What impact do U.S. sanctions have on Indian companies involved in supplying components to Russian firms?a) They lead to increased trade with the U.S.b) They can exclude these companies from the U.S. marketc) They have no significant effect on business operationsd) They primarily target domestic sales within IndiaCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?

EduRev

All Courses

Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity

Open App

CLAT Exam > CLAT Questions > What impact do U.S. sanctions have on Indian ...

Join the Discussion on the App

What impact do U.S. sanctions have on Indian companies involved in supplying components to Russian firms?

a)
They lead to increased trade with the U.S.
b)
They can exclude these companies from the U.S. market
c)
They have no significant effect on business operations
d)
They primarily target domestic sales within India

Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?

FREE This question is part of

Daily Current Affairs MCQ: 2nd November 2024

Attempt Test

Attempt this Test

Verified Answer

What impact do U.S. sanctions have on Indian companies involved in sup...

U.S. sanctions against Indian companies supplying components to Russian firms can lead to their exclusion from the U.S. market. Such sanctions are designed to limit trade, investment, and financial dealings with targeted entities, which can have severe implications for the affected companies. The penalties may result in the loss of American business partners and create substantial financial and operational challenges. This disruption can affect global trade dynamics and complicate the operations of the sanctioned firms, emphasizing the significant impact that international sanctions can have on businesses connected to sensitive geopolitical issues.

View all questions of this test

View all answers Start learning for free

< Previous Question Next Question >

Explore Courses for CLAT exam

Similar CLAT Doubts

The modern multinational corporation is described as having originated when the owner-managers of nineteenth-century British firms carrying on international trade were replaced by teams of salaried managers organized into hierarchies. Increases in the volume of transactions in such firms are commonly believed to have necessitated this structural change. Nineteenth-century inventions like the steamship and the telegraph, by facilitating coordination of managerial activities, are described as key factors. Sixteenth- and seventeenth-century chartered trading companies, despite the international scope of their activities, are usually considered irrelevant to this discussion: the volume of their transactions is assumed to have been too low and the communications and transport of their day too primitive to make comparisons with modern multinationals interesting.In reality, however, early trading companies successfully purchased and outfitted ships, built and operated offices and warehouses, manufactured trade goods for use abroad, maintained trading posts and production facilities overseas, procured goods for import, and sold those goods both at home and in other countries. The large volume of transactions associated with these activities seems to have necessitated hierarchical management structures well before the advent of modern communications and transportation. For example, in the Hudson’s Bay Company, each far-flung trading outpost was managed by a salaried agent, who carried out the trade with the Native Americans, managed day-to-day operations, and oversaw the post’s workers and servants. One chief agent, answerable to the Court of Directors in London through the correspondence committee, was appointed with control over all of the agents on the bay.The early trading companies did differ strikingly from modern multinationals in many respects. They depended heavily on the national governments of their home countries and thus characteristically acted abroad to promote national interests. Their top managers were typically owners with a substantial minority share, whereas senior managers’ holdings in modern multinationals are usually insignificant. They operated in a pre-industrial world, grafting a system of capitalist international trade onto a pre-modern system of artisan and peasant production. Despite these differences, however, early trading companies organized effectively in remarkably modern ways and merit further study as analogues of more modern structures.Q. The author lists the various activities of early chartered trading companies in order to

View answer

Eliminating Black Money was one of the objectives of demonetization as stated in the Government of India's 'Press Release' dated 8th November, 2016 in this regard.Action against black money stashed abroad is an on-going process. Such actions include putting in place appropriate legislative and administrative frameworks and processes along-with effective enforcement actions.Recent major steps to bring back black money stashed abroad include -I. Constitution of the Special Investigation Team (SIT) on Black MoneyII. Enactment of a comprehensive law - 'The Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015' to specifically deal with black money stashed away abroadIII. Renegotiation of tax treaties to bring the Article on Exchange of Information to International Standards and expanding India's treaty network by signing tax treaties with many jurisdictions to facilitate the exchange of information and to bring transparencyIV. Enabling attachment and confiscation of property equivalent in value held within the country where the property/proceeds of crime is taken or held outside the country by amending the Prevention of Money-laundering Act, 2002 through the Finance Act, 2015.V. The Benami prohibition law which remained inoperative for last 28 years was made operational through a comprehensive amendment with effect from November, 2016.VI. Relevant laws and rules have been streamlined & tightened, plugging the loopholes and strengthening the penal provisions.VII. Crackdown against thousands of shell companies engaged in nefarious activities was effected through enforcement actions (searches, surveys, arrests, prosecutions).Thus, there had been co-coordination and monitoring of the actions taken by departments concerned with the objective of eliminating the conduits of black money generation and application.Q. If shell companies are found to be engaged in financial crimes then crackdown is effected through enforcement actions. Dhawan incorporated multiple companies having no assets. By the use of web of shell companies and layering of proceeds of crime, he used to launder money.Enforcement Authority identified these shell companies. Based on the essence of the passage and given principle of law, decide the validity of crackdown?

