Article 1
President Jokowi on Demographic Bonus in Indonesia: Blessing or Disaster
Tuesday, 03 October 2017 | 08:27 WIB
JAKARTA, NETRALNEWS.COM – President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo said the demographic bonus is like a double-edged sword, it can be a blessing but it can also be a disaster.
“It could be a problem if we do not prepare the quality of human resources, there are job opportunities but they cannot enter so unemployed, if one or two people it does not matter, if a lot of people it becomes big problems,” said President Jokowi, as quoted by Antara, Tuesday (10/03/2017).
President Jokowi, while attending the peak of the 45th PKK (Family Welfare Movement) Unity Movement Day at the same time opening the 2017 PKK National Cadre Jamboree, mentioned in 2020-2030, Indonesia is facing demographic bonus with many productive young people alive in that era.
“It means we have a great opportunity, but the big number is like a double-edged sword it can be a blessing, but it can also bring problems,” said the President, in front of about 1,600 PKK cadres from across Indonesia.
According to the President, demographic bonus will be a blessing if Indonesia can take advantage, so that emerging the great power of human resources of Indonesia. “It’s become a great power of this nation because in the era of competition, HR becomes the key, it depends on how we prepare our human resources, there remain 10-15 years.”
According to him, the family plays an important role in improving the character and mental of the children so that children have a fighting spirit. “Awareness of global competition must be owned because the era of competition is very close, family role is very important,” concluded the President.
Conclusion Article 1
demographic bonus is like a double-edged sword, it can be a blessing but it can also be a disaster.
bonus demografi itu seperti pedang bermata dua, bisa jadi berkah tapi bisa juga menjadi bencana.
Indonesia is facing demographic bonus with many productive young people alive in that era.
Indonesia menghadapi bonus demografis dengan banyak anak muda produktif yang hidup dalam era.
According to the President, demographic bonus will be a blessing if Indonesia can take advantage, so that emerging the great power of human resources of Indonesia. “It’s become a great power of this nation because in the era of competition, HR becomes the key, it depends on how we prepare our human resources, there remain 10-15 years.”
Menurut Presiden, bonus demografi akan menjadi berkah jika Indonesia bisa memanfaatkannya, sehingga muncul kekuatan besar sumber daya manusia Indonesia. “Ini menjadi kekuatan besar bangsa ini karena di era persaingan, SDM menjadi kuncinya, itu tergantung dari bagaimana kita mempersiapkan sumber daya manusia kita, tetap ada 10-15 tahun.”
Article 2
IMF warnings on economy will fall on deaf ears among world leaders
on Sunday 8 October 2017 06.59 BST
Christine Lagarde, boss of the International Monetary Fund, is expected to deliver a hard-hitting speech at the organisation’s annual meeting this week, urging world leaders to push ahead with reforms to turn the current global economic recovery into something more sustainable.
Lagarde, who is now in her second four-year term as managing director of the Washington-based lender of last resort, will talk about a lack of education, training and productivity. She will, no doubt, develop the argument she put forward in London a fortnight ago that regulators need to be wary of lenders outside the mainstream repeating the same errors as the banks a decade ago.
The need to tame a rapidly growing shadow banking industry will be set alongside concerns about government finances and how those administrations that are awash with cash, like Germany and South Korea, “can use this moment to invest more in their own economies”, to help others with large deficits, as she said last week in a speech at Harvard university.
But who cares what Lagarde says about the future direction of the global economy? As far as the autocratic leaders who fill the UN’s assembly hall are concerned, the IMF served its purpose in the wake of the crash. Now its ideas for greater co-operation, investment and equality are surplus to requirements, like a wool coat in August or a Royal Navy landing ship in a cost-cutting defence review.
Not only is the IMF seen as a hand-wringing liberal institution making nuanced and technical suggestions in an age of simpler, broad-brush solutions, it is wedded to a past that both left and right on the political spectrum are beginning to accept will never return.
The normality of galloping productivity gains that lead to improving wage rates, bountiful tax receipts and declining government debts is still a long way off, and –given how much commerce is changing with the growing amount of business conducted over the internet, the rise of artificial intelligence and robotics may never return.
