The federal income tax system in the United States depends upon a high degree of voluntary compliance. The IRS estimates that the voluntary compliance level is declining and that this tax compliance gap cost the government an estimated $90.5 billion in 1981. Between 1979 and 1982, Congress made several changes in the tax laws designed to improve tax compliance. Extensive data was collected by the IRS for 1979 and 1982 through the random sample audits of approximately 50,000 taxpayers on the Taxpayer Compliance Measurement Program (TCMP), which is conducted every three years. During the period 1979 through 1982, Congress lowered the marginal tax rates, added some fairly severe penalties, for both taxpayers and paid return preparers, and increased information reporting requirements for certain types of income. In this research, it was hypothesized that voluntary compliance should increase in response to lower marginal rates, a higher risk of detection due to additional reporting requirements, and increased penalties. Multiple regression analysis was employed to test these hypotheses, using 1979 and 1982 TCMP data. Because of the requirements for taxpayer confidentiality, it was necessary for the IRS to run the data and provide the aggregate data results for the research. The results provided insight into the effectiveness of tax compliance legislation. While the overall voluntary compliance level (VCL) increased from 1979 to 1982 by 1.53 per cent, the VCL increase for taxpayers in high marginal rates was much smaller (.42 percent) than the overall increase. This is very inconsistent with the notion that high marginal rates are driving noncompliance, and suggests that marginal rates may not be strong determinants of compliance. Probably other factors, such as opportunity for evasion, may be more important. There was little change from 1979 to 1982 of the compliance of returns done by paid return preparers. Because of the timing of many TEFRA provisions (effective in 1983), further research for years after 1982 is needed.

The purposes of this study were: (1) to present data resulting from an analysis of the ninety-seven published grievance-arbitration awards involving issues of racial discrimination occurring between April 1, 1974, and December 31, 1980? and (2) to determine from the data how labor arbitrators have reacted to Alexander v. Gardner-Denver Co., 415 U.S. 36 (1974) . The Supreme Court held that labor arbitration was a "comparatively inappropriate" forum for the resolution of employment discrimination disputes. However, the Court said that an arbitral award could be "accorded great weight" by a lower court when certain relevant factors are present in an award. The cases were analyzed to determine the extent to which arbitrators responded to the factors set forth in the Gardner-Denver decision.

Properly written waiver of liability forms can be an effective tool in decreasing injury liability of intramural and recreational sports programs. In order for a waiver to be effective, (i.e., held up in court), participants must not only read and sign the waiver, but they must understand it as well. Readability, the ease of which text can be read and understood, is an important part of a well-written waiver. Waiver of liability forms should be written at a reading level consistent with that of the intended audience. On average, students read three grade levels below the last grade they completed in school. The highest grade level at which waiver of liability forms written for use in college settings should be the 9th grade. The main goal of this study was to assess the reading level of intramural and recreational sport waiver of liability forms, and compare them to the 9th grade level. Nine NIRSA member schools and nine non-NIRSA member schools from each of the six NIRSA regions were randomly selected for inclusion in this study. Following multiple mailings, the forms received were scanned into a computer, and readability was assessed using the Readability Calculation software (Micro Power & Light, Dallas, TX) for McIntosh. A one-sample t-test was performed to compare the forms to the 9th grade reading level. Forms were written significantly higher than the 9th grade level (t[26]=14.53, p<.0001). An analysis of variance was performed to assess possible moderating variables (e.g., NIRSA membership status and involvement of a risk management team in writing the waiver). No significant differences were found. Font size was also measured, and forms were found to have been written at a significantly higher level then the recommended 12 point font (t[28]=-2.88, p<.01). This study brings into questions the efficacy of waiver of liability forms used in many collegiate/university intramural and recreational sports programs in the U.S. / Graduation date: 2003

The Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 requires that employers provide "reasonable accommodations" for qualified individuals who have a disability, provided that doing so does not result in "undue hardship". There are several guidelines that employers have been given to evaluate the reasonableness of job accommodations. Unfortunately, these guidelines have been criticized as being vague and ambiguous. Specific factors considered when determining whether or not to grant an accommodation under the ADA have yet to be examined in psychological research. The current study evaluated the impact of cost of accommodations, position level of the employee, and attitudes of raters for their effects on judgements of the reasonableness of requests and on subjects' likelihood of honoring requests. Results showed that accommodations were rated as more reasonable and were recommended to be honored more often for higher level positions than for lower level positions. Measures of attitudes toward disabled persons, both in general and in the workplace, did not have many significant correlations with the dependent measures. Implications of the findings and ideas for future research are discussed.

This thesis examines the study and management of Alaskan fur seals from 1867 to 1914. Government involvement in resource conservation expanded during this period, as did the role of experts. Federal officials charged with managing fur seals often sought advice from scientists, and over the years naturalists studied the animals regularly. Despite this apparent cooperation, scientific recommendations rarely took precedence over other considerations. Fur seal history illuminates obstacles facing scientists as they tried, and failed, to control resource use. Scientists often lost credibility as a result of the changing nature of their profession, but, as this study shows, the most important barriers to expert influence were entrenched economic, political, and diplomatic agendas within the federal government. / Master of Arts

No description available.

No description available.

Call number: LD2668 .T4 1955 N34 / Master of Science

No description available.

This study is designed to investigate discrimination in employment against resident aliens in the United States as evaluated by both U.S. practices and standards of international law and to determine whether the American treatment of aliens in employment is compatible with the international standard. In order to examine the common assertion that American practices in the treatment of aliens in employment is superior to the international minimum standard, two sets of hypotheses are tested: one on the existence of the minimum international standard, which protects aliens' rights, and the other on the American practice of requiring citizenship for employment, which deprives aliens of equal protection and thereby places the legal position of aliens below the minimum international standard. Three major sources of data for this study involve data from: (1) international arbitrations, conventions and agreements; (2) United States executive, legislative, and judicial decisions and actions; and (3) Immigration and Naturalization Service materials. The major findings indicate that the contemporary minimum international standard includes post-1945 Human Rights instruments together with the traditional minimum international standards. The most significant finding is that the contemporary minimum standard affords aliens the right to work without discrimination and confirms the relevant hypothesis in connection with the minimum standard. The study reveals that aliens in the United States are discriminated against in employment because of alienage at three different levels--federal, state, and private--with more intensity of discrimination at the federal level, despite the equal protection clause in the U.S. Constitution. The study concludes that American employment practice in the period of 1886-1971 was comparable with the international standard. On the other hand, during the 1971-1980 era, U.S. standards were below the minimum international standard as set forth by international law. This confirms the hypothesis, with some modification, that the U.S. practice of demanding citizenship for some employment has undercut the legal position of aliens so that it falls below the minimum international standard.