Here are a bunch of little bites to satisfy your hunger for movie culture:
Movie Shoes of the Day:
Nike is raffling off a limited amount of Nike Mag self-lacing sneakers inspired by the iconic shoes in Back to the Future Part II to support the Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson’s Research (via USA Today):
[embedded content]
Short Film of the Day:
Speaking of things from the 1980s, see how many movie and TV references from the decade you can spot in this animated short titled Mall 84 (via Geek Tyrant):
[embedded content]
Character Introduction of the Day:
Get ready for Rogue One: A Star Wars Story with the debut and origin of Wedge Antilles in a clip from the upcoming Gary Whitta-scripted episode of Star Wars Rebels:
[embedded content]
Alternate Ending of the Day:
Here’s an animated look at how Star Trek Beyond should have ended:
[embedded content]
Vintage Image of the Day:
Buster Keaton, who was born on this day in 1895, with Gloria Swanson on the set of 1950’s Sunset Blvd.:
Magic Trick of the Day:
Benedict Cumberbatch does a trick with water, one of the ancient elements, in this video for Vanity Fair:
[embedded content]
Cosplay of the Day:
Speaking of magic, here’s some great cosplay of Newt Scamander from Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them. See more pics at Fashionably Geek.
Screenwriting Lesson of the Day:
Lessons from the Screenplay showcases the script for Moonlight Kingdom and what’s written before the style takes over:
[embedded content]
Filmmaker in Focus:
The Discarded Image explores Quentin Tarantino’s use of violence in the video essay “Not Blood, Red”:
[embedded content]
Classic Trailer of the Day:
Today is the 20th anniversary of the release of That Thing You Do!, written and directed by Tom Hanks. Watch the original trailer for the movie below.
George Town in Grand Cayman, Cayman Islands, is the home of many international banks and offshore companies. A new study shows the Caymans hold $46 billion in multinational corporate profits, far more than its own $3 billion economy. David Rogers/Getty Imageshide caption
The study looked at Fortune 500 companies and how they used tax haven subsidiaries to avoid paying taxes on their income in 2015. One of the practices that has become standard for big companies is to create subsidiaries in a country that has no corporate or income tax.
According to the study, 367 of the companies on the Fortune 500 have at least one of these subsidiaries. The study found these companies are holding $2.5 trillion in accumulated profits offshore for tax purposes.
Here are highlights from the study, which is titled Offshore Shell Games 2016:
“All told, these 367 companies maintain at least 10,366 tax haven subsidiaries.
“The 30 companies with the most money officially booked offshore for tax purposes collectively operate 2,509 tax haven subsidiaries.
“The most popular tax haven among the Fortune 500 is the Netherlands, with more than half of the Fortune 500 reporting at least one subsidiary there.
“Approximately 58 percent of companies with tax haven subsidiaries have set up at least one in Bermuda or the Cayman Islands — two particularly notorious tax havens. The profits that all American multinationals — not just Fortune 500 companies — collectively claimed they earned in these two island nations according to the most recent data totaled 1,884 percent and 1,313 percent of each country’s entire yearly economic output, respectively.”
Matt Gardner, executive director of the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, is one of the study’s authors. He says: “In many tax havens, it’s easier to set up a subsidiary than it is to get a library card. Very often there is little asked of the company in terms of who owns it [and] what they’re doing with it.”
The Securities and Exchange Commission requires publicly held corporations, to disclose how they interact with the federal tax system — how much they pay in U.S. taxes, how much they pay abroad, how much cash they hold abroad for tax purposes. The study analyzed disclosures mainly from corporate reporting.
Gardner says a hallmark of Bermuda and the Caymans is that they have little in the way of a tax system. According to the study, nearly half of the money that is held offshore is parked on one of the two island nations.
“Is there a chance that they’re actually doing something real in these countries? And pretty clearly the answer is: no.” says Gardner. He points to the fact that the entire economy of the Cayman Islands is $2.7 billion, according the country’s Economics and Statistic office. According to the study, U.S. multinationals claimed they earned $46 billion in the Cayman Islands, a figure that far surpasses the size of its whole economy.
“Very clearly these are profits that are being earned in the Caymans on paper only,” says Gardener, “and the economic activity generating these profits is taking place somewhere else, most likely in the U.S.”
Gardner points out that this activity is completely legal, but he says his group is fighting for changes in federal tax laws. To those who say avoiding taxes is the responsibility of corporate managers, Gardner responds, “Concealing their profits in a post office box in Bermuda may be a highly effective strategy for avoiding tax but it’s a terrible strategy for building a company.”
Gardner says the billions of dollars held in these two islands are effectively being “stashed in a suitcase under a bed.” He says companies could be investing in meaningful ways, such as building infrastructure in the U.S. or other countries, investing in research and development or adding production capacity. “They’re not doing that with this cash,” he laments. That, he argues, is “fundamentally against the interest of their shareholders.”
A federal health list specifically guarantees some women’s health coverage available without a copay or deductible, so what about men’s health? And what options are available for coverage for people who travel frequently? Here are the answers to some recent questions from readers.
Why aren’t there preventive health recommendations for men like there are for women under the health law? Women and breast cancer get so much attention by the health care community. Heart health, diabetes, prostate cancer and colon cancer are a few examples of opportunities for education and preventive screening for men.
