Example collocations logo

Restrictions in sentence

1028 examples of Restrictions in a sentence

With the threat of renewed US sanctions having already created a rial crisis, the Trump administration is using the nuclear deal, formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, to try to force Iran to accept more restrictions on its nuclear program, as well as on its ballistic missile program.
And now that the government has imposed new restrictions on capital flows, the country’s attractiveness to foreign investors will fall further.Capital controls are of course in keeping with the “resistance economy” favored by conservatives, one of whom recently stoked fears of capital flight by declaring that $30 billion had left the country in only a few months.
And now that the government has imposed new restrictions on capital flows, the country’s attractiveness to foreign investors will fall further.
Unless you want restrictions, unless you want a bigger role for the government...This is America, democracy, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, the freedom to petition your government.
If restrictions on involuntary commitment to prevent crime are eased, zealous prosecutors could circumvent civil liberties.
A stronger community response, supported by limited exceptions to legal restrictions on information-sharing, could have allowed involuntary evaluation of the suspect.
Regardless of one’s choice in the partisan struggle between Fatah and Hamas within occupied Palestine, we must remember that economic sanctions and restrictions in delivering water, food, electricity, and fuel are causing extreme hardship among the innocent people in Gaza, about one million of whom are refugees.
The agreement is likely to entail greater territorial adjustments than were called for under the Annan Plan, as well as modernized security guarantees, a phasing out of settlement and property restrictions, and clearer and more decentralized governing arrangements.
Another company, Gubretas, which had bought Razi, one of Iran’s biggest petrochemical companies, for $650 million dollars in 2008, has not yet been able to start production, owing to administrative restrictions.
As it stands, many EU countries resist the introduction of any trade restrictions, whether owing to an excessive commitment to liberal economic ideals or fear of jeopardizing their own interests in China by, say, establishing an EU mechanism for managing foreign investment.
Moreover, the military leaders are dragging their feet on easing restrictions on the import of humanitarian supplies and allowing a UN assessment team into the country.
In practice, this means 42 years of quarterly reviews, during which the European Commission and the ECB “in collaboration with the IMF” may impose new “measures” on Greece (such as austerity, fire sales of public property, and restrictions on organized labor).
This may include restrictions on investments by institutions and individuals and intrusive regulation that limits, or dictates, their conduct in the market.
If, on the other hand, we believe that economic actors will respond rationally to incentives and information, then we can usefully reform regulatory frameworks with well-targeted measures, including restrictions on off-balance sheet vehicles, tougher disclosure requirements, and controls on rating agencies’ conflicts of interests.
In a democracy, standard restrictions regulate the time, place, and manner of speech in order to prevent imminent violence and civil disorder.
As in the Ellwanger case, restrictions on free expression should be defined narrowly.
Ever since the 1986 Single European Act removed restrictions on working in other member countries, the continent has been a single labor market – at least in theory.
To spur financial investment, China will raise foreign-ownership limits to 51% within three years, on the path toward ultimately removing restrictions altogether.
True prudence requires that regulators avail themselves of a broader set of policy instruments, including quantitative ceilings, transaction taxes, restrictions on securitization, prohibitions, or other direct inhibitions on financial transactions – all of which are anathema to most financial market participants.
Yes, there were strong trade and investment relationships, but there was always explicit dominance, exemplified in imposed curricula, curfews, and movement restrictions based on skin color.
When tourists from the United Kingdom traveled to France, Italy, or Spain, they faced restrictions on how many francs, lire, or pesetas they could buy; and international investment was constrained by a pervasive system of capital controls.
It is scandalous that drug lords enjoy more freedom to operate than aid agencies, while basic access to food, education, and health care suffers many restrictions, with up to 70% of Burma’s children are chronically malnourished in some border areas.
Indeed, in August, World Food Program Executive Director James Morris revealed that the WFP had delivered only 430 tons of the 5,500 tons of rice earmarked for vulnerable people in Burma’s northern Arakan State because of restrictions imposed by the regime.
Two weeks later, the Global Fund for HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria pulled its funding for programs in Burma, citing government restrictions that had created “an impossibly difficult environment.”
One key to this rebound was that, in contrast to the 1930s, the global economy maintained existing conditions: trade barriers remained low, as did restrictions on foreign direct investment, and cross-border exchange continued to spread with the Internet.
Many day-to-day cross-border services, ranging from freight transport to hairdressing, face major barriers and restrictions.
But Wajeha al Huwaider, Bahia al Mansour, Rasha al Maliki, and many other activists are nonetheless insisting that driving a car is their legitimate right, and are eloquently demanding the removal of restrictions and an end to women’s dependency.
Private developers have trouble getting a large plot free of restrictions.
Export restrictions in producing countries and price controls in importing countries both serve to exacerbate the magnitude of the world price upswing, owing to the artificially reduced quantity that is still internationally traded.
The US Supreme Court has interpreted the US Constitution in a way that vitiates all restrictions on campaign spending, essentially allowing wealthy American individuals and corporations to buy elections.
BackNext