Federal rates; adjusted federal rates; adjusted federal long-term rate and the long-term exempt rate. For purposes of sections 382, 642, 1274, 1288, 7872, and other sections of the Code, tables set forth the rates for May 2017.
This revenue procedure provides guidance under the Protecting Americans for Tax Hikes Act of 2015 (PATH Act) regarding amendments to (i) expensing section 179 property, (ii) the additional first year depreciation deduction under section 168(k), and (iii) the qualified Indian reservation property depreciation provision under section 168(j).
This notice sets forth updates on the corporate bond monthly yield curve, the corresponding spot segment rates for April 2017 used under § 417(e)(3)(D), the 24-month average segment rates applicable for April 2017, and the 30-year Treasury rates. These rates reflect the application of § 430(h)(2)(C)(iv), which was added by the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act, Public Law 112–141 (MAP-21) and amended by section 2003 of the Highway and Transportation Funding Act of 2014 (HATFA).
Notice inviting public comment on recommendations for the 2017–2018 Priority Guidance Plan.
This revenue ruling provides various prescribed rates for federal income tax purposes for May 2017 (the current month). Table 1 contains the short-term, mid-term, and long-term applicable federal rates (AFR) for the current month for purposes of section 1274(d) of the Internal Revenue Code. Table 2 contains the short-term, mid-term, and long-term adjusted applicable federal rates (adjusted AFR) for the current month for purposes of section 1288(b). Table 3 sets forth the adjusted federal long-term rate and the long-term tax-exempt rate described in section 382(f). Table 4 contains the appropriate percentages for determining the low-income housing credit described in section 42(b)(1) for buildings placed in service during the current month. However, under section 42(b)(2), the applicable percentage for non-federally subsidized new buildings placed in service after July 30, 2008, shall not be less than 9%. Finally, Table 5 contains the federal rate for determining the present value of an annuity, an interest for life or for a term of years, or a remainder or a reversionary interest for purposes of section 7520.
This notice provides guidance on the corporate bond monthly yield curve, the corresponding spot segment rates used under § 417(e)(3), and the 24-month average segment rates under § 430(h)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code. In addition, this notice provides guidance as to the interest rate on 30-year Treasury securities under § 417(e)(3)(A)(ii)(II) as in effect for plan years beginning before 2008 and the 30-year Treasury weighted average rate under § 431(c)(6)(E)(ii)(I).
Generally, except for certain plans under sections 104 and 105 of the Pension Protection Act of 2006 and CSEC plans under § 414(y), § 430 of the Code specifies the minimum funding requirements that apply to single-employer plans pursuant to § 412. Section 430(h)(2) specifies the interest rates that must be used to determine a plan’s target normal cost and funding target. Under this provision, present value is generally determined using three 24-month average interest rates (“segment rates”), each of which applies to cash flows during specified periods. To the extent provided under § 430(h)(2)(C)(iv), these segment rates are adjusted by the applicable percentage of the 25-year average segment rates for the period ending September 30 of the year preceding the calendar year in which the plan year begins. However, an election may be made under § 430(h)(2)(D)(ii) to use the monthly yield curve in place of the segment rates.
Notice 2007–81, 2007–44 I.R.B. 899, provides guidelines for determining the monthly corporate bond yield curve, and the 24-month average corporate bond segment rates used to compute the target normal cost and the funding target. Consistent with the methodology specified in Notice 2007–81, the monthly corporate bond yield curve derived from March 2017 data is in Table I at the end of this notice. The spot first, second, and third segment rates for the month of March 2017 are, respectively, 2.06, 3.95, and 4.75.
The 24-month average segment rates determined under § 430(h)(2)(C)(i) through (iii) must be adjusted pursuant to § 430(h)(2)(C)(iv) to be within the applicable minimum and maximum percentages of the corresponding 25-year average segment rates. For plan years beginning before 2021, the applicable minimum percentage is 90% and the applicable maximum percentage is 110%. The 25-year average segment rates for plan years beginning in 2015, 2016, and 2017 were published in Notice 2014–50, 2014–40 I.R.B. 590, Notice 2015–61, 2015–39 I.R.B. 408, and Notice 2016–54, 2016–40 I.R.B. 429, respectively.
The principal author of this notice is Tom Morgan of the Office of the Associate Chief Counsel (Tax Exempt and Government Entities). However, other personnel from the IRS participated in the development of this guidance. For further information regarding this notice, contact Mr. Morgan at 202-317-6700 or Tony Montanaro at 202-317-8698 (not toll-free numbers).
 Pursuant to § 433(h)(3)(A), the 3rd segment rate determined under § 430(h)(2)(C) is used to determine the current liability of a CSEC plan (which is used to calculate the minimum amount of the full funding limitation under § 433(c)(7)(C)).
The Department of the Treasury (Treasury Department) and the Internal Revenue Service (Service) invite public comment on recommendations for items that should be included on the 2017–2018 Priority Guidance Plan.
The Treasury Department’s Office of Tax Policy and the Service use the Priority Guidance Plan each year to identify and prioritize the tax issues that should be addressed through regulations, revenue rulings, revenue procedures, notices, and other published administrative guidance. The 2017–2018 Priority Guidance Plan will identify guidance projects that the Treasury Department and the Service intend to work on as priorities during the period from July 1, 2017, through June 30, 2018.
The Treasury Department and the Service recognize the importance of public input in formulating a Priority Guidance Plan that focuses resources on guidance items that are most important to taxpayers and tax administration. Published guidance plays an important role in increasing voluntary compliance by helping to clarify ambiguous areas of the tax law. The published guidance process is most successful if the Treasury Department and the Service have the benefit of the experience and knowledge of taxpayers and practitioners who must apply the rules implementing the internal revenue laws. This input is of particular importance in light of Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339) and other recent executive orders that may affect the number or type of guidance projects that can be issued during the 2017–2018 plan year.
As is the case whenever significant tax legislation is enacted, the Treasury Department and the Service will dedicate substantial resources during the current plan year to published guidance projects necessary to implement various provisions of tax legislation enacted over the past several years or that may be enacted during the plan year. The Treasury Department and the Service will continue to evaluate the priority of each guidance project taking into account this tax legislation, as well as other developments occurring during the 2017–2018 plan year.
4. Whether the recommended guidance would be in accordance with Executive Order 13771, Executive Order 13777 (82 FR 12285), or other executive orders.
7. Whether the recommended guidance can be drafted in a manner that will enable taxpayers to easily understand and apply the guidance.
Please submit recommendations by June 1, 2017, for possible inclusion on the original 2017–2018 Priority Guidance Plan. Taxpayers may, however, submit recommendations for guidance at any time during the year. The Treasury Department and the Service may update the 2017–2018 Priority Guidance Plan periodically to reflect additional guidance that the Treasury Department and the Service intend to publish during the plan year. The periodic updates allow the Treasury Department and the Service to respond to the need for additional guidance that may arise during the plan year.
Taxpayers are not required to submit recommendations for guidance in any particular format. Taxpayers should, however, briefly describe the recommended guidance and explain the need for the guidance. In addition, taxpayers may include an analysis of how the issue should be resolved. For recommendations to modify, streamline, or withdraw existing regulations or other guidance, taxpayers should explain how the changes would reduce taxpayer cost and/or burden or benefit tax administration. It would be helpful if taxpayers suggesting more than one guidance project prioritize the projects by order of importance. If a large number of projects are being suggested, it would be helpful if the projects were grouped in terms of high, medium, or low priority. Requests for guidance in the form of petitions for rulemaking will be considered with other recommendations for guidance in accordance with the considerations described in this notice.
Alternatively, taxpayers may submit comments electronically via the Federal eRulemaking Portal at www.regulations.gov (type IRS–2017–0008 in the search field on the regulations.gov homepage to find this notice and submit comments). All recommendations for guidance submitted by the public in response to this notice will be available for public inspection and copying in their entirety. For further information regarding this notice, contact Emily M. Lesniak of the Office of Associate Chief Counsel (Procedure and Administration) at (202) 317-3400 (not a toll-free number).
This revenue procedure provides guidance under §§ 124(c)(2), 124(d), 124(e), 143(b), and 167(b) of the Protecting Americans From Tax Hikes Act of 2015 (PATH Act), enacted as Division Q of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016, Pub. L. No. 114–113, 129 Stat. 2242 (Dec. 18, 2015). Sections 124(c)(2), (d), and (e) of the PATH Act amend § 179 of the Internal Revenue Code by (i) making permanent the treatment of qualified real property as § 179 property under § 179(f), (ii) making permanent the permission granted under § 179(c)(2) to revoke without the consent of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue (Commissioner) any election made under § 179 and any specification contained in that election, and (iii) allowing certain air conditioning or heating units to be eligible as § 179 property under § 179(d)(1). Section 143(b) of the PATH Act amends § 168(k) by (i) extending the placed-in-service date for property to qualify for the additional first year depreciation deduction, (ii) modifying the definition of qualified property under § 168(k)(2), (iii) extending and modifying the election under § 168(k)(4) to increase the alternative minimum tax (AMT) credit limitation in lieu of the additional first year depreciation deduction, (iv) adding § 168(k)(5), which allows a taxpayer to elect to deduct the additional first year depreciation for certain plants bearing fruits and nuts before such plants are placed in service, (v) adding § 168(k)(6), which provides a phase down of the additional first year depreciation deduction percentage for future taxable years, and (vi) adding § 168(k)(7), which allows a taxpayer to elect not to deduct additional first year depreciation for any class of property. Section 167(b) of the PATH Act amends § 168(j) by adding new § 168(j)(8), which allows a taxpayer to elect not to apply § 168(j) for any class of property. This revenue procedure does not reflect any proposed technical corrections to the PATH Act. This revenue procedure also does not provide guidance relating to the extension and modification of the election under § 168(k)(4) to increase the AMT credit limitation in lieu of the additional first year depreciation deduction. The Department of the Treasury (Treasury Department) and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) anticipate issuing guidance regarding the extension and modification of the election under § 168(k)(4) in a separate revenue procedure.