Not that the IMF is giving up its role as adviser to governments large and small about how they should move forwards. Last week it urged the G20 to focus on “rebalancing and ensuring the sustainability of growth, while fine-tuning the macroeconomic policy mix”.
Rebalancing refers back to the call for Germany and South Korea to splash some of their spare money on the goods and services of their neighbours. In this way, the balance between debtor and surplus countries would narrow to reduce the risk of another financial crash.
Except that no one is listening to the G20 either. Least of all the G20’s own members, despite their enthusiasm for a group created to rebuild the global economy in the wake of the 2008 financial crash. Mexico, Australia, Canada and Indonesia are keen to keep the global trading routes open with as few barriers as possible. But the majority of G20 of members are, in different ways, turning in on themselves and of the IMF’s recommendations, the most they can probably manage is the fine-tuning.
China is about to embark of a phase of introspection as the Communist party wrestles with keeping control amid slowing growth. Germany is busy saving for its ageing baby boomers, while the Trump administration is busy putting America first, which initially means unwinding its trade agreements. The fact that the IMF’s global concerns are lost on its most powerful members means that all eyes in Washington next week will be on the real movers and shakers – the central bank governors, who turn up en masse for the IMF bash.
Yet they have, almost in unison, expressed the limitations of their powers in recent weeks, not least the Bank of England governor Mark Carney. He will be in Washington with Lagarde and may hint again about an interest rate rise in November. Yet he is the first to say that a sustainable future is one only politicians can forge.
In a sector long beset by turbulence, the eventual crash of Monarch Airlines was predictable if still a mighty shock to many staff, and hundreds of thousands of passengers who booked flights without protection.
While other airlines, such as Air Berlin and Alitalia, have been kept on life support by their governments, Monarch’s demise was sudden. The venerable brand had lasted almost 50 years, carrying holidaymakers through oil shocks, recession and wars. But Britain’s great survivor could not withstand the latest blows, a combination of terrorism, Brexit uncertainty, a collapsing pound and fierce competition from low-cost airlines.
Should other airlines fear trouble ahead? Not necessarily. Consolidation, the bigger aviation beasts like to argue, is inevitable. The effects of oversupply in key markets were fatally evident to Monarch: cheap-as-chips fares to Spain in summer meant its planes would never see the autumn. Monarch was too small to survive, but its demise is going to make life a little easier for rivals; already prices have surged on some routes. The greater ramifications for aviation could yet be in events unfolding at Ryanair, where a failure to factor in pilots’ leave led to two waves of cancellations. The Irish airline meets its own crisis from a vastly different position: cash-rich, leading the European market, with annual profits topping £1bn. Its unremittingly low-cost philosophy has come to dominate aviation. Yet at least one pillar of Ryanair’s economy is wobbling.
Pilots, long derided by O’Leary and led into unusual contractual arrangements, have rediscovered their strength. While Ryanair looks to double its customers and awaits the arrival of a new fleet of 737s, it is going to need more people to fly them.
Pilots’ salaries are not small: but neither is the investment they make in their training, nor the responsibility they hold. With its work culture in the spotlight, Ryanair is being forced to bump up pay for pilots; cabin crew, who suffer even greater indignities at the hands of Ryanair’s management for far less reward, might wait longer for a rise.
Higher costs could mean higher fares. But it is time that Ryanair, which now preaches the virtue of niceness to customers, extended the same courtesy to its own employees.
Both sides look to win the Uber battle Transport for London’s surprise banishment of Uber – and the subsequent bipartisan peace talks – increasingly feel like carefully staged theatre.
The ride-hailing app’s chief executive Dara Khosrowshahi held a tête à tête with TfL commissioner Mike Brown last week, a personal touch designed to show he is taking the firm’s reputational struggles seriously.
Both TfL and mayor Sadiq Khan welcomed this gesture of contrition and the script is ready for a deal allowing both sides to claim victory. Khosrowshahi need only make minor tweaks to allay TfL’s concerns about driver background checks and reporting of crime. That will cast him as the face of a new era of social responsibility at Uber, while TfL and Khan can boast that they took on a Californian tech giant and won.
