We all deserve a better life!

 

 Among the myths taken as fact by the environmental managers of most corporations is the belief that environmental regulations affect all competitors in a given industry uniformly. In reality, regulatory costs—and therefore compliance—fall unevenly, economically disadvantaging some companies and benefiting others. For example, a plant situated near a number of larger noncompliant competitors is less likely to attract the attention of local regulators than is an isolated plant, and less attention means lower costs. Additionally, large plants can spread compliance costs such as waste treatment across a larger revenue base; on the other hand, some smaller plants may not even be subject to certain provisions such as permit or reporting requirements by virtue of their size. Finally, older production technologies often continue to generate toxic wastes that were not regulated when the technology was first adopted. New regulations have imposed extensive compliance costs on companies still using older industrial coal-fired burners that generate high sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide outputs, for example, whereas new facilities generally avoid processes that would create such waste products. By realizing that they have discretion and that not all industries are affected equally by environmental regulation, environmental managers can help their companies to achieve a competitive edge by anticipating regulatory pressure and exploring all possibilities for addressing how changing regulations will affect their companies specifically.

 

 

 

=========================

※ 題目解析

>Q9 句子功能題

 為何作者要提這一段?

(“By realizing that they have discretion and that not all industries are affected equally by environmental regulation, environmental managers can help their companies to achieve a competitive edge by anticipating regulatory pressure and exploring all possibilities for addressing how changing regulations will affect their companies specifically.”)?

 

如果太緊張看不懂文章，關鍵字抓"Anticipating"(預測)/如果考試太緊張前面沒有意識到Anticipating的話，後面的How Changing regulations "will" 應該也看的出來是"研究法規本身"的前置作業而不是競爭對手的東西。

 

雖然文章中有提到競爭對手的種種，但引用的這一段裡面其實只有講到對於即將實施法規的前期study & planning

有計時的情況下，因為引用的句子裡面有兩個表未來事件的點(Anticipating + Will),所以我一開始就用關鍵字把含有競爭對手( competitor )的(A)、(C)刪掉，有"upcoming" 、 "Ban"字樣的正確答案(D)就跳出來。

 

(C) 太武斷 ( is reluctant to implement those methods.)

(E) AT裡面應該不會有"公然違法"的選項出來啦~

 

>Q10

關於排放sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide的敘述，下列為者為真:

定位句" New regulations have imposed extensive compliance costs on companies still using older industrial coal-fired burners that generate high sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide outputs, for example, whereas new facilities generally avoid processes that would create such waste products."

 

(A) 論點剛好跟正確答案相斥。

(B) the most -->Out!

(C) 正確答案

(D) Many older plants-->推不出

(E) "sometimes" adopted  -->Out!

 

>Q11 推論題

工廠地點與遵循法規成本的關係為何?

 

(A) 正確答案  "定位句" "a plant situated near a number of larger noncompliant competitors is less likely to attract the attention of local regulators than is an isolated plant, and less attention means lower costs."

(B) (E) 沒提到

(C) (D) 與文章論點相反的敘述

============================

因為這一篇算簡單，來補充一點資訊給大家參考參考，要考試的直接跳過不用看嚕~不重要的東西!

 

※ 財會法規單字補充

Compliance  遵循

 

背景資訊:

這是一個近年來在法律稅務界蠻紅的字，除了前幾年台灣很紅的"肥咖條款"「外國帳戶稅收遵從法」（Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act) 裡面就有這個字，這篇RC提到的環境汙染條例法規以外，美國幾年前也通過了"「海外反貪污行為法」(Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, FCPA)" ，這類型非刑法/民法類的新型商業法規，由於牽涉到不同領域的技術層面(Ex "汙染空氣"這個項目有時候在工業區很難界定出是哪一家工廠造成的，位於西北風口的工廠要罰比較重還是生產數量單位最多的工廠罰比較重?，這一類的問題很難像古老的法律一樣去界定罰款及罰則，因此國稅局較常使用一個籠統的compliance/ non-compliance 名目去開罰單(財報上也是如此認列Fine/罰款金額)。

 

這類型的商業法規因為灰色地帶多，所以前期準備的規畫也相對重要，實務上的案例也給各位將來的CEO們提供一點小故事:

 

VVN去年做過的一個專案，是關於巴西政府知道他們辦足球盃(2014 FIFA World Cup Brazil)會吸引很多人潮，因此他們在2012年的時候就通過一項法案，開放了一部份靠港口，土壤貧濟，氣候條件不好的區域，說2014會生效，歡迎大家去設立工廠，所有從這個區域製造出來的加工品/成品/半成品通通免出口稅，台灣有些商人就因此把大陸工廠關掉(因為連年高升的內地人力成本)，搬到巴西去，也有美國公司把工廠關掉搬到巴西去的，不過是為了躲避環境法規的罰款啦，我跟我的同事們都覺得巴西政府這個政策蠻聰明的! 解決了他們高失業率的當務之急 : ) 

 

肥咖條款簡介: http://www.obu.com.tw/news_10_20110920.php