.01 Modifications to § 179.
(1) Section 179(a) allows a taxpayer to elect to treat the cost (or a portion of the cost) of any § 179 property as an expense for the taxable year in which the taxpayer places the property in service. Section 179(b)(1) and (2) prescribe a dollar limitation on the aggregate cost of § 179 property that can be treated as an expense under § 179(a). The dollar limitation is the amount under § 179(b)(1) (the § 179(b)(1) limitation), reduced (but not below zero) by the amount by which the cost of § 179 property placed in service during the taxable year exceeds the amount under § 179(b)(2) (the § 179(b)(2) limitation). For taxable years beginning after 2014, the § 179(b)(1) limitation is $500,000 and the § 179(b)(2) limitation is $2,000,000. Pursuant to § 179(b)(6), these limitation amounts are adjusted for inflation for taxable years beginning after 2015. For taxable years beginning in 2016, section 3.03 of Rev. Proc. 2016–14, 2016–9 I.R.B. 365, provides that the § 179(b)(1) limitation and the § 179(b)(2) limitation, adjusted for inflation, are $500,000 and $2,010,000, respectively. For taxable years beginning in 2017, section 3.25 of Rev. Proc. 2016–55, 2016–45 I.R.B. 707, provides that the § 179(b)(1) limitation and the § 179(b)(2) limitation, adjusted for inflation, are $510,000 and $2,030,000, respectively.
(2) Section 179(b)(3)(A) provides that a taxpayer’s § 179 deduction for any taxable year, after application of the § 179(b)(1) and (2) limitations, is limited to the taxpayer’s taxable income for that taxable year that is derived from the taxpayer’s active conduct of any trade or business during that taxable year (taxable income limitation). Section 179(b)(3)(B) provides that the amount of any cost of § 179 property elected to be expensed in a taxable year that is disallowed as a § 179 deduction under the taxable income limitation may be carried forward for an unlimited number of years and may be deducted under § 179(a) in a future year, subject to the same limitations.
(3) If a taxpayer elects to apply § 179(f), § 179(f)(1) provides that § 179 property includes qualified real property, as defined in § 179(f)(2). Prior to amendment by the PATH Act, § 179(f) applied to qualified real property placed in service in any taxable year beginning in 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, or 2014. Section 124(c)(1) of the PATH Act extended the application of § 179(f) to qualified real property placed in service in any taxable year beginning after 2009 and before 2016. As a result of the amendment by § 124(c)(1) of the PATH Act, § 179(f)(3) provided that the maximum amount of qualified real property that may be expensed under § 179(a) for any taxable year beginning after 2009 and before 2016 was $250,000. Further, § 179(f)(4) provided that, notwithstanding § 179(b)(3)(B), a taxpayer that elected to apply § 179(f) and elected to expense under § 179(a) the cost (or a portion of the cost) of qualified real property placed in service during any taxable year beginning after 2009 and before 2016 could not carry over to any taxable year beginning after 2015 the amount of any cost of such property that was disallowed as a § 179 deduction under the taxable income limitation of § 179(b)(3)(A). To the extent that any § 179 deduction attributable to qualified real property was not allowed to be carried over to a taxable year beginning after 2015, that amount was required to be treated as an amount for which an election under § 179 was not made and as property placed in service on the first day of the taxpayer’s last taxable year beginning in 2015 for purposes of computing depreciation. Rev. Proc. 2016–48, 2016–37 I.R.B. 348, provides guidance under § 124(c)(1) of the PATH Act.
Section 124(c)(2) of the PATH Act further amends § 179(f) by making permanent the treatment of qualified real property as § 179 property if the taxpayer elects to apply § 179(f). Section 124(c)(2) of the PATH Act also amends § 179(f) by striking paragraphs (3) and (4). Section 124(g)(2) of the PATH Act provides that the amendments made by § 124(c)(2) of the PATH Act apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2015. Section 3.01 of this revenue procedure addresses the application of these revised rules.
(4) Section 179(c) provides the rules for making and revoking elections under § 179 (§ 179 election). Pursuant to § 179(c)(1), a § 179 election is made in the manner prescribed by regulations. Prior to amendment by § 124(d) of the PATH Act, § 179(c)(2) provided that a § 179 election for taxable years beginning after 2002 and before 2015 may be revoked by the taxpayer with respect to any § 179 property. Section 1.179–5(c)(1) of the Income Tax Regulations provides that for any taxable year beginning after 2002 and before 2008, a taxpayer is permitted to make or revoke a § 179 election without the consent of the Commissioner on an amended Federal tax return for that taxable year. Section 1.179–5(c) was promulgated in 2005 and has not been amended to reflect the extensions of § 179(c)(2) to taxable years beginning before 2015. However, in 2008, the Treasury Department and the IRS issued Rev. Proc. 2008–54, 2008–2 C.B. 722. Section 7 of Rev. Proc. 2008–54 provides that for a taxable year beginning after 2007 and before the last year provided in § 179(c)(2) for revoking a § 179 election by a taxpayer for any § 179 property, the taxpayer will be permitted to make a § 179 election on an amended return for that taxable year without the Commissioner’s consent. Section 7 of Rev. Proc. 2008–54 further provides that until § 1.179–5(c) is amended to incorporate this guidance, taxpayers may rely on such guidance.
Section 124(d) of the PATH Act amends § 179(c)(2) to make permanent the permission granted to a taxpayer to revoke a § 179 election for any § 179 property without the Commissioner’s consent. This amendment applies to taxable years beginning after 2014. As a result, some taxpayers are uncertain about whether a § 179 election for taxable years beginning after 2014 may be made on an amended Federal tax return without the Commissioner’s consent. Section 3.02 of this revenue procedure provides the rules for making such a § 179 election.
(5) Section 179(d)(1) defines the term “§ 179 property.” Prior to amendment by the PATH Act, § 179(d)(1) defined § 179 property as property that is: (A)(i) tangible property to which § 168 applies, or (ii) computer software, as defined in § 197(e)(3)(B), that is described in § 197(e)(3)(A)(i), to which § 167 applies, and that is placed in service in a taxable year beginning after 2002 and before 2015; (B) § 1245 property, as defined in § 1245(a)(3); and (C) acquired by purchase for use in the active conduct of a trade or business. Prior to amendment by the PATH Act, § 179(d)(1) further provided that § 179 property does not include any property described in § 50(b) and does not include air conditioning or heating units.
Section 124(b) of the PATH Act amends § 179(d)(1)(A)(ii) to make permanent the treatment of computer software, as defined in § 197(e)(3)(B), that is described in § 197(e)(3)(A)(i), to which § 167 applies, as § 179 property. This amendment applies to taxable years beginning after 2014. Section 124(e) of the PATH Act also amends § 179(d)(1) to allow air conditioning or heating units to be § 179 property. This amendment applies to taxable years beginning after 2015.
Some taxpayers have inquired about what types of air conditioning or heating units qualify as § 179 property. Section 3.03 of this revenue procedure addresses this issue.
.02 Modifications to § 168(k).
(1) Prior to amendment by the PATH Act, § 168(k)(1) allowed a 50-percent additional first year depreciation deduction for qualified property that, as provided by § 168(k)(2)(A), was acquired by a taxpayer after 2007 and placed in service by the taxpayer before 2015 (before 2016 in the case of property described in § 168(k)(2)(B) or (C)). Section 143(a)(1) of the PATH Act amends § 168(k)(2)(A) by extending the placed-in-service date to before 2016 (before 2017 in the case of property described in § 168(k)(2)(B) or (C)), and extending other dates in § 168(k)(2) by changing “January 1, 2015” each place it appears to “January 1, 2016.” Rev. Proc. 2016–48 provides guidance under § 143(a)(1) of the PATH Act.
(2) Section 143(b)(1) of the PATH Act further amends § 168(k)(2) by extending the placed-in-service date to before 2020 (before 2021 in the case of property described in § 168(k)(2)(B) or (C)), and by modifying the definition of qualified property. As amended by § 143(b)(1) of the PATH Act, qualified property under § 168(k)(2)(A) includes property that is qualified improvement property instead of qualified leasehold improvement property. The term “qualified improvement property” is defined in § 168(k)(3), as amended by § 143(b)(2) of the PATH Act. Further, qualified property no longer has to meet the acquisition date requirements in § 168(k)(2)(A)(iii) as in effect before the enactment of the PATH Act. Section 143(b)(1) of the PATH Act also modifies the property described in § 168(k)(2)(B) and (C), including by imposing a new acquisition date requirement, and modifies the special rules under § 168(k)(2)(E) by deleting the related party rules in § 168(k)(2)(E)(iv) that were in effect before the enactment of the PATH Act.
Section 143(b)(5) of the PATH Act amends § 168(k) by adding § 168(k)(6) to the Code. It provides that the additional first year depreciation deduction percentage of 50 percent is phased down beginning for qualified property placed in service after December 31, 2017 (after December 31, 2018, for property described in § 168(k)(2)(B) or (C)). The percentage is 40 percent for qualified property placed in service in 2018 (in 2019 for property described in § 168(k)(2)(B) or (C), determined by substituting “2019” for “2020” in § 168(k)(2)(B)(i)(III) and (ii), and § 168(k)(2)(E)(i)), and is 30 percent for qualified property placed in service in 2019 (in 2020 for property described in § 168(k)(2)(B) or (C)).
Section 143(b)(6)(D) of the PATH Act further amends § 168(k) by adding § 168(k)(7) to the Code. It allows a taxpayer to elect not to deduct additional first year depreciation for any class of property placed in service by the taxpayer in the same taxable year. This election is similar to the election provided under § 168(k)(2)(D)(iii) as in effect before the enactment of the PATH Act.
Pursuant to § 143(b)(7)(A) of the PATH Act, these amendments apply to property placed in service after December 31, 2015. Sections 4.01 through 4.04 of this revenue procedure address the application of these revised rules.
