Sandor Working Paper Series in Law and Coase-Sandor Institute for Law and Economics Economics 2010 What Is So Special about Intangible Property? The Case for intelligent Carryovers Richard A. Epstein Follow this and additional works at: https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/law_and_economics Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Richard A. Epstein, "What Is So Special about Intangible Property? The asC e for intelligent Carryovers" (John M. Olin Program in Law and Economics Working Paper No. 524, 2010). This Working Paper is brought to you for free and open access by the Coase-Sandor Institute for Law and Economics at Chicago Unbound. It has been accepted for inclusion in Coase-Sandor Working Paper Series in Law and Economics by an authorized administrator of Chicago Unbound. For more information, please contact [email protected]. CHICAGO JOHN M. OLIN LAW & ECONOMICS WORKING PAPER NO. 524 (2D SERIES) What Is So Special about Intangible Property? The Case for Intelligent Carryovers Richard A. Epstein THE LAW SCHOOL THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO August 2010 This paper can be downloaded without charge at: The Chicago Working Paper Series Index: http://www.law.uchicago.edu/Lawecon/index.html and at the Social Science Research Network Electronic Paper Collection. WHAT IS SO SPECIAL ABOUT INTANGIBLE PROPERTY? THE CASE FOR INTELLIGENT CARRYOVERS by Richard A. Epstein* ABSTRACT One of the major controversies in modern intellectual property law is the extent to which property rights conceptions, developed in connection with land or other forms of tangible property, can be carried over to different forms of property, such as rights in the spectrum or in patents and copyrights.
    [Show full text]
  • Indigenous and Tribal People's Rights Over Their Ancestral Lands
    INTER‐AMERICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS OEA/Ser.L/V/II. Doc. 56/09 30 December 2009 Original: Spanish INDIGENOUS AND TRIBAL PEOPLES’ RIGHTS OVER THEIR ANCESTRAL LANDS AND NATURAL RESOURCES Norms and Jurisprudence of the Inter‐American Human Rights System 2010 Internet: http://www.cidh.org E‐mail: [email protected] OAS Cataloging‐in‐Publication Data Derechos de los pueblos indígenas y tribales sobre sus tierras ancestrales y recursos naturales: Normas y jurisprudencia del sistema interamericano de derechos humanos = Indigenous and tribal people’s rights over their ancestral lands and natural resources: Norms and jurisprudence of the Inter‐American human rights system / [Inter‐American Commission on Human Rights.] p. ; cm. (OEA documentos oficiales ; OEA/Ser.L)(OAS official records ; OEA/Ser.L) ISBN 978‐0‐8270‐5580‐3 1. Human rights‐‐America. 2. Indigenous peoples‐‐Civil rights‐‐America. 3. Indigenous peoples‐‐Land tenure‐‐America. 4. Indigenous peoples‐‐Legal status, laws, etc.‐‐America. 5. Natural resources‐‐Law and legislation‐‐America. I. Inter‐American Commission on Human Rights. II Series. III. Series. OAS official records ; OEA/Ser.L. OEA/Ser.L/V/II. Doc.56/09 Document published thanks to the financial support of Denmark and Spain Positions herein expressed are those of the Inter‐American Commission on Human Rights and do not reflect the views of Denmark or Spain Approved by the Inter‐American Commission on Human Rights on December 30, 2009 INTER‐AMERICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS MEMBERS Luz Patricia Mejía Guerrero Víctor E. Abramovich Felipe González Sir Clare Kamau Roberts Paulo Sérgio Pinheiro Florentín Meléndez Paolo G. Carozza ****** Executive Secretary: Santiago A.
    [Show full text]
  • Imagereal Capture
    Some Aspects of Theft of Computer Software by M. Dunning I. INTRODUCTION The purpose of this paper is to test the capability of New Zealand law to adequately deal with the impact that computers have on current notions of crimes relating to property. Has the criminal law kept pace with technology and continued to protect property interests or is our law flexible enough to be applied to new situations anyway? The increase of the moneyless society may mean a decrease in money motivated crimes of violence such as robbery, and an increase in white collar crime. Every aspect of life is being computerised-even our per­ sonality is on character files, with the attendant )ossibility of criminal breach of privacy. The problems confronted in this area are mostly definitional. While it may be easy to recognise morally opprobrious conduct, the object of such conduct may not be so easily categorised as criminal. A factor of this is a general lack of understanding of the computer process, so this would seem an appropriate place to begin the inquiry. II. THE COMPUTER Whiteside I identifies five key elements in a computer system. (1) Translation of data into a form readable by the computer, called input; and subject to manipulation by the introduction of false data. Remote terminals can be situated anywhere outside the cen­ tral processing unit (CPU), connected by (usually) telephone wires over which data may be transmitted, e.g. New Zealand banks on­ line to Databank. Outside users are given a site code number (identifying them) and an access code number (enabling entry to the CPU) which "plug" their remote terminal in.