It would be no great shock if Uber won its licence back by Christmas. But concerns about issues such as labour rights for drivers will linger on.
Conclusion Article 2
The need to tame a rapidly growing shadow banking industry will be set alongside concerns about government finances and how those administrations that are awash with cash, like Germany and South Korea, “can use this moment to invest more in their own economies”, to help others with large deficits, as she said last week in a speech at Harvard university.
Kebutuhan untuk menjinakkan industri perbankan bayangan yang berkembang pesat akan diatur bersamaan dengan kekhawatiran tentang keuangan pemerintah dan bagaimana administrasi yang dibanjiri uang tunai, seperti Jerman dan Korea Selatan, “dapat menggunakan momen ini untuk berinvestasi lebih banyak di ekonomi mereka sendiri”, untuk membantu yang lainnya dengan defisit besar, seperti yang dia katakan minggu lalu dalam sebuah pidato di universitas Harvard.
Not only is the IMF seen as a hand-wringing liberal institution making nuanced and technical suggestions in an age of simpler, broad-brush solutions, it is wedded to a past that both left and right on the political spectrum are beginning to accept will never return.
IMF tidak hanya dipandang sebagai institusi liberal yang merajuk membuat saran bernuansa dan teknis di zaman yang lebih sederhana, solusi sikat lebat, namun terikat pada masa lalu yang ditinggalkan dan ditinggalkan di spektrum politik yang mulai menerima tidak akan pernah ada. kembali.
Rebalancing refers back to the call for Germany and South Korea to splash some of their spare money on the goods and services of their neighbours. In this way, the balance between debtor and surplus countries would narrow to reduce the risk of another financial crash.
Rebalancing mengacu pada seruan untuk Jerman dan Korea Selatan untuk menyalurkan sebagian uang cadangan mereka untuk barang dan jasa tetangga mereka. Dengan cara ini, keseimbangan antara debitur dan negara-negara surplus akan menyempit untuk mengurangi risiko terjadinya kecelakaan finansial lainnya.
The fact that the IMF’s global concerns are lost on its most powerful members means that all eyes in Washington next week will be on the real movers and shakers – the central bank governors, who turn up en masse for the IMF bash.
Fakta bahwa kekhawatiran global IMF hilang pada anggotanya yang paling kuat berarti bahwa semua mata di Washington minggu depan akan menjadi penggerak dan penggerak nyata – gubernur bank sentral, yang muncul secara massal untuk pesta IMF.
Article 3
Exploring the estate tax: Part 1
Practitioners should know these basics about estate taxes to better advise clients.
By David J. Beausejour, J.D.
October 1, 2017
Covers estate tax planning techniques, including maximizing the marital deduction and the use of various types of trusts.
OVERRIDING GOAL: TAX MINIMIZATION
A major area of personal financial planning is planning for the transfer of property during an individual’s lifetime and at death. Although most individuals do not have enough money to be concerned about federal gift and estate taxes, minimizing gift taxes and estate taxes is a primary financial goal for many millionaires and billionaires.
The federal estate and gift tax is referred to as a unified tax because both taxes use the same tax rate schedule and the same credit against the tax, called the unified credit. The unified credit amount in 2017 is $2,141,800, which is the tax on $5,490,000 of taxable value (the calculations in this article are based on 2017 figures). This $5,490,000 is called the basic exclusion amount.
An individual will be liable for the gift tax only if during the individual’s lifetime he or she transfers property by gift in excess of the basic exclusion amount. Because the basic exclusion amount applies to both the gift and estate tax, an individual’s estate will be liable for the estate tax only when the taxable value of the estate exceeds the individual’s exclusion amount, less the amount of taxable gifts the individual made during his or her lifetime.