(3) Section 143(b)(4) of the PATH Act also amends § 168(k) by adding § 168(k)(5) to the Code. It allows a taxpayer to elect to deduct additional first year depreciation for any specified plant that is planted before January 1, 2020, or grafted before that date to a plant that has already been planted, by the taxpayer in the ordinary course of its farming business, as defined in § 263A(e)(4). If the taxpayer makes this election, the additional first year depreciation deduction is allowable for any specified plant for the taxable year in which that specified plant is planted or grafted and that specified plant is not treated as qualified property under § 168(k) in the plant’s placed-in-service year. The percentage of the additional first year depreciation deduction is (i) 50 percent for any specified plant planted or grafted after 2015 and before 2018, (ii) 40 percent for any specified plant planted or grafted during 2018, and (iii) 30 percent for any specified plant planted or grafted during 2019.
A specified plant is defined in § 168(k)(5)(B) as (i) any tree or vine that bears fruits or nuts, and (ii) any other plant that will have more than one yield of fruits or nuts and that generally has a pre-productive period of more than two years from the time of planting or grafting to the time at which such plant begins bearing fruits or nuts. The term “specified plant” does not include any property that is planted or grafted outside of the United States.
Section 143(b)(7)(C) of the PATH Act provides that § 168(k)(5) applies to specified plants, as defined in § 168(k)(5)(B), planted or grafted after December 31, 2015.
Section 4.05 of this revenue procedure provides procedures for making the election to apply § 168(k)(5) (§ 168(k)(5) election). The Treasury Department and IRS understand that some taxpayers are uncertain as to whether, if such election is made for a specified plant, a § 179 election for the specified plant in its placed-in-service year is based on the adjusted basis of the specified plant, or on the original cost of the specified plant by recapturing the additional first year depreciation deduction. To address this uncertainty, section 4.05 of this revenue procedure also clarifies how the § 168(k)(5) election interacts with the § 179 election.
.03 Modification to § 168(j).
(1) Section 168(j) provides that for purposes of § 168(a), the applicable recovery period for qualified Indian reservation property is determined in accordance with the table contained in § 168(j)(2) instead of the table contained in § 168(c). The term “qualified Indian reservation property” is defined in § 168(j)(4). Section 168(j) does not apply to property placed in service after December 31, 2016.
(2) Section 167(b) of the PATH Act amends § 168(j) by redesignating paragraph (8), as amended by § 167(a) of the PATH Act, as paragraph (9), and by adding new paragraph (8). New § 168(j)(8) allows a taxpayer to elect not to apply § 168(j) for all property that is in the same class of property and placed in service in the same taxable year (the § 168(j)(8) election). Once made, this election is irrevocable. Section 167(c)(2) of the PATH Act provides that the amendments made by § 167(b) of the PATH Act apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2015. Section 5 of this revenue procedure provides the procedures for making the § 168(j)(8) election.
.04 Subsequent References. Unless otherwise specifically stated, all references in the subsequent sections of this revenue procedure to § 168(k), § 168(j), and § 179 are to § 168(k), § 168(j), and § 179 as in effect after the enactment of the PATH Act.
.01 Qualified Real Property. For any taxable year beginning after December 31, 2015, the § 179(b)(1) and (2) limitation amounts, and the carryover rules in § 179(b)(3)(B) and § 1.179–3(a), apply to qualified real property placed in service by the taxpayer during that taxable year, if the taxpayer elects to apply § 179(f).
.02 Making § 179 Elections by Amended Returns. For any taxable year beginning after 2014, a taxpayer may make a § 179 election with respect to any § 179 property without the Commissioner’s consent on an amended Federal tax return for the taxable year in which the taxpayer places in service the § 179 property. The Treasury Department and the IRS intend to amend § 1.179–5(c) to incorporate the guidance set forth under this section 3.02. Until § 1.179–5(c) is amended, taxpayers may rely on the guidance set forth in this section 3.02.
.03 Air Conditioning or Heating Units Qualifying as § 179 Property.
(1) In general. Except as provided in section 3.03(2) of this revenue procedure, an air conditioning or heating unit qualifies as § 179 property if such unit is § 1245 property, depreciated under § 168, acquired by purchase for use in the active conduct of the taxpayer’s trade or business, and placed in service by the taxpayer in a taxable year beginning after 2015. For example, portable air conditioners, such as window air conditioning units, and portable heaters, such as portable plug-in unit heaters, that are placed in service by the taxpayer in a taxable year beginning after 2015 may qualify as § 179 property under § 179(d)(1) and § 1.179–4(a). Except as provided in section 3.03(2) of this revenue procedure, an example of an air conditioning or heating unit that will not qualify as § 179 property is any component of a central air conditioning or heating system of a building, including motors, compressors, pipes, and ducts, whether the component is in, on, or adjacent to a building. See § 1.48–1(e)(2).
(2) Qualified real property. If a component of a central air conditioning or heating system of a building meets the definition of qualified real property, as defined in § 179(f)(2), and the component is placed in service by the taxpayer in a taxable year beginning after 2015, the component may qualify as § 179 property if the taxpayer elects to apply § 179(f).
(1) In general. The rules for determining whether depreciable property is eligible for the additional first year depreciation deduction under § 168(k) are similar to the rules in § 168(k) as in effect before the enactment of the PATH Act. However, qualified property under § 168(k)(2)(A) includes property that is qualified improvement property instead of qualified leasehold improvement property. Further, the acquisition date requirement in § 168(k)(2)(A)(iii) and the related party rules in § 168(k)(2)(E)(iv), both as in effect before the enactment of the PATH Act, do not apply. However, a new acquisition date requirement applies for property described in § 168(k)(2)(B) or (C).
(2) Property described in § 168(k)(2)(B) or (C).
(a) Acquisition date requirement. Qualified property includes any property described in § 168(k)(2)(B) or (C). Pursuant to § 168(k)(2)(B)(i)(III) and (C)(i), property is described in § 168(k)(2)(B) or (C) if the property is acquired by the taxpayer before January 1, 2020, or is acquired pursuant to a written contract entered into before January 1, 2020, assuming all other requirements in § 168(k)(2)(B) or (C), as applicable, are met. To determine if the acquisition date requirement is met, rules similar to the rules in § 1.168(k)–1(b)(4) for “qualified property” or for “30-percent additional first year depreciation deduction” apply. However, in applying § 1.168(k)–1(b)(4), § 1.168(k)–1(b)(4)(ii)(A)–(D) and (iv) do not apply.
(b) Certain aircraft. For aircraft described in § 168(k)(2)(C), the nonrefundable deposit requirement in § 168(k)(2)(C)(iii) is satisfied if the purchaser, at the time of the purchase contract, has made a nonrefundable deposit of at least the lesser of 10 percent of the cost of the aircraft or $100,000. See section 5.02 of Rev. Proc. 2008–54.
(3) Application of § 1.168(k)–1. For purposes of the additional first year depreciation deduction, rules similar to the rules in § 1.168(k)–1 for “qualified property” or for “30-percent additional first year depreciation deduction” apply to § 168(k)(2) and (3). However, in applying § 1.168(k)–1(d)(1)(i), the computation of the allowable 50-percent additional first year depreciation deduction is made in accordance with the rules for 50-percent bonus depreciation property and, in applying § 1.168(k)–1(f)(5)(iii)(A), the rules for 50-percent additional first year depreciation deduction apply. In applying § 1.168(k)–1(c) to qualified improvement property, see section 4.02(3) of this revenue procedure.
(1) In general. Section 168(k)(3) defines the term “qualified improvement property” as any improvement to an interior portion of a building that is nonresidential real property if the improvement is placed in service after the date the building was first placed in service. However, qualified improvement property does not include any improvement attributable to the enlargement of the building, any elevator or escalator, or the internal structural framework of the building.
(2) Building was first placed in service. For purposes of § 168(k)(3), the term “first placed in service” means the first time the building is placed in service by any person. See § 1.168(k)–1(c)(1)(iii). A building is first placed in service when first placed in a condition or state of readiness and availability for a specifically assigned function, whether in a trade or business, in the production of income, in a tax-exempt activity, or in a personal activity. See § 1.46–3(d)(1)(ii) and (d)(2).
(3) Application of § 1.168(k)–1(c). Rules similar to the rules in § 1.168(k)–1(c) apply to depreciable property that is qualified improvement property. However, in applying § 1.168(k)–1(c), § 1.168(k)–1(c)(2)(iii), (3)(ii), and (3)(vi) do not apply.
(4) Qualified restaurant property. Qualified property that is placed in service by the taxpayer after December 31, 2015, and that meets the definition of both qualified improvement property and qualified restaurant property, as defined in § 168(e)(7), is eligible for the additional first year depreciation deduction under § 168(k), assuming all other requirements in § 168(k) are met.
(5) Examples. The following examples illustrate the provisions concerning qualified improvement property. Assume that all of the improvements in the examples are required to be capitalized under § 263(a) and/or § 263A.
(a) Example 1 – Qualified improvement property. In 2010, A places in service a new office building. In February 2016, A sells this office building to B at fair market value. B uses the office building in its trade or business. In March 2016, B begins to construct improvements to the interior portion of the office building and places the improvements in service in December 2016. Because the office building was first placed in service in 2010 and the improvements made by B to the interior portion of the office building are placed in service after that date, the improvements that are § 1250 property are qualified improvement property, assuming all other requirements in § 168(k)(3) and § 1.168(k)–1(c), taking into account section 4.02(3) of this revenue procedure, are met.
(b) Example 2 – Qualified improvement property. In 2015, C, a corporation and manufacturer, enters into a written contract with X for X to construct a new building for use by C in its trade or business. The building will house a manufacturing operation and office space. The initial construction plans did not include a private restroom for the owner of C. During the construction of the building, C enters into a written contract with Y to construct a private restroom in the new building for the owner of C. On May 27, 2016, C places in service the building, except for the private restroom. On May 28, 2016, the private restroom in the building for the owner of C is placed in service. Because the building is first placed in service on May 27, 2016, and the private restroom is placed in service on May 28, 2016, the assets in the private restroom that are § 1250 property are qualified improvement property, assuming all other requirements in § 168(k)(3) and § 1.168(k)–1(c), taking into account section 4.02(3) of this revenue procedure, are met.
