Sentences with phrase «pay period in question»

In this case, if you still owe taxes, your employer will send your whole paycheck to the IRS since the amount exempt from levy was paid to you already for the particular pay period in question.

Not exact matches

Putting into question its involvement in the new deal, the IMF suggested that Athens should receive a 30 - year grace period before it has to start paying off its debts.

No one questions that the period between 1936 and 1939 was crucial for an understanding of Borges» s development as a writer; however, little attention has been paid to Borges's other literary activities during these years — especially the various essays, reviews, biographical sketches and literary gossip that appeared in El Hogar.

In the question - and - answer period, Coetzee asked panelists to consider the idea of instituting a «national standard» for postdoc pay.

Ms. Laura my question to you when I pay off my balance again in a short period of time, should I then make my move and call the credit card company and request to lower my interest rate?

I'm assuming that you're paying in full each period (as you indicated in your question), because if you don't, then obviously, portions of your balances from previous statements will appear on your next statement (s) because you haven't paid them off in full yet.

But this doesn't look to be the case; I see that there were some convertible notes that were converted during the period in question so the share repurchases were, in effect, just a form of paying down debt.

This is my following pay statement for a 2 - week period: I worked in total 183 hours in a 2 week interval, my questions is why am I getting paid to little for overtime?

The question is if since his Mom continues to stay in the apartment and we move out, will the landlord allow us to move out [and collect his rent from his Mom] or request us to pay the rent for remaining period.

It is a question with no right or wrong answer because a number of variables (interest rates applicable till the mortgage is paid down, annual returns from a diversified portfolio during the same period, future tax rates on income, interest, dividends and capital gains, the annual churn in a portfolio etc.) are unknown at this point.

The key questions are — how long do you plan to stay in the home, when do you want to pay off the mortgage or sell the property, what will your income look like in the next 3, 5 — 10 years — do you need better cash flow with lower payments or a workable repayment plan to pay off the mortgage sooner — knowing the borrower's short and long term plans and financial goals is necessary to make the best options avilable — the numbers of actual cost and benefits are the answer — show the total costs of principal and interest over 5 year periods and the total for keeping the loan for the full term, these are the real costs and savings for the borrower.

Section 17 (4) provided: «(4) Where the landlord has duly served a notice under subsection (2)..., the amount (exclusive of interest) which the former tenant or (as the case may be) the guarantor is liable to pay in respect of the fixed charge in question shall not exceed the amount specified in the notice unless --(a) his liability in respect of the charge is subsequently determined to be for a greater amount, (b) the notice informed him of the possibility that that liability would be so determined, and (c) within the period of three months beginning with the date of the determination, the landlord serves on him a further notice informing him that the landlord intends to recover that greater amount from him (plus interest, where payable)».

To answer these questions the advocate general needed to look at the two limbs of Art 7 WTD: Art 7.1 which guarantees workers a minimum of four weeks» paid annual leave; and Art 7.2 which stipulates that this minimum period can not be replaced with a payment in lieu, except where the employment relationship is terminated.

Although the claimant was paid for the period in question it was in the EAT's judgment plainly a detriment to require him to stay at the depot.

If the company fails to pay you as agreed for an agreed time period, that could function as a breach of the contract that would prevent it from enforcing the non-compete, putting aside the question of whether the non-compete is viable in general.

NO EQUAL PAY COMPARISON WITH A SUCCESSOR EMPLOYEE Bewley vWalton Centre for Neurology [2008] UKEAT / 564/07, [2008] All ER (D) 341 (May) is a complicated case in which the claimant was relying on both like work and equal value, and using certain comparators who had only been employed towards the end of the period in question.

The two main reasons you might not want to change policies are surrender charges (only in permanent plans such as whole life or universal life), and your new policy will likely contain a new two year contestable period, which means the company could potentially weasel out of paying the life insurance proceeds upon your death if you die within 2 years of purchasing the policy and they find that you answered questions fraudulently on your application.

The people who bought the policy in question during the period of 2008 - 09 and 2010 - 11 would be the main beneficiaries of the refund order, according to which the policyholders will get 44 % of the Rs 625 crore premiums that was collectively paid by them for the plan.

Posted in AARP, contestability, contestability period, death benefit, insurance, life insurance, senior life insurance Tagged AARP, AARP / New York Life, agreed to pay the claim in full, conferenced with AARP claims department, ethics of selling to elderly, insurance, left voicemail questioning contestability, life insurance, life insurance contestability, prior knowledge of cause of death, return premium, senior life insurance, two year contestability period, withheld payment of death benefits 12 Responses

In January, lawmakers demanded exchanges pay both corporate tax and a local income tax amounting to just over 24 % of revenues earned during the period in questioIn January, lawmakers demanded exchanges pay both corporate tax and a local income tax amounting to just over 24 % of revenues earned during the period in questioin question.

What this means is you'll have a negative IRR each period until the cash in = the cash out (all investor capital has been returned) So a pref based on IRR won't pay off annual promote to the sponsor until cash in = cash out... which is essentially the problem (for the sponsor) I highlighted in my original question.