06-25-2005, 02:58 AM
|
|
|
The Demon & 12clicks
Industry Role:
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: SallyRand is a FAGGOT
Posts: 18,208
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by DirtyWhiteBoy
Please tell me where in the following regulations it says you can't have 2 offices?"
|
Here you go
Two commenters commented that the implicit requirement that records be kept at a place of business is unreasonable and argued that the regulation should permit third-party custody of records. The Department declines to adopt this comment. Permitting a third party to possess the records would unnecessarily complicate the compliance and inspection processes by removing the records from the physical location where they were initially collected, sorted, indexed, and compiled.
For example, producers could provide false names and addresses to the third party as a means to avoid scrutiny by law enforcement. Historically, producers have used front corporations in order to evade both law enforcement and tax authorities. Permitting third-party custodianship would exacerbate this problem. Custodians could, for example, disclaim any responsibility for the condition or completeness of the records or be unable to provide additional information regarding the status of the records. Permitting such third-party custodians in the final rule would thus require additional regulations to ensure that the third-party custodian could guarantee the accuracy of the records, would act as a legally liable agent of the producer, and would raise other administrative issues as well.
Keep trying to be cutesy with these rules and see what happens to you. |
|
|