(c) Example 3 – Qualified improvement property. The facts are the same as in Example 2, except C enters into an amendment to the existing written contract with X, the contractor of the building, for X to construct a private restroom in the building for the owner of C. Because the building is first placed in service on May 27, 2016, and the private restroom is placed in service on May 28, 2016, the result is the same as in Example 2.
(d) Example 4 – Qualified improvement property. D is engaged in the commercial building rental business. In March 2015, D enters into a written contract with Z to construct a multi-story building. Pursuant to this contract, Z constructs a completely finished exterior of the building and a minimally finished interior of the building with only elevators, heating, ventilation, and air conditioning systems, plumbing, restrooms, and concrete floors. In December 2015, D and E entered into a lease agreement providing that E will lease one floor of the new building and E will install on that floor drop ceilings, lighting, interior walls, electrical outlets, carpeting, and trade fixtures necessary for the operation of E’s trade or business (collectively referred to as a build-out). On February 8, 2016, D places in service the new building. On June 4, 2016, E places in service the build-out. Because the building is first placed in service on February 8, 2016, and the build-out is placed in service after that date, the assets of the build-out that are § 1250 property are qualified improvement property, assuming all other requirements in § 168(k)(3) and § 1.168(k)–1(c), taking into account section 4.02(3) of this revenue procedure, are met.
(e) Example 5 – Qualified restaurant property that is qualified improvement property. In 2016, F constructs and places in service an improvement to a restaurant building and that improvement meets the definitions of both qualified restaurant property under § 168(e)(7) and qualified improvement property under § 168(k)(3). Accordingly, the improvement is eligible for the additional first year depreciation deduction provided by § 168(k), assuming all other requirements in § 168(k) are met.
(f) Example 6 – Qualified restaurant property that is not qualified improvement property. In 2016, G constructs and places in service a new restaurant building and that building meets the definition of qualified restaurant property under § 168(e)(7). However, that building is not qualified improvement property under § 168(k)(3). Accordingly, the building is not eligible for the additional first year depreciation deduction provided by § 168(k).
.03 Phase Down of Additional First Year Depreciation Deduction Percentage.
(1) In general. Pursuant to § 168(k)(6), the additional first year depreciation deduction percentage of 50 percent is phased down beginning for qualified property placed in service after December 31, 2017 (after December 31, 2018, for property described in § 168(k)(2)(B) or (C)). The tables below provide the additional first year depreciation deduction percentages for qualified property placed in service by the taxpayer after 2015.
(2) Additional first year depreciation deduction percentages.
* For qualified property described in § 168(k)(2)(B) and placed in service in 2019 but acquired, or acquired pursuant to a written contract entered into, before 2019, the 40% applies only to the property’s unadjusted depreciable basis attributable to the property’s manufacture, construction, or production before January 1, 2019. See § 168(k)(2)(B)(ii) and (6)(A) and § 1.168(k)–1(d)(1)(ii), taking into account section 4.01(3) of this revenue procedure. For qualified property described in § 168(k)(2)(B), placed in service in 2019, and acquired, or acquired pursuant to a written contract entered into, in 2019, the 30% applies only to the property’s unadjusted depreciable basis attributable to the property’s manufacture, construction, or production before January 1, 2020. For qualified property described in § 168(k)(2)(C) and placed in service in 2019, the 30% and 40% apply to the property’s unadjusted depreciable basis.
** For qualified property described in § 168(k)(2)(B) and placed in service in 2020 but acquired, or acquired pursuant to a written contract entered into, before 2020, the 30% applies only to the property’s unadjusted depreciable basis attributable to the property’s manufacture, construction, or production before January 1, 2020. See § 168(k)(2)(B)(ii) and (6)(B) and § 1.168(k)–1(d)(1)(ii), taking into account section 4.01(3) of this revenue procedure. For qualified property described in § 168(k)(2)(C) and placed in service in 2020 but acquired, or acquired pursuant to a written contract entered into, before 2020, the 30% applies to the property’s unadjusted depreciable basis.
.04 Election Not to Deduct the Additional First Year Depreciation.
(1) In general. The rules for making the election under § 168(k)(7) not to deduct the additional first year depreciation (the § 168(k)(7) election) are similar to the rules for making such election under § 168(k)(2)(D)(iii) as in effect before the enactment of the PATH Act. As a result, the § 168(k)(7) election applies to all qualified property that is in the same class of property and placed in service in the same taxable year. If the § 168(k)(7) election is made for a class of property that is qualified property placed in service during the taxable year, no additional first year depreciation deduction is allowable for that property and § 168(k)(2)(F) does not apply to that property. However, that property is still qualified property for purposes of § 168(k), assuming all the requirements of § 168(k)(2) are met. For example, if a calendar-year taxpayer makes the § 168(k)(7) election for a class of property that is qualified property placed in service during 2016, the depreciation adjustments under § 56 and the regulations under § 56 do not apply to the property to which the election applies for purposes of computing the taxpayer’s alternative minimum taxable income. See § 168(k)(2)(G). However, see section 4.04(3) of this revenue procedure for how the election not to deduct the additional first year depreciation applies to a taxpayer with a taxable year beginning in 2015 and ending in 2016.
(2) Application of § 1.168(k)–1(e). Except as provided in section 4.04(3) of this revenue procedure, rules similar to the rules in § 1.168(k)–1(e)(2), (3), (5), and (7) apply for purposes of § 168(k)(7).
(3) Special rules for certain taxpayers. This section 4.04(3) applies to a taxpayer with a taxable year beginning in 2015 and ending in 2016. If such taxpayer makes an election not to deduct the additional first year depreciation for a class of property that is qualified property placed in service during such taxable year, no additional first year depreciation deduction is allowable for that property and § 168(k)(2)(F), as in effect before and after the enactment of the PATH Act, does not apply to that property. The election is made under § 168(k)(2)(D)(iii) as in effect before the enactment of the PATH Act for property placed in service in 2015 and under § 168(k)(7) for property placed in service in 2016. For property placed in service in 2015 to which the election applies, the depreciation adjustments under § 56 and the regulations under § 56 apply to such property for purposes of computing the taxpayer’s alternative minimum taxable income. See § 1.168(k)–1(e)(6). For qualified property placed in service in 2016 to which the election applies, the depreciation adjustments under § 56 and the regulations under § 56 do not apply to such property for purposes of computing the taxpayer’s alternative minimum taxable income. See § 168(k)(2)(G).
.05 Special Rules for Certain Plants Bearing Fruits and Nuts.
(a) In general. The § 168(k)(5) election applies to one or more specified plants, as defined in § 168(k)(5)(B), planted or grafted by the taxpayer during the taxable year for which the § 168(k)(5) election is made. If a taxpayer makes the § 168(k)(5) election for a specified plant, (i) the additional first year depreciation deduction provided by § 168(k) is allowed for that specified plant for regular tax and alternative minimum tax purposes for the taxable year in which the specified plant is planted or grafted by the taxpayer, (ii) that specified plant is not treated as qualified property under § 168(k) in its placed-in-service year, and (iii) the depreciation deductions under § 168 for that specified plant, after deducting the additional first year depreciation, are allowed for its placed-in-service year and subsequent taxable years. Further, pursuant to § 263A(c)(7) (as added to the Code by § 143(b)(6)(H) of the PATH Act), § 263A does not apply to any amount deducted under the § 168(k)(5) election.
(b) Time and manner for making the § 168(k)(5) election.
(i) In general. Except as provided in section 4.05(1)(b)(ii) of this revenue procedure, the § 168(k)(5) election must be made by the due date, including extensions, of the Federal tax return for the taxable year in which the taxpayer plants or grafts the specified plant to which the election applies. Except as provided in section 4.05(1)(b)(ii) of this revenue procedure, the § 168(k)(5) election must be made in the manner prescribed on Form 4562, Depreciation and Amortization, and its instructions.
(B) Did not revoke the deemed election provided under this section 4.05(1)(b)(ii) within the time and in the manner provided in section 4.05(2)(b) of this revenue procedure.
(2) Revocation of the § 168(k)(5) election.
(a) In general. Except as provided in section 4.05(2)(b) of this revenue procedure, the § 168(k)(5) election, once made, may be revoked only with the written consent of the Commissioner. To seek the Commissioner’s consent, the taxpayer must submit a request for a letter ruling pursuant to Rev. Proc. 2017–1, 2017–1 I.R.B. 1 (or successor).
(b) Automatic 6-month extension. If a taxpayer made, or would be treated under section 4.05(1)(ii) of this revenue procedure as having made, the § 168(k)(5) election for a specified plant, an automatic extension of 6 months from the due date, excluding extensions, of the taxpayer’s Federal tax return for the taxable year in which such specified plant is planted or grafted is granted to revoke that election, provided the taxpayer timely filed the taxpayer’s Federal tax return for that taxable year and, within this 6-month extension period, the taxpayer, and all taxpayers whose tax liability would be affected by the § 168(k)(5) election, files an amended Federal tax return for that taxable year in a manner that is consistent with the revocation of the election.
(3) Interaction with § 179. If a taxpayer makes the § 168(k)(5) election for a specified plant, the adjusted basis of that specified plant is reduced by the amount of the additional first year depreciation deduction allowed or allowable under § 168(k), whichever is greater. This remaining adjusted basis is the cost of the specified plant for purposes of § 179, before the application of § 179(d)(3) and § 1.179–4(d).