The federal estate tax is owed by only about 1 out of 700 estates. It has gone through many changes since 2001 when estates with a taxable value of more than $675,000 were liable for the estate tax. This amount was increased gradually from $1 million in 2002—2003 to $5 million in 2010—2011. After 2011, the $5 million basic exclusion amount is adjusted for inflation; for 2017, it is $5.49 million.
This article discusses the mechanics of the estate tax as well as a number of planning techniques to minimize the federal estate tax so that the estate can transfer the maximum value to its beneficiaries. Although this discussion focuses on the federal estate tax and does not review state estate taxes, the relevant state rules must also be addressed as part of an individual’s financial plan.
Under Sec. 2001(a), the estate tax is imposed on the transfer of the taxable estate of every decedent who is either a citizen or a resident of the United States. The estate tax is calculated by adding together the decedent’s taxable estate (the gross estate less allowable deductions) and the decedent’s adjusted taxable gifts to determine the estate tax base (see below).
Formulas for calculating estate tax base and net estate tax liability
Gross estate – deductions = Taxable estate
Taxable estate + adjusted taxable gifts after 1976 = Estate tax base
Tentative estate tax – gift taxes paid after 1976 = Gross estate tax
Gross estate tax – unified credit – other credits = Net estate tax liability
Adjusted taxable gifts are taxable gifts made by the decedent after Dec. 31, 1976, other than gifts that are includible in the gross estate of the decedent. Next, the estate tax rates are applied to the estate tax base amount to determine the tentative estate tax. Gift taxes paid by the decedent after 1976 are then deducted from the tentative estate tax to arrive at the gross estate tax. Finally, the decedent’s remaining unified credit and any other credits are deducted from the gross estate tax to determine the decedent’s net estate tax liability.
Estates use Form 706, United States Estate (and Generation-Skipping Transfer) Tax Return, to calculate the estate tax liability of a decedent (this article does not address generation-skipping transfer (GST) taxes). Estates with a gross estate, plus adjusted taxable gifts, of more than the exclusion amount for the decedent’s year of death, and estates of any size whose executor elects to make a portability election, need to file an estate tax return, which is due within nine months after the date of the decedent’s death.
GROSS ESTATE
The gross estate includes all property, real or personal, tangible or intangible, wherever situated (Sec. 2031(a)). An estate lists property included in the gross estate on Form 706, Part 5, “Recapitulation,” lines 1-10.
LIFE INSURANCE
The gross estate includes the proceeds of life insurance in two situations (Sec. 2042):
- When the proceeds of life insurance are received by the estate as the beneficiary on a life insurance policy where the decedent is the insured; or
- When the proceeds of life insurance are received by beneficiaries other than the estate on a life insurance policy where the decedent is the insured and possessed at the date of death any of the incidents of ownership.
Incidents of ownership include the right to change the beneficiary, the right to transfer ownership of the life insurance policy, and the right to use the policy’s value as collateral for a loan. An incident of ownership also includes a reversionary interest (whether arising under the policy or other instrument or by operation of law), but only if the reversionary interest’s value exceeded 5% of the policy’s value immediately before the decedent’s death (Sec. 2042(2)).The gross estate also includes the replacement value of a life insurance policy owned by the decedent where someone other than the decedent is the insured.
GIFTS MADE WITHIN 3 YEARS OF DEATH
The gross estate includes any interest in property (by trust or otherwise) transferred by the decedent during the three-yearperiod ending on the date of the decedent’s death if the property would have been included in the decedent’s estate if it had not been transferred (Sec. 2035(a)). In addition, any gift tax paid on these gifts is included in the gross estate (Sec. 2035(b)).GROSS ESTATE VALUATIONAll property included in the gross estate is valued as of the date of the decedent’s death unless the executor elects the alternate valuation under Sec. 2032. If the executor elects the alternate valuation, the gross estate is valued as follows:
- For property distributed, sold, exchanged, or otherwise disposed of within six months after the decedent’s death, that property is valued as of the date of distribution, sale, exchange, or other distribution.
- Other property is valued as of the date six months after the decedent’s death.