    [Show full text]
  • Communal Land and Agricultural Productivity ✩
    Communal Land and Agricultural Productivity ✩ Charles Gottlieb2,3,4, Jan Grobovˇsek1 September 26, 2016 Abstract Communal land tenure is a typical feature of many developing countries. Such tenure regimes implement a “use it or lose it” principle by imposing restrictions to land trans- ferability that are enforced via the threat of expropriation. This paper measures the distortionary impact of communal land in a dynamic general equilibrium model of oc- cupational selection, calibrated to Ethiopia. We find that lifting restrictions on land transferability lowers agricultural employment by 19% and increases GDP by 7%. It also results in a large reduction in the ratio between non-agricultural and agricultural productivity, by 40% in real and 44% in nominal terms. Limited land transferability rationalizes a substantial fraction of the large agricultural productivity gap in poor economies. The associated loss in aggregate productivity, though, is comparatively minor. Keywords: Agricultural productivity, Growth and development, Misallocation, Land, Africa, Ethiopia. JEL: O10, O13, O40, O55, Q15. ✩ First version: September 2014. This paper has benefited from helpful suggestions by Tasso Adamopoulos, Tekie Alemu, Douglas Gollin, Madina Guloba, Roland Hodler, Philipp Kircher, Winfried Koeniger, Francis Mwesigye and Alemayehu Taffesse, as well as seminar participants at the Atlanta Fed, Cambridge, Western Ontario, York, McMaster, McGill, the North American Econometric Society Meeting (Minneapolis), CEPR Macroeconomic and Growth Meeting, EDRI (Addis Ababa), EPRC (Kampala), DEGIT XXI Conference, and World Bank Land and Poverty Conference 2015. The finan- cial support from DFID/ESRC (ES/L012499/1) is gratefully acknowledged. Email addresses: [email protected] (Charles Gottlieb), [email protected] (Jan Grobovˇsek) 1University of Edinburgh, School of Economics 2University of St.
    [Show full text]
  • Creating Anticommons: Historical Land Privatization and Modern
    Creating Anticommons: Historical Land Privatization and Modern Natural Resource Use1 Bryan Leonard Arizona State University [email protected] Dominic Parker University of Wisconsin, Madison [email protected] May 31, 2017 Abstract: We explain how privatizing the commons to promote use of one land-based resource (agriculture) discourages use of another (shale oil). We test for this ‘anticommons’ problem using a natural experiment on the Bakken, one of the world's largest shale reserves. Before oil discovery, U.S. land policies inadvertently created a mosaic of private and tribal subsurface ownership on the Fort Berthold Indian Reservation. We compare horizontal drilling across parcels during the 2005-2015 fracking boom and find that fragmented ownership significantly reduced royalty income, relative to contiguous tribal ownership. This evidence highlights a cost of subdividing land containing spatially expansive natural resources. Key words: anticommons, oil, indigenous policy, transaction costs, resource booms, privatization JEL Codes: O13, Q32, Q33, D23, H82, K11 1 For helpful comments, we thank Alex Rothenberg, Jane Friesen, Dean Lueck, Donna Feir, Gary Libecap, Terry Anderson, Shawn Regan, Tim Fitzgerald, Dan Benjamin, Ronald Trosper, and seminar participants at Simon Fraser U., Stanford U. (Hoover Economic Policy Talk), U. of Illinois, U. of Hawaii, UC-Riverside, and the Property and Environment Research Center. We also thank attendees of conference sessions hosted by SOIE, UC Santa Barbara, WEAI, AERE, and the Midwest International Development Conference. We are grateful to Matt Kelly, an attorney of Tarlow and Stonecipher PLLC for helpful discussions about oil and gas leasing on the Bakken. I. Introduction Much of the world’s indigenous populations live on communally owned land and this ownership structure has likely hindered development.