.01 In General. The § 168(j)(8) election applies to all qualified Indian reservation property, as defined in § 168(j)(4), that is in the same class of property and placed in service in the same taxable year. If the § 168(j)(8) election is made for a class of property that is qualified Indian reservation property placed in service during the taxable year, the applicable recovery period for that property for purposes of § 168(a) is determined in accordance with the table contained in § 168(c), and the depreciation adjustments under § 56 and the regulations under § 56 apply to that property for purposes of computing the taxpayer’s alternative minimum taxable income. Once made, the § 168(j)(8) election is irrevocable.
.02 Definition of Class of Property. For purposes of § 168(j)(8) and this section 5, the term “class of property” means each class of property described in the table contained in § 168(j)(2) (for example, 3-year property).
.03 Time and Manner for Making the § 168(j)(8) Election.
(1) In general. Except as provided in section 5.03(2) of this revenue procedure, the § 168(j)(8) election must be made by the due date, including extensions, of the Federal tax return for the taxable year in which the taxpayer places in service the qualified Indian reservation property. Except as provided in section 5.03(2) of this revenue procedure, the § 168(j)(8) election must be made in the manner prescribed on Form 4562, Depreciation and Amortization, and its instructions.
(2) Deemed election. This section 5.03(2) applies to a taxpayer that did not make the § 168(j)(8) election within the time and in the manner provided in section 5.03(1) of this revenue procedure for a class of property that is qualified Indian reservation property placed in service by the taxpayer in its taxable year of less than 12 months beginning and ending in 2016. If this section 5.03(2) applies, the taxpayer will be treated as making the § 168(j)(8) election for a class of property that is qualified Indian reservation property if the taxpayer, on its timely filed Federal tax return for that taxable year, determined depreciation for that class of property under the general depreciation system of § 168(a) by using the applicable recovery period for that class of property in accordance with the table contained in § 168(c).
Section 7 of Rev. Proc. 2008–54 is obsoleted for taxable years beginning after 2014.
This revenue procedure is effective April 20, 2017.
The principal author of this revenue procedure is Elizabeth Binder of the Office of Associate Chief Counsel (Income Tax & Accounting). For further information regarding this revenue procedure, contact Ms. Binder at (202) 317-7005 (not a toll-free number).
A cumulative list of all revenue rulings, revenue procedures, Treasury decisions, etc., published in Internal Revenue Bulletins 2016–27 through 2016–52 is in Internal Revenue Bulletin 2016–52, dated December 26, 2016.


text:
Bronx, V. 15, Plate No. 18 Map bounded by W. 174th St., Jerome Ave., W. Belmont St.
1915 about 2 months ago. 4 control points.
Bronx, V. 15, Plate No. 1 Map bounded by W. 172nd St., Shakespeare Ave., Boscobel Ave.
1915 about 2 months ago. 8 control points.
Bronx, V. 15, Plate No. 27 Map bounded by W. Tremont Ave., University Ave., W. 176th St., Montgomery Ave.
1915 about 2 months ago. 7 control points.
Manhattan, V. 5, Plate No. 24 Map bounded by 7th Ave., West 34th St., 6th Ave., West 28th St.
1911 about 2 months ago. 9 control points.
1891 about 2 months ago. 29 control points.
1910 about 2 months ago. 11 control points.
1915 about 2 months ago. 6 control points.
1916 about 2 months ago. 11 control points.
1916 about 2 months ago. 5 control points.
1852 2 months ago. 5 control points.
Bronx, V. 15, Plate No. 14 Map bounded by E. Belmont St., Teller Ave., E. 172nd St., Sheridan Ave.
1915 2 months ago. 7 control points.
Bronx, V. 15, Plate No. 23 Map bounded by E. 173rd St., Bathgate Ave., Claremont parkway, Park Ave.
1915 2 months ago. 3 control points.
Bronx, V. 15, Plate No. 3 Map bounded by W. 172nd St., Townsend Ave., W. 170th St., Inwood Ave.
1915 2 months ago. 5 control points.
Bronx, V. 15, Plate No. 19 Map bounded by Clifford Place, Grand Blvd., E. Belmont St., Jerome Ave.
1915 2 months ago. 9 control points.
Bronx, V. 15, Plate No. 15 Map bounded by W. 176thSt., Popham Ave., Sedgwick Ave.
Bronx, V. 15, Plate No. 20 Map bounded by Grand Blvd., E. 174th St., Weeks Ave., E. Belmont St.
Sheet 3: Bounded by Reade Street, Nassau Street, Pearl Street, Chatham Street, Oliver Street, Pier Line South Street, Battery State Street, Battery Place and West Street.
1867 2 months ago. 19 control points.
1897 2 months ago. 4 control points.
Manhattan, V. 11, Plate No. 89 Map bounded by Hudson River, W. 170th St., Haven Ave., W. 165th St.
1909 2 months ago. 4 control points.
1909 2 months ago. 3 control points.
1909 2 months ago. 5 control points.
1875 2 months ago. 4 control points.
1880 2 months ago. 10 control points.
1877 2 months ago. 130 control points.
1869 2 months ago. 8 control points.
1916 2 months ago. 8 control points.
1877 2 months ago. 3 control points.
1873 2 months ago. 5 control points.
1900 2 months ago. 5 control points.
1859 2 months ago. 6 control points.
1874 3 months ago. 4 control points.
1916 3 months ago. 18 control points.
Map of Sullivan County, New York / by C. Gates & Son.
1856 3 months ago. 4 control points.
1685 3 months ago. 7 control points.
Displaying maps 251 - 300 of 11339 in total. 20 50 100 per page.

matches: V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V.


text:
The configuration file is saved at /plugins/iDisguise/config.yml.
# Do disguised players see their own disguise in 3rd person view.
# This only works for player disguises at the moment.
# WARNING: DON'T ENABLE THIS FEATURE IF YOU USE BUNGEECORD, it will crash Minecraft clients.
# in this case the disguise name is shown instead of the original player name.
# Consider enabling modify-scoreboard-packets as well if you experience problems with scoreboard/nametag plugins.
# This may help scoreboard plugins to work properly with disguised players.
# Furthermore, this option enables compatibility with NametagEdit and ColoredTags.
# Obviously, this option does NOT affect player disguises.
# Explanation: BungeeCord breaks the standard player disguises, this option fixes that.
Besides the configuration file, iDisguise also features a language file which is saved at /plugins/iDisguise/language.yml.
It enables you to modify and translate the messages that are sent to your players.
1. Find the field disguise-alias-<disguise-type>.
2. List the aliases you’d like to have (seperated by a comma).
no-permission: §cYou are not allowed to do this.
console-use-other-command: §cUse /odisguise from the server console.
cannot-find-targets: §cNo target entities were found.
invalid-name: §cThe given account name is invalid.
event-cancelled: §cAnother plugin prohibits you to do that.
disguise-success-self: §6You disguised as a %type%.
disguise-success-other: §6%player% disguised as a %type%.
status-player-self: §6You are disguised as a %type% called %name%.
status-player-other: §6%player% is disguised as a %type% called %name%.
status-self: §6You are disguised as a %type%.
status-other: §6%player% is disguised as a %type%.
status-not-disguised-self: §6You are not disguised.
status-not-disguised-other: §6%player% is not disguised.
outdated-server: §cYour Minecraft version does not support the given disguise type.
undisguise-console: §cYou are not a player so you cannot undisguise.
undisguise-not-disguised-self: §cYou are not disguised.
undisguise-not-disguised-other: §c%player% is not disguised.
undisguise-success-multiple: §6%share% out of %total% selected entities undisguised.
help-info: §7Use §o%command% §7to read the other pages.
move-as-shulker: §cYou must not move while you are disguised as a shulker.
update-option: §6[iDisguise] You can enable automatic updates in the config file.
easter-egg-birthday: §eYAAAY!!! Today is my birthday! I'm %age% years old now.
see-through-status-on-self: §6See-through mode is currently §aenabled §6for you.
see-through-status-on-other: §6See-through mode is currently §aenabled §6for %player%.
see-through-status-off-self: §6See-through mode is currently §cdisabled §6for you.
see-through-status-off-other: §6See-through mode is currently §cdisabled §6for %player%.
see-through-enable-self: §6See-through mode is now §aenabled §6for you.
see-through-enable-other: §6See-through mode is now §aenabled §6for %player%.
see-through-disable-self: §6See-through mode is now §cdisabled §6for you.
see-through-disable-other: §6See-through mode is now §cdisabled §6for %player%.
see-through-entity: §cSee-through mode is only for players.

matches: §6 §6 §6 §6 §6 §6 §6 §6 §6 §7 §7 §6 §6 §6 §6 §6 §6 §6 §6 §6 §6 §6 §6 §6 §6 §6 §6 §6


Parker v. U.S. Immigration & Customs Enforcement (D.D.C.) -- on second round of briefing in dispute over emails from 1998 to 2006, finding that agency's search of one Special Agent's email remained inadequate in several respects but that agency adequately explained its email backup system.
Eil v. DEA (1st Cir.) -- reversing judgment of district court because it failed to consider privacy interests of decedents' family members and holding that Exemption 7(C) permitted DEA to withhold medical and death-related records introduced as exhibits by government at criminal trial of Dr. Paul Volkman. A dissenting judge agreed that the lower court employed incorrect standard, but opined that summary judgment.was precluded by a genuine factual dispute.
Gatore v. DHS (D.D.C.) -- ruling that plaintiffs were eligible for and entitled to attorney's fee and costs for substantially prevailing in case involving FOIA requests for assessments of asylum officers. In reaching its decision, the court notably held that it was unreasonable for DHS to withhold non-responsive information from a responsive document. per recent D.C. Circuit case law. The court also held that plaintiff failed to demonstrate the "LSI Laffey Matrix" reflects the prevailing hourly rates for attorneys better than the "USAO Matrix."
Whitaker v. Dep't of Commerce (D. Vt.) -- concluding that: (1) First Responder Authority Network (FirstNet)is wholly exempt from FOIA pursuant to section 1426(d) of Title 47; (2) National Telecommunications & Information Administration and main Department of Commerce both properly declined to perform searches because they were likely to be futile; (3) Department did not have improper practice or policy of referring requests to FirstNet.