The executor can elect the alternate valuation only if the gross estate and the sum of the estate tax on the estate and the GST tax on property included in the estate are less using the alternate valuation than the date-of-death valuation. The alternate valuation is calculated based on the aggregate value of the gross estate, not on an item-by-item basis. As a result, it is possible to use the alternate valuation even though one or more properties appreciate during the six-monthperiod between the date of death and the alternate valuation date.
The basis of property received by an estate’s beneficiary is either stepped-up (if the property has appreciated) or stepped-down (if the property has depreciated) to the fair market value (FMV) of the property at the date of the decedent’s death or, if elected, the value at the alternate valuation date (Sec. 1014). As a result, any pre-death (or pre-alternate valuation date) appreciation of property will escape income taxes. Consequently, as a general rule, highly appreciated property should not be sold before death. On the other hand, any pre-death (or pre-alternate valuation date) decrease in the value of property will not be available as a potential loss deduction to the beneficiary of the property. Thus, as a general rule, if possible, property that has lost value should be sold before death so that the decedent can realize the loss and potentially take an income tax deduction for it.
DEDUCTIONS
Estate tax deductions are reported on Form 706, Part 5, “Recapitulation,” lines 14—23. Deductions include:
- Funeral expenses;
- Expenses incurred in administering property subject to claims;
- Debts of the decedent;
- Mortgages and liens;
- Net losses during settlement of the estate;
- Expenses incurred in administering property not subject to claims;
- Amounts passing to a surviving spouse; and
- Charitable, public, and similar gifts and bequests.
Commissions paid to the estate’s executor are allowed as a deduction on the estate tax return. Likewise, attorneys’ fees and accounting fees paid are allowed as a deduction. In valuing the gross estate, the executor often needs an appraiser’s services, and the appraisal fees are allowed as a deduction. All debts the decedent owed as of the date of death are allowed as a deduction, including mortgages, automobile loans, student loan debt, and credit card debt.
As noted above, the estate can take a deduction for losses incurred during the estate settlement, including losses arising from fires, storms, shipwrecks, or other casualties or from theft (Sec. 2054). In a recent Tax Court case, the court showed a willingness to interpret the language in Sec. 2054 broadly to allow an estate a theft loss deduction where a limited liability company owned by the decedent lost money in a Ponzi scheme, diminishing its value to the estate (Estate of Heller, 147 T.C. No. 11 (2016)).
Since the estate can take a deduction for the decedent’s debts, any medical expenses owed at death can be deducted on the estate tax return. Medical expenses owed at death, in the alternative, could be deducted on the decedent’s final income tax return if the estate pays the medical expenses within one year of death (Sec. 213(c), Regs. Sec. 1.213-1(d)). The deduction on the estate return would more likely than not be more beneficial than taking the medical deduction on the decedent’s final income tax return because of the adjusted gross income limitation on the deductibility of medical expenses, which does not apply to estate tax returns. The executor has the flexibility of claiming all or part of the medical expenses owed at death on the decedent’s final income tax return rather than on the estate tax return.
MARITAL DEDUCTION
In calculating the estate tax, married individuals are at a significant advantage over unmarried individuals since the estate of a decedent who was married at the time of death can take an unlimited estate tax deduction for all amounts passing to the surviving spouse (Sec. 2056(a)). Many married people have wills providing that all property passes to the surviving spouse. As a result, there is often no estate tax liability on the estate of the first spouse to die.
Conclusion Article 3
This article discusses the mechanics of the estate tax as well as a number of planning techniques to minimize the federal estate tax so that the estate can transfer the maximum value to its beneficiaries. Although this discussion focuses on the federal estate tax and does not review state estate taxes, the relevant state rules must also be addressed as part of an individual’s financial plan.
Artikel ini membahas mekanika pajak perkebunan serta sejumlah teknik perencanaan untuk meminimalkan pajak real estat federal sehingga perkebunan tersebut dapat mentransfer nilai maksimum kepada penerima manfaatnya. Meskipun diskusi ini berfokus pada pajak real estat federal dan tidak meninjau pajak negara bagian, peraturan negara yang relevan juga harus ditangani sebagai bagian dari rencana keuangan individu.