    [Show full text]
  • Real & Personal Property
    CHAPTER 5 Real Property and Personal Property CHRIS MARES (Appleton, Wsconsn) hen you describe property in legal terms, there are two types of property. The two types of property Ware known as real property and personal property. Real property is generally described as land and buildings. These are things that are immovable. You are not able to just pick them up and take them with you as you travel. The definition of real property includes the land, improvements on the land, the surface, whatever is beneath the surface, and the area above the surface. Improvements are such things as buildings, houses, and structures. These are more permanent things. The surface includes landscape, shrubs, trees, and plantings. Whatever is beneath the surface includes the soil, along with any minerals, oil, gas, and gold that may be in the soil. The area above the surface is the air and sky above the land. In short, the definition of real property includes the earth, sky, and the structures upon the land. In addition, real property includes ownership or rights you may have for easements and right-of-ways. This may be for a driveway shared between you and your neighbor. It may be the right to travel over a part of another person’s land to get to your property. Another example may be where you and your neighbor share a well to provide water to each of your individual homes. Your real property has a formal title which represents and reflects your ownership of the real property. The title ownership may be in the form of a warranty deed, quit claim deed, title insurance policy, or an abstract of title.
    [Show full text]
  • Business Owner's Guide to Tangible Taxes
    Larry D. Hart DELINQUENT TANGIBLE PERSONAL IMPORTANT CONTACTS PROPERTY (DELQTPP) LEE COUNTY Lee County Tax Collector Tax Collector Tangible personal property taxes become delinquent April Delinquent Tangible Taxes 1 of each year, at which time interest and additional fees 239.533.6000 are due and added to the bill for collection. A reminder www.leetc.com notice is mailed to the property owner showing the [email protected] additional fees. Tangible personal property accounts that remain unpaid on May 1 of each year will be referred to Lee County Property Appraiser Revenue Recovery Solutions, Inc. for collection. Accounts Tangible Tax Department referred for collection will be subject to an additional fee 239.533.6140 BUSINESS OWNER’S assessed by the vendor. www.leepa.org [email protected] GUIDE TO TANGIBLE A list of delinquent tangible personal property taxpayers are advertised in a local newspaper, the cost of which is TAXES added to the tax bill. TAX COLLECTOR This information is provided to assist you in Pursuant to Florida Statute 197.413, tax warrants are understanding the requirements associated with issued by the Tax Collector prior to April 30 of the next Tangible Personal Property Taxes. Local Business Tax year on all unpaid tangible personal property taxes. The September 30 Tax Collector will also apply to the circuit court for an order renewals due granting levy and seizure of the tangible personal property for the amount of the unpaid taxes and costs. Visit our official website at November 1 – March 31 Current year taxes due www.leetc.com If the delinquent taxes cannot be made in one payment and the amount due is at least $40.00, a payment plan OFFICE HOURS AND LOCATIONS may be available.
    [Show full text]
  • Non-Level Rents: Issues and Opportunities
    Note: This is an expanded version of the Federal Insight column that was published in the November/December 2015 issue of ELFA’s Equipment Leasing & Finance Magazine. Non-Level Rents: Issues and Opportunities Detailed Analysis By Glenn Johnson and Joe Sebik Pricing Analysis by David Holmgren Background The leasing industry is known for creativity as well as its ability to adapt to industry changes such as the types of assets leased and tax law changes. Congress long ago recognized that tax benefits can promote investment in capital assets by lowering the net present value cost of acquiring assets. Similarly within the tax leasing world, long ago leasing professionals realized the power of the time value of money and of tax benefits. They recognized the benefit of accelerating tax deductions and deferring taxable revenues. These practitioners realized that there was little they could do to affect the existing tax depreciation rules that established the basis and method for depreciating assets, but they continued to seek the benefits from deferring rental income, suitable especially for lessees with excellent credit. Perceived abuses prompted the Treasury to establish tax rules to limit the deferral of rents. Application of Tax Laws (in general) For many years Congress sought to craft tax rules to rein in the perceived structuring abuses. As it turned out, not all lease payment structuring was purely tax-motivated. Often rental structuring was to accommodate the seasonality of the lessee’s business or underlying cash flow availability. In the real estate market, lessors argued that leases were often for extended terms and the norm was to start rents at a defined level and escalate them annually consistent with usual inflationary trends to cover rising operating expenses such as maintenance and energy costs.