Am. Ctr. for Equitable Treatment v. OMB (D.D.C.) -- ruling that agency's search was inadequate because: (1) agency failed to sufficiently explain why it did not search for records requested prior to January 20, 2009, and (2) agency failed to use certain commonly used terms as search terms.
Elec. Privacy Info. Ctr. v. Office of the Dir. of Nat'l Intelligence (D.D.C.) -- ruling that agency properly relied on Exemptions 1 and 3 (National Security Act of 1947) to withhold, in its entirety, an assessment of U.S. Intelligence Community ("IC") compiled by agency regarding Russia's attempts to influence 2016 U.S. presidential election.
Reporters Comm. for Freedom of the Press v. FBI (D.C. Cir.) -- reversing and remanding district court's decision that FBI had conducting adequate search for records concerning its impersonation of media during law enforcement investigations. In reaching its ruling, the Circuit found that the government failed to sufficiently describe which agency files were searched and how, failed to demonstrate that certain records would not likely be maintained outside of one office it searched, and failed to follow one clear lead mentioned in responsive records.
Frank LLP v. CFPB (D.D.C.) -- determining that: (1) Bureau properly invoked Exemption 7(E) to withhold certain records concerning enforcement action against debt collector; (2) Bureau properly withheld attorney interview notes prepared during active investigation into potential target pursuant to Exemption 5 (attorney work-product); (3) plaintiff failed to exhaust administrative remedies with respect to second request for failure to pay fees; (4) Bureau has improper practice of treating records submitted in response to Civil Investigative Demands ("CIDs") as "voluntarily" submitted for purposes of Exemption 4; (5) Bureau properly treats entities that buy and collect on debts as "financial institutions" for purposes of Exemption 8.
Pickard v. U.S. Dep't of Justice (9th Cir.) (unpublished opinion) -- ruling that: (1) district court properly held that Exemption 7(D) protected name and information provided by source despite source's testimony at public trail; and (2) district court abused its discretion by considering plaintiff's remaining claims "withdrawn," because even though plaintiff had not sought summary judgment on those claims, he had opposed agency's summary judgment motion.
Scudder v. CIA (D.D.C.) -- concluding that plaintiffs failed to demonstrate that CIA has policy or practice of categorically refusing to produce responsive documents electronically.
Goldner v. SSA (D. Md.) -- finding that: (1) agency reasonably searched for names and contact information of claimant representatives by utilizing its "Modernized Claims System" (MCS) database; and (2) although plaintiff sought only business contact information, agency properly relied on Exemption 6 to withhold disputed addresses and telephone numbers because agency was unable to distinguish personal and business information in MCS database.
Pub. Emps. for Envtl. Responsibility v. EPA (D.D.C.) -- finding that EPA properly relied on deliberative process privilege to withhold thirteen documents concerning toxic contamination at schools in Santa Monica Malibu Unified School District, but that agency failed to carry burden of proof with respect to six other documents withheld in full or in part pursuant to same privilege.
Powell v. IRS (D.D.C.) -- determining that: (1) several of plaintiff's FOIA requests were moot because agency released all responsive records; and (2) agency demonstrated that it performed reasonable search by submitting declaration containing "three essential statements that courts require: the search terms used, the database or locations searched, and an averment that all locations likely to contain responsive records were searched."
Rojas v. FAA (D. Ariz.) -- in case involving multiple requests pertaining to agency's policy change for hiring Air Traffic Control Specialists, finding that: (1) agency properly refused to confirm or deny existence of complaints against named individual; and (2) agency improperly relied on privacy exemptions to redact email subject lines, case numbers, attachment files, and various other records; (3) agency failed to justify its use of Exemption 7(A).
Judicial Watch v. Nat'l Archives & Records Admin. (D.C. Cir.) -- affirming district court's decision that agency properly relied on Exemption 7(C) to withhold copies of any indictments against Hillary Clinton arising out of Independent Counsel's investigation.
Keeping Gov't Beholden v. DOJ (D.D.C.) -- denying plaintiff's request for expedited review under Federal Courts Civil Priorities Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1657, because plaintiff failed to show "manifest good cause."
Ecological Rights Found. v. Fed. Emergency Mgmt. Agency (N.D. Cal.) -- determining that: (1) agency properly used the date it began to search for documents as cut-off date; (2) agency failed to demonstrate propriety of its withholdings pursuant to deliberative process and attorney work-product privileges; notably, the court cited agency's statutory obligation to show reasonably foreseeable harm; (3) Exemption 6 did not protect names of individuals or contact information appearing in records concerning National Flood Insurance Program; and (4) plaintiff was entitled to declaratory relief "because FEMA has repeatedly failed to comply with its express statutory requirements."


text:
Randy Jordan is a partner in HunterMaclean’s litigation practice group. He is a uniquely experienced trial attorney, having tried well over one hundred jury cases in state and federal courts across the country. For over thirty years, Randy has defended some of America’s largest railroads in a wide array of business and tort matters, including the defense of hundreds of asbestos and other toxic exposure claims. Randy also frequently appears in state and federal appellate courts throughout the Southeast. He is a frequent speaker on issues relating to the transportation industry.
Randy is admitted to practice in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Georgia, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, and the U.S. Supreme Court.
Obtained defense verdict in Maryland trial court for Class 1 railroad in FELA case brought by living, former railroad employee suffering from malignant mesothelioma who alleged that asbestos exposure while employed by the railroad caused his cancer. Argued successfully for affirmance of defense verdict in the Maryland Court of Special Appeals. Plummer v. CSXT, Circuit Court of Maryland for Alleghany County, C07-29379-F.
Obtained favorable settlement during trial of FELA case alleging asbestos-related malignant mesothelioma contracted as a result of an employee’s railroad employment. Preissler v. CSXT, Case No. 24-X-12-000958, in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City, Maryland.
Obtained dismissals or favorable settlements in 350 toxic exposure cases against a Class 1 railroad when cases remanded en masse from the Federal MDL to U.S. District Courts throughout the Southeast.
Argued for and obtained favorable language regarding the scope of a railroad’s duty to non-employees alleging toxic exposures from railroad in Supreme Court of Alabama. 23 So 3d 625, 635 (Ala. 2009) (Murdock, J., concurring).
On behalf of a Class 1 railroad defendant, and on a certified question from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, obtained unanimous ruling from the Supreme Court of Georgia that an employer owed no duty to third-party, non-employees who came into contact with its employees’ asbestos-tainted work clothing away from the workplace. Williams, et al, v. CSX Transportation, 278 Ga. 888, 608 S.E. 2d 208, and subsequent summary judgment for the defendant in U.S.D.C. for the Southern District of Georgia.
Served as lead trial counsel in 3500+ separate toxic exposure related FELA personal injury lawsuits against Class 1 railroads filed in federal and state courts throughout the Mid-Atlantic and Southern states.
Obtained orders excluding plaintiffs’ industrial hygiene experts, their data, and their exposure simulations in toxic exposure cases in U.S.D.C., Southern District of Georgia (Lear, et al., v. CSX Transportation, Civil Action No. 591-015) and in the Circuit Court for Duval County, Florida (Tyre, et al, v. CSX Transportation, Case Number 16-2001-CA-8235).
Obtained reversal of a Tennessee jury’s adverse verdict on inadequate jury charge grounds in the Supreme Court of the United States, Hensley v. CSX Transportation, 556 U.S. 838 (2009).
Participated in the design and execution of a comprehensive industrial hygiene study of the potential for asbestos exposure during routine diesel locomotive maintenance. See “Characterizing and Communicating Risk with Exposure Reconstruction and Bayesian Analysis: Historical Locomotive Maintenance/Repair Associated with Asbestos Woven Tape Pipe Lagging,” Boelter, et al, Risk Analysis, Vol. 36, No. 2, 2016.
Obtained a defense verdict for a Class 1 railroad in FELA case alleging that a long-term, living employee developed lung cancer from toxic exposures while employed by the railroad. Dickens v. CSX Transportation, Superior Court of Nash County, North Carolina, CA 01CVS1785.
Obtained a defense verdict in FELA lung cancer death case brought against a Class 1 railroad by the estate of a former employee who alleged toxic exposures during his railroad employment caused his cancer. Beverly Birkle, Ind. and as Representative of the Estate of Thomas Birkle, v. BNSF Railway, in the Circuit Court of Tarrant County Texas, Case No. 342-272324-14.
Favorable settlement obtained on behalf of Class 1 railroad following successful Daubert challenge to plaintiff’s medical experts in lung cancer, wrongful death case brought by widow of former twenty-eight-year railroad employee in Tennessee Circuit Court in Alley v. CSX Transportation, Circuit Court of Davidson County, Docket No. 11C3609.
Favorable post-trial settlement obtained in wrongful death action alleging former employee’s malignant mesothelioma and death were caused by exposures at a Class 1 railroad. McElwain v. Union Pacific Railroad, in the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, California, McElwain v. Union Pacific, Case No. BC546962.
Defense verdict obtained on behalf of Class 1 railroad in the Superior Court for New Hanover County, North Carolina, in FELA case brought by former railroad employee alleging on-the-job toxic exposures caused his lung disease. Bobby G. Hickman v. CSX Transportation, Superior Court of New Hanover County, North Carolina, Case No. CVO1724.
Defense verdict obtained on behalf of Class 1 railroad in Augusta, Georgia, in FELA case brought by forty-two-year railroad employee alleging on-the-job toxic exposures caused him lung injury. Leslie Towns v. CSX Transportation, Superior Court of Richmond County, Georgia, Case No. 97-RCCV-422.
Obtained defense verdict in FELA case alleging plaintiff’s esophageal cancer was caused by toxic exposures working for a Class 1 railroad. Clyde Varnadore v. CSX Transportation, Circuit Court of Duval County, Florida, Case No. 2-07566 CA.
Co-authored Amicus Brief on cancer issues to the U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of the Association of American Railroads in Norfolk & Western R. Co. v. Ayers, 538 U.S. 135 (2003).