There are many recommendations for men’s preventive care in the health law, although most of the examples you mention apply to women as well. Under the law, services recommended by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force have to be provided without charging people anything out of pocket. The independent panel of medical experts currently recommends that women and men be screened for high blood pressure, elevated cholesterol and blood sugar levels, and for colorectal cancer.
The drafters of the health law paid special attention to women’s preventive health needs, creating additional recommendations tailored specifically for them. This was done in part to address recognized gaps in women’s services, especially in the areas of sexual and reproductive health, said Adam Sonfield, senior policy manager at the Guttmacher Institute, a reproductive health research and policy organization.
The federal government is in the process of updating the women’s preventive health guidelines. If it adopts the working group recommendations this fall, insurers will begin to cover condoms and vasectomies for men without charge. Adding this no-cost benefit would address an inequity in current coverage rules and help both women and men avoid unwanted pregnancies.
I am 74 years old and on Medicare. My mother died of ovarian cancer and two maternal aunts and my paternal grandmother had breast cancer. Does Medicare cover BRCA testing?
Medicare generally only covers genetic testing for the two BRCA mutations that are associated with an increased risk of breast and ovarian cancer if you’ve already been diagnosed with cancer and have a family history that indicates testing is appropriate.
Throughout its history, the Medicare program, which provides health benefits for older and disabled Americans, has focused on treating injury and illness, not preventing them. Although the program now covers some cancer screening tests such as mammograms and colonoscopies, those changes were specifically authorized by Congress.
It’s a wrongheaded approach, said Dr. J. Leonard Lichtenfeld, deputy chief medical officer at the American Cancer Society. “I’m incensed that this is not covered.”
The BRCA test results could be important not only to the woman but also to her siblings and children, Lichtenfeld said.
The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommends that women who have a family history of breast or ovarian cancers be screened to determine if they’re at higher risk for potentially harmful genetic mutations and, if appropriate, referred for genetic counseling and BRCA testing. Under the health law, private insurers are required to cover such testing without charging women for it. But that provision does not apply to Medicare.
There are non-insurance options for testing, Lichtenfeld noted. Color Genomics, for example, offers a genetic test that analyzes 30 genes associated with hereditary cancers, including BRCA1 and BRCA2, for $249.
Are there any options available for people with marketplace plans who travel regularly? Emergency costs for an accident should be covered, but what about follow-up care after an accident or an illness while traveling? How does this work with increasingly narrow provider networks?
The situation you describe can be tough to manage. Under the health law, an insurer can’t require you to pay more for care in an emergency department that’s not in your provider network than it would have mandated for emergency care in network.
But once you leave the emergency department, you may get hit with out-of-network charges if you’re admitted to the hospital, for example, or need other follow-up care and are far from home.
Be sure to check with individual Blues plans before signing up if that type of coverage is important to you, said Paul Rooney, vice president of carrier relations at eHealth.com, an online insurance broker.
“Some of the local Blues are pulling [that coverage] from their offerings,” he said.
You might consider buying an accident policy. These plans typically pay a fixed dollar amount to offset your costs if you’re injured in an accident. But they can be tricky, said Nate Purpura, vice president of consumer affairs at eHealth.com. The policies don’t cover preexisting medical conditions, and the insurer might deny a claim that it considers related to an earlier medical problem, he said.
Kaiser Health News is an editorially independent news service that is part of the nonpartisan Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation.Michelle Andrews is on Twitter:@mandrews110.
Maria Sharapova during her quarterfinal match at the Australian Open tennis tournament in January. A drug test Sharapova took during the event later came back positive for the banned substance meldonium. Rick Rycroft/APhide caption
toggle caption
Rick Rycroft/AP
The international Court of Arbitration for Sport has reduced tennis star Maria Sharapova’s two-year doping ban to 15 months.
In its decision, released Tuesday morning, the court cited Sharapova’s apparent lack of knowledge that the drug she was taking — a prescription heart medication called meldonium that can improve blood flow — had been banned by anti-doping regulators. She had appealed the two-year sentence, calling it “unfairly harsh” in a post on Facebook.
In another post following Tuesday’s decision, Sharapova called it one of her “happiest days, as I found out I can return to tennis in April.” She also called on the International Tennis Federation to look into better ways to notify athletes of changes to doping regulations.
[embedded content]
As we have reported, Sharapova has said she simply did not know the drug’s status had changed. In March, when she announced she had failed the drug test, she said she had been taking the drug for years.
“I did fail the test, and I take full responsibility for it. … It’s very important for you to understand that for 10 years, this medicine was not on WADA [World Anti-Doping Agency]’s banned list and I had been legally taking the medicine for the past 10 years. But on Jan. 1, the rules had changed and meldonium became a prohibited substance, which I did not know. … I was given this medicine by my doctor for several health issues I was having in 2006.”
So, what’s so bad about meldonium? In an interview with NPR this summer, Olivier Rabin, science director for the World Anti-Doping Agency, said the agency banned it on Jan. 1 after noticing that entire teams were taking meldonium, “which usually suggests a drug isn’t being taken for medical purposes. How could every member of a team need the same medical treatment?” He also cited studies questioning the drug’s safety.
Sharapova first tested positive for meldonium in January during the Australian Open, where she lost to Serena Williams in the quarterfinals. The court upheld an earlier decision that stripped Sharapova of the ranking points she earned by making it to the quarterfinals, as well as any prize money.
The 15-month ban is back-dated to Jan. 26, 2016, which means Sharapova will be eligible to compete in April 2017, in time for both the French Open in May and at Wimbledon in July.