Capstone Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words - 2

Capstone - Essay Example The company operations are segmented in to three; US domestic package, International package and supply chain and freight (UPS, 2013). The supply chain and freight operations offers freight forwarding and logistics services, customs brokerage, supply chain design and management and consulting services to more than 195 countries across the world. Accordingly, UPS has diversified its services to billing technologies, payment solutions and risk mitigation services. The company operates more than 100,000 fleets of package delivery cars, tractors and more than 30,000 containers in airfreight transport. The competitors are United States Postal service, DHL international and FedEx (Magretta 2012). UPS mission, vision, and primary stakeholders UPS mission statement seeks to grow business through meeting the logistic needs of the clients and offering excellent services in all business operations. The company aims at maintaining strong financial position thus offering long-term impressive retu rns to the shareowners (Henry, 2008). Accordingly, the company is geared at inspiring its people and business partners through offering opportunities for personal growth and development. In addition, it is the aspiration of the company to lead by example in being responsible and sustainable company in making the difference in communities through social responsibility initiatives. Some of the UPS’s shared beliefs include integrity in its operations, innovation and creativity and teamwork. Accordingly, UPS is committed to quality and efficiency in the pursuit of excellence and safety of its people and business partners (Magretta 2012). The company is committed to continued environmental stewardship and social responsibility initiatives. UPS has a slogan that asserts; â€Å"what can Brown do for you† thus emphasizing that the company is capable of providing services to everyone across the world and to any address. UPS five forces of competition analysis Michael Porterâ₠¬â„¢s five forces of competition can be used to analyze the competitive strength and position of UPS in the market (Faarup, 2010). The first force is the threat of new entrants in to the market. In this case, the threat of new entrants in the global package delivery business is low due to the large economies of scale of the existing players such as DHL international, UPS and United States Postal service. In addition, large capital outlay is needed to establish operations through purchase of aircrafts, lorries, cars and hiring of personnel. Trade tariffs and international regulations have also made it difficult for other companies to enter in to the market. The second force of competition is the bargaining power of suppliers such as providers of fuel, business partners and trade unions. In this case, the bargaining power of suppliers is high due to demand for better salaries, rising fuel costs and providers of envelops and boxes who demand better prices for their services (Magretta 2 012). The third force of competition is the bargaining power of buyers. In this case, the buyers have moderate bargaining power due to high brand recognition, high brand loyalty and high switching costs (Henry, 2008). The fourth competitive force is the threat of substitutes in the global market. The threat of substitutes in the market is low since no real substitutes of airfreight and the company has diversified its services to offer integrated global shipping network (Faarup, 2010). In addition, UPS has controlled the threat of sub

Tax memorandum and dividend Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Tax memorandum and dividend - Essay Example She makes 16 to 17 hour trips for every trip and takes naps at suitable locations where she stops. While Mark captains a ferry boat that takes up to 15 to 17 hours journeys with 6 to 7 hour overlay. During the over lay Mark takes a four hour nap at the cot restored in the pilot house. The applicable law in these two cases is the overnight rule which is found in section 162(a) (2) of the internal revenue Code of 1954. Specific issues Is Tracy allowed to deduct the cost of meals purchased during the trip? And is Mark allowed to deduct the cost of meals purchased during the trip? The overnight rule only applies if the nature of the taxpayer’s employment is such that it requires him to sleep or rest when away from home. His expenditures which include incidental expenses such as tips are deductible travelling expenses this under section 162(a) (2) of the 1954 Code. It however does not include the brief period of time whereby an employee may be released from duty for the purpose of eating rather than sleeping. In normal circumstances meals are normally nondeductible under section 262 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954. For meals to be deductible as travelling expenses the petitioner has to prove that the meals were eaten while they were travelling away from home in carrying out their employment duties or trade as well as to show they slept substantially away from home. Conclusion Tracy was therefore not eligible for a deduction under the overnight rule, as per the Frederick. J. Barry, pro se. She was only eligible for tax deduction on entertainment expenses during the trips that she made. While Mark was eligible for tax deduction as the layover was mandatory after a 15 to 17 hour shift so as to get the passengers safely back to shore. He was however not going to eligible during the peak season. Support In Marks case, a Ferry captain qualified as being â€Å"away from home† in Code Sec. 162 (a) (2) purposes during off-season tours that were completed w ithin 24 hours and included 6 to 7 hours layovers. This is because of the demanding nature of taxpayer’s job since the captain needed to be alert during the long work hours to ensure passengers and crew safety. This was evidence enough that is was reasonable to obtain sleep and rest to be able meet job exigencies and demands. A 6 to 7 hour layover is more than sufficient duration to reflect increased expenses incurrence. This was not applicable though during peak season tours because rest periods during those hours were not part of the layover released time. The Ferryboat captain deduction for M&IE incurred during off-season tours that were 15 to 17 hours long were subject to Code Sec. 274 (n)(1) deduction limitation. Expenses, which taxpayer computed and substantiated pursuant to operative revenue procedures and federal rate, were treated as food and beverage expenses within meaning of Code Sec. 274(n) (1). In Tracy’s case Frederick J. Barry, pro se. Barry argued that the meals paid for during the 17 hour to 18 hour trips he made to see his clients was deductible under section 162(a), independently of section 163(a) (2). Barry made this trips and stopped at a suitable place to rest in the car before he went back home. He kept a blanket and a pillow in his car for this purpose. The petitioner did not substantially show that his meals where under the ordinary and necessary provision section 162 (a). The case was found to be indistinguishable from Correl. The petitioner was therefore not away from home when section 162(a) (2) was considered during his one day trips during 1966. The petitioner kept detailed records of amounts spent on meals during his one day trips in 1966, this amounted to $, 348.47. From that amount $1, 535. 26, was deductible as entertainment exp