Obtained summary judgment for a Class 1 railroad on causation issues in a mesothelioma case brought under the FELA by a former railroad employee in U.S.D.C. for the Southern District of Georgia (CV298-1). Argued for and obtained affirmance of summary judgment in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. Betty Whitt v. CSX Transportation (U.S.D.C. SD Ga. CV 298-1).
In Federal MDL Docket No. 875, argued for and obtained summary judgment on causation grounds in FELA case against a Class 1 railroad where the plaintiff contended his lung disease was caused by toxic exposures working for the railroad. Case subsequently dismissed by the District Court. Carter, et al, v. CSX Transportation, 2012 WL 1231840.

matches: v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v.


The U.S. Geological Survey (“USGS”), along with other non-federal entities, sponsors a citizen science project called CrowdHydrology. See CrowdHydrology, CitizenScience.gov, https://www.citizenscience.gov/catalog/129/# (last visited Feb. 7, 2019). CrowdHydrology gathers information on stream stage or water levels from anyone willing to send a text message of water levels at their local stream to collect spatially distributed hydrologic data. See How It Works, CrowdHydrology, http://www.crowdhydrology.com/about/how-it-works/ (last visited Feb. 7, 2019). This project is ongoing in Utah. See Locations, Utah, CrowdHydrology, http://www.crowdhydrology.com/location/utah/ (last visited Feb. 7, 2019).
Utah Water Watch (“UWW”), a partnership between Utah State University Water Quality Extension and the Utah Department of Environmental Quality’s (“DEQ”) Division of Water Quality, creates opportunities for the public to assist in monitoring Utah’s lakes and streams. See Utah Water Watch, The Cornell Lab of Ornithology, http://www.birds.cornell.edu/citscitoolkit/utah-water-watch/ (last visited Feb. 7, 2019). As part of UWW, volunteers of all ages monitor water quality once a month and report back the data to watershed managers. See id.; see also Utah Water Watch, Extension Utah State U., https://extension.usu.edu/utahwaterwatch/ (last visited Feb. 7, 2019).
DEQ developed the bloomWatch mobile app, a phone application where users can upload the location and photos of harmful algal blooms (“HABs”) to water quality managers and public health officials. Jared Mendenhall, Keeping Tabs on HABs, Utah Dep’t of Envtl. Quality, https://deq.utah.gov/communication/news/keeping-tabs-on-habs (last updated Nov. 21, 2018). “The app effectively harnesses crowd-sourced data to track and manage water resources that the public depends on for potable water and recreation.” Id.
DEQ also welcomes citizen science aerial monitoring of waterbodies at risk of developing HABs. See id. DEQ will outfit small fixed-wing aircraft with geospatial cameras to collect aerial imagery that “can be quickly processed to detect high concentrations of cyanobacteria at a much quicker speed and better resolution than satellite imagery.” Id.
Utah’s former Ag-Gag law, Utah Code Ann. § 76-6-112, was declared unconstitutional by a federal judge on July 7, 2017. See Animal Legal Def. Fund v. Herbert, 263 F. Supp. 3d 1193 (D. Utah 2017).
“A person is guilty of criminal trespass if . . .
the person enters or remains unlawfully on or causes an unmanned aircraft to enter and remain unlawfully over property and . . .
posting of signs reasonably likely to come to the attention of intruders . . . .” Utah Code Ann. § 76-6-206(2).
A violation of Subsection 2(a) or (b) is a Class B misdemeanor. Id. § 76-6-206(3)(a).
(c) posted signs or markers that would reasonably be expected to be seen by persons in the area of the borders of the land.” Utah Code Ann. § 76-6-206.3(2).
“A person may not operate an unmanned aircraft system in a manner that causes an unmanned aircraft to fly within an area that is under a temporary flight restriction that is issued by the Federal Aviation Administration as a result of the wildland fire, or an area designated as a wildland fire scene on a system managed by a federal, state, or local government entity that disseminates emergency information to the public, unless the person operates the unmanned aircraft system with the permission of, an in accordance with the restrictions established by, the incident commander.” Utah Code Ann. § 65A-3-2.5(2).
A violation of this subsection is generally a Class B misdemeanor, but can be a Class A misdemeanor if the unmanned aircraft interferes with other aircrafts attempting to control or contain a wildland fire. Id. § 65A-3-2.5(3).
(b) the political subdivision or entity is an airport operator….
(2) [Chapter 14] supersedes any law, ordinance, or rule enacted by a political subdivision of the state before July 1, 2017.” Utah Code Ann. § 72-14-103.
State parks in Utah have park-specific rules for drones. For example, Antelope Island State Park prohibits drone use March – November (not including the Davis County Causeway), and allows drone use for the remainder of the year in designated areas within the park for a fee. See Drone Regulations for Antelope Island State Park, Utah Dep’t of Nat. Resources, https://stateparks.utah.gov/parks/antelope-island/drone-guidelines/ (last visited Feb. 7, 2019). For drone rules for other state parks visit stateparks.utah.gov or contact a state park representative.
(b) to suffer other emotional distress.” Utah Code Ann. § 76-5-106.5(2).
“The Division [of Water Quality] will investigate and provide [a] written response to all citizen complaints” that a permit to discharge into state waters has been violated. Utah Admin. Code R317-8(1.9).
“(1) A law enforcement agency may not obtain, receive, or use data acquired through an unmanned aircraft system unless the data is obtained …. (c) subject to Subsection (2), from a person who is a nongovernment actor…or (e) for purposes unrelated to a criminal investigation.
(3) A law enforcement agency that obtains, receives, or uses data acquired under Subsection (1)(d) or (e) shall destroy the data as soon as reasonably possible after the law enforcement agency obtains, receives, or uses the data.” Utah Code Ann. § 72-14-203.
(b) shall ensure that data described in Subsection (1)(a) is destroyed as soon as reasonably possible after the law enforcement agency collects or receives the data.
(e) the data was collected through the operation of an unmanned aircraft system over public lands outside of municipal boundaries.” Utah Code Ann. § 72-14-204.
Requires certification that “the allegations and other factual contentions have evidentiary support or, if specifically so identified, are likely to have evidentiary support after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery.” Utah R. Civ. P. 11(b)(3).
“To satisfy the requirement of authenticating or identifying an item of evidence, the proponent must produce evidence sufficient to support a finding that the item is what the proponent claims it is.” Utah R. Evid. 901(a).
For testimony about novel science, courts impose a standard of “inherent reliability,” similar to Daubert. State v. Rimmasch, 775 P.2d 388, 396 (Utah 1989). For other kinds of testimony, Utah courts require the plaintiff to make a “threshold showing” of reliability. Utah R. Evid. 702(b)–(c); see also Alder v. Bayer Corp., 61 P.3d 1068, 1084 (Utah 2002) (“[W]e reaffirm our previous holdings that the Rimmasch test applies only to novel scientific methods and techniques. Other scientific testimony is to be evaluated under rule 702 without heightened tests of ‘inherent reliability.’”).


Claims filed in the Superior Court seeking judicial review of administrative agency proceedings on the administrative record pursuant to the standards set forth in G.L. c. 30A, § 14, G.L. c. 249, § 4, or similar statutes, whether joined with a claim for declaratory relief under G.L. c. 231A, or any other claim, shall be heard in accordance with the following procedures.
The administrative agency whose proceedings are to be judicially reviewed shall, by way of answer, file the original or certified copy of the record of the proceeding under review (the record) within ninety (90) days after service upon it of the Complaint. Such record "shall consist of (a) the entire proceedings, or (b) such portions thereof as the agency and the parties may stipulate, or (c) a statement of the case agreed to by the agency and the parties." G.L. c. 30A, § 14(4). Upon service of a Complaint, the agency shall notify all parties of procedures for acquiring a transcript of the hearing testimony. The agency shall also inform the parties of their obligation to provide a transcript, or portions thereof, to the court if alleging that an agency's decision is not supported by substantial evidence or is arbitrary or capricious, or is an abuse of discretion. A request for a copy of the transcript must be made by a party within thirty (30) days after service of the Complaint, and such transcript or portion thereof shall be made part of the record. The Agency’s certified record shall include any transcript that has been prepared but need not include a transcript of any untranscribed proceeding or portion thereof in the absence of a timely transcript request.
The court may assess the expense of preparing the record as part of the costs in the case. G. L. c. 30A, § 14(4). Additionally, "the court may, regardless of the outcome of the case, assess any one unreasonably refusing to stipulate to limit the record, for the additional expenses of preparation caused by such refusal." G. L. c. 30A, § 14(4). The court may require or permit subsequent corrections or additions to the record when deemed desirable. G. L. c. 30A, § 14(4). The time for filing the record may be enlarged, for good cause shown, upon allowance of an appropriate motion.
(b) separately file all other portions in one or more volumes, each having a first page that bears the legend: "FILED UNDER PROVISIONAL MOTION TO IMPOUND," together with such a motion, which need not be served pursuant to Superior Court Rule 9A. Documents bearing that legend shall NOT be impounded without a hearing in compliance with Trial Court Rule VIII, but shall be segregated from the rest of the file in the same manner already employed by clerks' offices for third-party production of medical records, phone records and the like. The clerk shall note the existence of the segregated volume(s) on the docket sheet. The provisional motion to impound will be forwarded to the session judge for Rule VIII notice, hearing and findings ONLY if a non-party seeks to review the documents.
Notwithstanding the above, an agency need not redact from an administrative record any material that is in a public record.
The following motions raising preliminary matters must be served in accordance with Superior Court Rule 9A not later than twenty (20) days after service of the record by the administrative agency.
(a) Motions authorized by Mass. R. Civ. P. 12(b) or 12(e).
(b) Motion for leave to present testimony of alleged irregularities in procedure before the agency, not shown in the record (G.L. c. 30A, § 14(5)).
(c) Motion for leave to present additional evidence (G.L. c. 30A, § 14(6)).
