Example collocations logo

Corporations in sentence

1132 examples of Corporations in a sentence

First, “we” are US state governments and legislatures, nongovernmental organizations, local communities, and corporations.
Whatever form it takes, the message should be direct and transparent, and it should also target US corporations taking advantage of any relaxation of domestic environmental and emission standards.
The British Joint Stock Companies Act of 1856, for example, established the principle of limited liability for corporations.
And individuals and corporations can declare bankruptcy.
Whistle-blowers and protected witnesses provided details of the graft to Brazilian judges, who pursued Petrobras officials, politicians, and the CEOs of the corporations under investigation.
Such a plan, if attractive to US multinational corporations, could result in a shift in employment and production to the US and higher tax revenue.
A shift to a territorial system of taxation would remove the disadvantages faced by American multinational corporations and encourage them to reinvest their overseas profits at home, increasing US employment and profits.
The shift to a territorial system and a lower corporate tax rate would appeal to American multinational corporations even if they had to pay a 10-15% tax on accumulated past earnings.
Both the FCTC and the UNFCCC allow for governments to rein in global corporations’ unchecked power, which is a root cause of many other problems, from economic inequality to social injustice and broken democratic systems.
Global corporations are enormous, and their influence affects almost every aspect of our lives.
To understand the reach of their power, one must look no further than the billions of dollars they spend on elections; their lobbying to gut worker and environmental protections in trade agreements such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership; and fossil-fuel corporations’ relentless drive to derail climate-change policy.
Global corporations have disproportionate power because they can operate across national borders, which means that no single local or national government can effectively regulate them.
The FCTC is effective because it includes a hard-won provision that explicitly prohibits corporations from influencing policymaking.
Democracy advocates in civil society and government have managed to push back against global corporations, but much of their progress hangs in the balance this month.
In a world where governments, corporations, and other institutions have so much information about us, it is only right that we should have more information about them and about the activities of people acting on their behalf.
The US has relatively weak campaign-finance limits, so corporations and wealthy individuals – neither of which generally prioritizes income redistribution – have contributed a disproportionate share to politicians’ campaign war chests.
As a result, there is a growing disconnect between big money and political incentives; and while money is still a part of the political process, influence itself no longer belongs exclusively to corporations and wealthy individuals.
With the support of my community, I founded the Center for Justice, Governance, and Environmental Action (CJGEA) to hold the state and corporations accountable for ensuring a clean and healthy environment.
One year later, when we published public notices in local newspapers of our intention to sue the two corporations, all hell broke loose.
Herein lies the unique twist that Piketty's theory takes on in Japan: the disparity is not so much between the super-rich and everyone else, but between large corporations, which can retain earnings and accumulate capital, and the individuals who are being squeezed in the process.
First, a new generation of politically sensitive corporations, often state-owned, has proven successful in today’s emerging economic powerhouses – particularly in the commodity sector.
The Republicans’ shallow commitment to fiscal rectitude is now being exposed as they advocate massive tax cuts for corporations and billionaires that will add one and half trillion dollars to the deficit over the next decade.
During a typical recession, the default rate among corporations may rise to 10-15%, threatening massive losses for those holding risky corporate bonds.
On economic, financial, tax, trade, and climate issues, many people around the world are fearful or angry, believing that a worldwide cabal of bankers, corporations, and G-20 elites uses insider deals to monopolize the benefits of globalization.
The US and Canada agreed to drop investor-state dispute settlement, which many have criticized for giving corporations so much power in international negotiations that they might, in theory, advance their interests to the detriment of, say, health or the environment.
Also reminiscent of the TPP, there are provisions for the digital economy and the extension of intellectual property rights in areas like copyright and biologics data – wins for US corporations and setbacks for anti-globalizers.
As the middle class in southern countries has grown, its members’ consumption and nutritional habits have changed, boosting global demand for processed foods – and setting off a scramble for market power among multinational agricultural, chemical, and food corporations.
The five largest corporations account for 65% of the market, with Deere & Company, the owner of the John Deere brand, in the lead.
The most promising new opportunity for food corporations today lies in the digitization of agriculture.
The ETC Group, an American non-governmental organization, has already outlined a future scenario in which the major agrotechnology corporations move upstream and absorb the seed and pesticide producers.
BackNext