Before beginning work on this unit’s discussion forum, please review the link “Doing Discussion Questions Right,” the expanded grading rubric for the forum, and any specific instructions for this unit’s topic.

By the due date assigned, submit your answers to this Discussion Area. Post the assignment directly in the discussion thread and label the answers with the appropriate scenario number. Do not copy the scenarios into the thread with the answers. Start reviewing and responding to your classmates as early in the week as possible. You should review and critique the work of other students, as outlined in the rubric by the end of the week.

Evaluate two of the scenarios listed below and explain the best solution for each. Include comments related to any ethical issues that arise. Support your responses with appropriate cases, laws and other relevant examples by using at least one scholarly source from the SUO Library in addition to your textbook for each scenario.

The Director of Purchasing for parts distribution company wants to purchase steel coach screws from Germany; however, he is not sure what the best option is. The director comes to you and asks your opinion. You know that Germany, Canada, and Korea are the best sources for obtaining this product. While your research shows coach screws from Germany are of the highest quality, the United States imposes a tariff of 12.5%, which makes this option noncompetitive.

Which US trade laws should you consider when selecting a country?
Is there any way by which you can seek a reduction on the tariff? If so, how? If not, why?
Select an alternative country (Canada or Korea) for purchasing the coach screws and explain your reasons for selecting the country.
Slyce Pizza Company purchased four commercial refrigerators for the restaurants and eight pizza ovens from a supplier in Italy. Between the shipping costs, delays, and unanticipated duties, the purchasing manager was worried that his boss would be upset about the total costs. In an effort to reduce costs, the manager offered a US Customs officer $500 in cash to re-classify the imported goods to reduce the amount of duties owed.

Analyze the legal and ethical ramifications of the purchasing manager’s offer to the customs official?
Would it make a difference if the purchasing manager offered to donate $500 to St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital if the officer expedited the paperwork necessary to release the goods from custom’s custody?
Recycling Genie is a new company that contracts with Best Buy and other electronics retailers for the collection old computers, monitors, televisions, and cell phones dropped off at their facilities. The electronics contain lead, mercury, and polyvinyl chlorides that are known to have toxicological effects such as cancer, kidney disease, and brain damage. Recycling Genie has been in negotiations to ship the e-waste to companies in China, Vietnam, and Mongolia.

What are the legal and ethical concerns with shipping e-waste to these countries?
Ginger and Allen lived together in New Mexico since 2011, but they were not married until July 2013. Allen purchased the home in 2008, prior to meeting Ginger. He did not add Ginger to the title after they were married; however, she contributed to the mortgage payments from 2011 until she started her business in 2013. In September 2013, Ginger inherited $55,000 from her father that she used to start a corporation, Fantastic Faces, a beauty consulting business

Ginger worked full time for Fantastic Faces, while Allen continued with his job teaching at the university. Allen made no contributions to Fantastic Faces. Due to limited financial resources, Ginger did not earn any salary until 2015.

In May 2013, Allen inherited 20 acres of farmland in Alabama from his grandfather. The land was leased to a local farmer. Allen visited the farm after the funeral in 2013 but did not return to Alabama. The rental income of $5,000 per year was deposited into the couple’s joint account. Allen filed for divorce in New Mexico on November 10, 2015.

Explain the how the court will determine the ownership of the house, farmland, and business based on New Mexico law.
Determine how the court would decide if the couple resided in your state instead of New Mexico.
The Director of Purchasing for the parts distribution company is looking to purchase steel coach screws and is considering three countries: Germany, Canada, and Korea. Germany has the highest quality coach screws but is also subject to a 12.5% tariff imposed by the United States, making it a noncompetitive option. The US trade laws to consider in selecting a country are the Tariff Act of 1930 and the Trade Agreement Act of 1979.

To seek a reduction in the tariff, the Director of Purchasing can apply for a tariff reduction through the US International Trade Commission’s Tariff Classification Appeal Board. The company would need to demonstrate that the imposition of the 12.5% tariff would cause it undue economic hardship.

Given the high tariff on steel coach screws from Germany, it may be more advantageous for the company to purchase the coach screws from Canada or Korea. Of these two options, Canada may be the better choice as it has a more stable political and economic climate and is closer to the United States, which would result in lower shipping costs and faster delivery times.

The purchasing manager’s offer to a US Customs officer to reduce the duties owed by offering $500 in cash is illegal and unethical. This type of conduct violates the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), which prohibits companies and individuals from making corrupt payments to foreign officials to obtain business advantages. This act is enforced by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Department of Justice (DOJ).

Even if the purchasing manager offered to donate $500 to St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, this would still be considered bribery. Bribing an official in exchange for a service is illegal, regardless of whether the payment is made directly to the official or to a third party. This type of conduct would result in severe legal consequences, including fines, imprisonment, and damage to the company’s reputation.

Shipping e-waste to countries such as China, Vietnam, and Mongolia raises several legal and ethical concerns. The Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal prohibits the export of hazardous waste from developed to developing countries, unless it is for the purpose of re-processing or disposal in an environmentally sound manner. This would require Recycling Genie to demonstrate that the e-waste will be managed in an environmentally safe manner, which would be challenging given the lack of regulation in these countries.

Furthermore, shipping e-waste to these countries raises ethical concerns as it can lead to harm to the local environment and communities. The toxic materials in the e-waste, such as lead and mercury, can have adverse health effects on workers and residents in the areas where the e-waste is disposed of.

In New Mexico, property acquired during marriage is considered community property, which means it is owned equally by both spouses. The court would likely consider the house, business, and rental income from the farmland as community property, as they were acquired or developed during the marriage.

If the couple resided in a common law property state, such as Texas, the court would consider the property and business as separate property belonging to the spouse who acquired or developed it, unless the other spouse made contributions to the property or business. In this case, Ginger’s contributions to the mortgage payments on the house would likely be considered contributions to the community property and the court would award her a portion of the property. However, as Allen purchased the home prior to meeting Ginger and did not add her to the title, the court may find that