Any party failing to serve such a motion within the prescribed time limit, or within any court-ordered extension, shall be deemed to have waived any such motion (unless relating to jurisdiction) and the case shall proceed solely on the basis of the record. Any such motion shall be promptly resolved in accordance with Superior Court Rule 9A. If the motion specified in (c) is allowed, all further proceedings shall be stayed until the administrative agency has complied with the provisions of G.L. c. 30A, § 14(6).
A claim for judicial review shall be resolved through a motion for judgment on the pleadings, Mass. R. Civ. P. 12(c), in accordance with Superior Court Rule 9A except as otherwise provided by this Standing Order, unless the Court's decision on any motion specified in part 3 above has made such a resolution inappropriate. A plaintiff's Rule 12(c) motion and supporting memorandum shall be served within thirty (30) days of the service of the record or of the Court's decision on any motion specified in part 3 above, whichever is later. A defendant's response shall be deemed to include a cross-motion for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Mass. R. Civ. P. 12(c) (which should be noted in the caption of the response) and shall be served within thirty (30) days after service of the plaintiff's motion and memorandum. The plaintiff shall then promptly file the motion materials in accordance with Superior Court Rule 9A. The Court may grant an extension of time to file for good cause shown. Memoranda shall include specific page citations to matters in the record.
The Clerk or her/his designee will schedule a hearing date after receiving the motion materials. No pre-trial conference will be held, and no pre-trial memorandum filed, unless specifically ordered by the Court. No testimony or other evidence shall be presented at the hearing, and the review shall be confined to the record. A party may waive oral argument and submit on the brief by filing a written notice. Such waiver by a party shall not affect the right of any other party to appear and present oral argument.


8-1103. Towed motor vehicles, lien thereon; procedure; personal property; providing notice of fee; city ordinance or county resolution. (a) Whenever any person providing wrecker or towing service, as defined by law, while lawfully in possession of a vehicle, at the direction of a law enforcement officer or the owner or as provided by a city ordinance or county resolution, renders any service to the owner thereof by the recovery, transportation, protection, storage or safekeeping thereof, a first and prior lien on the vehicle is hereby created in favor of such person rendering such service and the lien shall amount to the full amount and value of the service rendered. The lien may be foreclosed in the manner provided in this act. If the name of the owner of the vehicle is known to the person in possession of such vehicle, then within 15 days, notice shall be given to the owner that the vehicle is being held subject to satisfaction of the lien. Any vehicle remaining in the possession of a person providing wrecker or towing service for a period of 30 days after such wrecker or towing service was provided may be sold to pay the reasonable or agreed charges for such recovery, transportation, protection, storage or safekeeping of such vehicle and personal property therein, the costs of such sale, the costs of notice to the owner of the vehicle and publication after giving the notices required by this act, unless a court order has been issued to hold such vehicle for the purpose of a criminal investigation or for use as evidence at a trial. If a court orders any vehicle to be held for the purpose of a criminal investigation or for use as evidence at a trial, then such order shall be in writing, and the court shall assess as costs the reasonable or agreed charges for the protection, storage or safekeeping accrued while the vehicle was held pursuant to such written order. Any personal property within the vehicle need not be released to the owner thereof until the reasonable or agreed charges for such recovery, transportation or safekeeping have been paid, or satisfactory arrangements for payment have been made, except as provided under subsection (c) or for personal medical supplies which shall be released to the owner thereof upon request. The person in possession of such vehicle and personal property shall be responsible only for the reasonable care of such property. Any personal property within the vehicle not returned to the owner shall be sold at the auction authorized by this act.
(b) At the time of providing wrecker or towing service, any person providing such wrecker or towing service shall give written notice to the driver, if available, of the vehicle being towed that a fee will be charged for storage of such vehicle. Failure to give such written notice shall invalidate any lien established for such storage fee.
(c) A city ordinance or county resolution authorizing the towing of vehicles from private property shall specify in such ordinance or resolution: (1) The maximum rate such wrecker or towing service may charge for such wrecker or towing service and storage fees; (2) that an owner of a vehicle towed shall have access to personal property in such vehicle for 48 hours after such vehicle has been towed and such personal property shall be released to the owner; and (3) that the wrecker or towing service shall report the location of such vehicle to local law enforcement within two hours of such tow.
History: L. 1987, ch. 209, § 1; L. 1991, ch. 40, § 1; L. 2000, ch. 179, § 12; L. 2004, ch. 37, § 2; L. 2009, ch. 119, § 9; L. 2016, ch. 81, § 3; July 1.


text:
Our Business is Finding the Right People for Your Business.
In accordance with Art. 32 GDPR, we take into account the state of the art, the costs of implementation and the nature, scope, circumstances and purposes of the processing as well as the different probability and severity of the risk for the rights and freedoms natural persons, appropriate technical and organizational measures to ensure a level of protection appropriate to the risk.
“Cookies” are small files that are stored on users’ computers. Different information can be stored within the cookies. A cookie is primarily used to store the information about a user (or the device on which the cookie is stored) during or after his visit to an online offer. Temporary cookies, or “session cookies” or “transient cookies”, are cookies that are deleted after a user leaves an online service and closes his browser. In such a cookie, e.g. the contents of a shopping cart in an online shop or a login status are saved. The term “permanent” or “persistent” refers to cookies that remain stored even after the browser has been closed. Thus, e.g. The login status will be saved if the users post these after several days attention. Likewise, in such a cookie the interests of the users can be stored, which are used for range measurement or marketing purposes. A “third-party cookie” refers to cookies that are offered by providers other than the person who manages the online offer (otherwise, if it is only their cookies, this is called “first-party cookies”).
We process the applicant data only for the purpose and in the context of the application process in accordance with the legal requirements. The processing of the applicant data takes place in order to fulfill our (pre-) contractual obligations in the context of the application process within the meaning of Art. 6 para. 1 lit. b. DSGVO Art. 6 para. 1 lit. f. DSGVO if the data processing e.g. is required for us in the context of legal proceedings (in Germany, § 26 BDSG applies additionally).
Furthermore, applicants can send us their applications via e-mail. However, please note that e-mails are generally not sent in encrypted form and that applicants themselves must provide encryption. We can therefore take no responsibility for the transmission of the application between the sender and the reception on our server and therefore recommend rather to use an online form or the postal delivery. Because instead of applying via the online form and e-mail, the applicants will the possibility to send us the application by post.
The data provided by the applicants may be further processed by us in the event of a successful application for employment purposes. Otherwise, if the application for a job offer is not successful, the applicants’ data will be deleted. Applicants’ data will also be deleted if an application is withdrawn, which the applicants are entitled to at any time.
As part of the application, we offer applicants the opportunity to work in our “Talent Pool” for a period of two years on the basis of a consent in accordance with Art. 6 para. 1 lit. b. and Art. 7 DSGVO.
The application documents in the Talent Pool are processed solely as part of future job advertisements and job search and will be destroyed at the latest after the deadline. Candidates are informed that their consent to be admitted to the talent pool is voluntary, has no influence on the current application process and that they can revoke this consent at any time in the future and declare an objection within the meaning of Art. 21 GDPR.
The IP address submitted by the user’s browser will not be merged with other data provided by Google. Users can prevent the storage of cookies by setting their browser software accordingly; In addition, the users may collect the data generated by the cookie and related to their use of the online offer to Google and the processing prevent this data from being accessed by Google by downloading and installing the browser plug-in available at the following link: http://tools.google.com/dlpage/gaoptout?hl=en.
We use Google’s online AdWords marketing tool “AdWords” to place ads on the Google advertising network (e.g., in search results, in videos, on websites, etc.) so that they are displayed to users who have a suspected interest in the ads. This allows us to more specifically display ads for and within our online offering so that we only present ads to users that potentially match their interests. If a user e.g. Showing ads for products he’s been looking for on other online offers is called remarketing. For these purposes, upon access to our and other websites where the Google Advertising Network is active, Google will immediately execute a Google code and become so-called (re) marketing tags (invisible graphics or code, also known as “).” Web beacons “) incorporated into the website. With their help, the user is provided with an individual cookie, i. a small file is saved (instead of cookies, comparable technologies can also be used). In this file is noted which websites the user visited, for what content he is interested and what offers the user has clicked, as well as technical information about the browser and operating system, referring websites, visit time and other information on the use of the online offer.
Furthermore, we receive an individual “conversion cookie”. The information obtained through the cookie is used by Google to generate conversion statistics for us. However, we only hear the anonymous total number of users who clicked on our ad and were redirected to a conversion tracking tag page. However, we do not receive any information that personally identifies users.
The data of the users are pseudonym processed within the Google advertising network. That Google stores and processes e.g. not the name or e-mail address of the users, but processes the relevant data cookie-related within pseudonymous user profiles. That from the perspective of Google, the ads are not managed and displayed to a specifically identified person, but to the cookie owner, regardless of who that cookie owner is. This does not apply if a user has explicitly allowed Google to process the data without this pseudonymization. The information collected about users is transmitted to Google and stored on Google’s servers in the United States.
Based on our legitimate interests (ie interest in the analysis, optimization and economic operation of our online offer within the meaning of Art. 6 (1) lit. DSGVO) we use the plugin Jetpack (here the subfunction “WordPress Stats”), which includes Includes Visitor Access Statistical Evaluation Tool and Automattic Inc., 60 29th Street # 343, San Francisco, CA 94110, USA. Jetpack uses so-called “cookies”, text files that are stored on your computer and that allow an analysis of the use of the website by you.
Within our online offering, features and content of the Google+ platform offered by Google LLC, 1600 Amphitheater Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA (“Google”) may be incorporated. For this, e.g. Content such as images, videos, or text and buttons that allow users to share content from this online offering within Twitter. If the users are members of the platform Google+, Google can call the o.g. Assign contents and functions to the profiles of the users there.

matches:
Art. 32
Art. 6
Art. 6
§ 26
Art. 6
Art. 7
Art. 21
Art. 6