    [Show full text]
  • Recommended Practices to Determine That a Non Real Estate Business Is a Qualified Active Low- Income Community Business (“QALICB”) Page 1
    Recommended Practices to determine that a non real estate business is a Qualified Active Low- Income Community Business (“QALICB”) Page 1 Objective: Determination that the non real estate business (“Borrower/Investee”) is a QALICB in accordance with Internal Revenue Code Section 45(d)(2). Background: In accordance with Section 45(d)(2)(A)(i)-(v), an entity can be termed as a QALICB with respect to a taxable year if for such year it derives at least 50% of its total gross income from the active conduct of a qualified business in any low-income community, a substantial portion of its tangible property is within any low-income community, a substantial portion of its employee services are performed in any low-income community, less than 5 percent of its average aggregate unadjusted cost basis of its assets are attributable to collectibles other than collectibles held primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of business, and less than 5 percent of its average aggregate unadjusted cost basis of its assets are attributable to nonqualified financial property. Recommended Practices: Ø Information to be obtained from the management of the proposed QALICB: Ø Name of the business Ø Nature of the business Ø Street address of principal location Ø Street address, census tract numbers, county names of locations where employee services are performed and/or where tangible property is used. Ø List of documents that should be obtained from management of proposed QALICB: Ø Trial balance as of beginning of current tax year or end of prior year (if available) Ø Year-to-date (working) trial balance (i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • Crimes Against Property
    9 CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY Is Alvarez guilty of false pretenses as a Learning Objectives result of his false claim of having received the Congressional Medal of 1. Know the elements of larceny. Honor? 2. Understand embezzlement and the difference between larceny and embezzlement. Xavier Alvarez won a seat on the Three Valley Water Dis- trict Board of Directors in 2007. On July 23, 2007, at 3. State the elements of false pretenses and the a joint meeting with a neighboring water district board, distinction between false pretenses and lar- newly seated Director Alvarez arose and introduced him- ceny by trick. self, stating “I’m a retired marine of 25 years. I retired 4. Explain the purpose of theft statutes. in the year 2001. Back in 1987, I was awarded the Con- gressional Medal of Honor. I got wounded many times by 5. List the elements of receiving stolen property the same guy. I’m still around.” Alvarez has never been and the purpose of making it a crime to receive awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor, nor has he stolen property. spent a single day as a marine or in the service of any 6. Define forgery and uttering. other branch of the United States armed forces. The summer before his election to the water district board, 7. Know the elements of robbery and the differ- a woman informed the FBI about Alvarez’s propensity for ence between robbery and larceny. making false claims about his military past. Alvarez told her that he won the Medal of Honor for rescuing the Amer- 8.
    [Show full text]
  • Oregon Taxation of Nonresidents and Non-Oregon Assets
    Online CLE Oregon Taxation of Nonresidents and Non-Oregon Assets .5 Oregon Practice and Procedure credit From the Oregon State Bar CLE seminar Basic Estate Planning for Oregon Taxable Estates, presented on November 15, 2019 © 2019 Philip Jones. All rights reserved. ii Chapter 8 The Oregon Estate Tax and Its Fractional Formula for Residents and Nonresidents PHILIP JONES Duffy Kekel LLP Portland, Oregon Contents Oregon Residents . 8–2 Oregon Nonresidents . 8–2 Gross Estate vs. Taxable Estate . 8–2 Summary of the Fractional Formula . 8–3 Odd Results . 8–3 Limited Liability Companies . 8–6 Conclusion . 8–7 Chapter 8—The Oregon Estate Tax and Its Fractional Formula for Residents and Nonresidents Basic Estate Planning for Oregon Taxable Estates 8–ii Chapter 8—The Oregon Estate Tax and Its Fractional Formula for Residents and Nonresidents The Oregon estate tax applies to both residents and nonresidents, but in different ways. In both cases, however, the Oregon estate tax statutes employ a fractional formula that can produce surprising results. Particularly surprising is the fact that a nonresident with only a small amount of Oregon assets might still be subject to the Oregon tax. Equally surprising is the fact that a nonresident could leave all of his or her Oregon assets to a surviving spouse or to a charity, and Oregon tax might still be due. All of this is caused by the fractional formula, and estate planners need to be familiar with that formula, both when planning estates and when administering estates. For an article that discusses the factors that will be taken into account to determine whether or not a decedent was an Oregon resident, see Stephen J.
    [Show full text]