Adjusted taxable gifts are taxable gifts made by the decedent after Dec. 31, 1976, other than gifts that are includible in the gross estate of the decedent. Next, the estate tax rates are applied to the estate tax base amount to determine the tentative estate tax. Gift taxes paid by the decedent after 1976 are then deducted from the tentative estate tax to arrive at the gross estate tax. Finally, the decedent’s remaining unified credit and any other credits are deducted from the gross estate tax to determine the decedent’s net estate tax liability.
Kena pajak yang dapat dikoreksi merupakan hadiah kena pajak yang dibuat oleh orang yang meninggal setelah tanggal 31 Desember 1976, selain hadiah yang termasuk dalam harta kotor orang yang telah meninggal. Selanjutnya, tarif pajak properti diterapkan pada jumlah pokok pajak perkebunan untuk menentukan pajak perkebunan sementara. Pajak hadiah yang dibayarkan oleh orang yang meninggal setelah tahun 1976 dikurangkan dari pajak sementara sementara untuk mendapatkan pajak kekayaan bruto. Akhirnya, sisa kredit bersatu dan kredit lainnya dikurangkan dari pajak kekayaan bruto untuk menentukan kewajiban pajak bersih orang yang diakuisisi.
The gross estate includes all property, real or personal, tangible or intangible, wherever situated.
Properti kotor mencakup semua properti, nyata atau pribadi, berwujud atau tidak berwujud, dimanapun berada.
The gross estate includes the proceeds of life insurance in two situations.
Properti kotor mencakup hasil asuransi jiwa dalam dua situasi.
All property included in the gross estate is valued as of the date of the decedent’s death unless the executor elects the alternate valuation under.
Estate tax deductions are reported on Form 706, Part 5, “Recapitulation,” lines 14-23. Deductions include:
- Funeral expenses;
- Expenses incurred in administering property subject to claims;
- Debts of the decedent;
- Mortgages and liens;
- Net losses during settlement of the estate;
- Expenses incurred in administering property not subject to claims;
- Amounts passing to a surviving spouse; and
- Charitable, public, and similar gifts and bequests.
Semua properti yang termasuk dalam harta kotor dinilai pada tanggal kematian orang yang meninggal itu kecuali jika eksekutor memilih penilaian alternatif menurut Sec. 2032
Pengurangan pajak perkebunan dilaporkan pada Formulir 706, Bagian 5, “Rekapitulasi,” baris 14-23. Pengurangan meliputi:
- Biaya pemakaman;
- Biaya yang dikeluarkan dalam mengelola properti yang tunduk pada klaim;
- Hutang orang yang meninggal;
- Hipotek dan hak gadai;
- Kerugian bersih selama penyelesaian perkebunan;
- Biaya yang dikeluarkan dalam mengelola properti yang tidak dikenai klaim;
- Jumlah yang lolos ke pasangan yang masih hidup; dan
- Hadiah, hadiah, dan hadiah amal, publik, dan sejenisnya.
In calculating the estate tax, married individuals are at a significant advantage over unmarried individuals since the estate of a decedent who was married at the time of death can take an unlimited estate tax deduction for all amounts passing to the surviving spouse.
Dalam menghitung pajak properti, individu yang menikah memiliki keuntungan yang signifikan atas individu yang belum menikah sejak harta seorang keturunan yang menikah pada saat kematian dapat mengambil pengurangan pajak tanah tak terbatas untuk semua jumlah yang lolos ke pasangan yang masih hidup.
Conditional Sentence
Article 1
Type 1 : Demographic bonus will be a blessing if Indonesia can take advantage
Bonus demografi akan menjadi berkah jika Indonesia bisa memanfaatkannya
Article 2
Type 2 : It would be no great shock if Uber won its licence back by Christmas.
Tidak akan mengejutkan jika Uber memenangkan lisensinya kembali pada hari Natal
Article 3
Type 3: The property would have been included in the decedent’s estate if it had not been transferred
Harta itu akan dimasukkan ke dalam harta milik orang hilang jika tidak dipindahkan
silpiintansuseno7 