View answer

The modern multinational corporation is described as having originated when the owner-managers of nineteenth-century British firms carrying on international trade were replaced by teams of salaried managers organized into hierarchies. Increases in the volume of transactions in such firms are commonly believed to have necessitated this structural change. Nineteenth-century inventions like the steamship and the telegraph, by facilitating coordination of managerial activities, are described as key factors. Sixteenth- and seventeenth-century chartered trading companies, despite the international scope of their activities, are usually considered irrelevant to this discussion: the volume of their transactions is assumed to have been too low and the communications and transport of their day too primitive to make comparisons with modern multinationals interesting.In reality, however, early trading companies successfully purchased and outfitted ships, built and operated offices and warehouses, manufactured trade goods for use abroad, maintained trading posts and production facilities overseas, procured goods for import, and sold those goods both at home and in other countries. The large volume of transactions associated with these activities seems to have necessitated hierarchical management structures well before the advent of modern communications and transportation. For example, in the Hudson’s Bay Company, each far-flung trading outpost was managed by a salaried agent, who carried out the trade with the Native Americans, managed day-to-day operations, and oversaw the post’s workers and servants. One chief agent, answerable to the Court of Directors in London through the correspondence committee, was appointed with control over all of the agents on the bay.The early trading companies did differ strikingly from modern multinationals in many respects. They depended heavily on the national governments of their home countries and thus characteristically acted abroad to promote national interests. Their top managers were typically owners with a substantial minority share, whereas senior managers’ holdings in modern multinationals are usually insignificant. They operated in a pre-industrial world, grafting a system of capitalist international trade onto a pre-modern system of artisan and peasant production. Despite these differences, however, early trading companies organized effectively in remarkably modern ways and merit further study as analogues of more modern structures.Q. The author mentions the artisan and peasant production systems of early chartered trading companies as an example of

View answer

Most large corporations in the United States were once run by individual capitalists who owned enough stock to dominate the board of directors and dictate company policy. Because putting such large amounts of stock on the market would only depress its value, they could not sell out for a quick profit and instead had to concentrate on improving the long-term productivity of their companies. Today, with few exceptions, the stock of large United States corporations is held by large institutions—pension funds, for example—and because these institutions are prohibited by antitrust laws from owning a majority of a company’s stock and from actively influencing a company’s decision-making, they can enhance their wealth only by buying and selling stock in anticipation of fluctuations in its value. A minority shareholder is necessarily a short term trader. As a result, United States productivity is unlikely to improve unless shareholders and the managers of the companies in which they invest are encouraged to enhance long-term productivity (and hence long-term profitability), rather than simply to maximize short-term profits.Since the return of the old-style capitalist is unlikely, today’s short-term traders must be remade into tomorrow’s long-term capitalistic investors. The legal limits that now prevent financial institutions from acquiring a dominant shareholding position in a corporation should be removed, and such institutions should be encouraged to take a more active role in the operations of the companies in which they invest. In addition, any institution that holds twenty percent or more of a company’s stock should be forced to give the public one day’s notice of the intent to sell those shares. Unless the announced sale could be explained to the public on grounds other than anticipated future losses, the value of the stock would plummet and, like the old-time capitalists, major investors could cut their losses only by helping to restore their companies’ productivity. Such measures would force financial institutions to become capitalists whose success depends not on trading shares at the propitious moment, but on increasing the productivity of the companies in which they invest.Q. According to the passage, the purpose of the requirement suggested in lines "In addition, any institution that holds twenty percent or more of a company’s stock should be forced to give the public one day’s notice of the intent to sell those shares." would be which of the following?

View answer

Most large corporations in the United States were once run by individual capitalists who owned enough stock to dominate the board of directors and dictate company policy. Because putting such large amounts of stock on the market would only depress its value, they could not sell out for a quick profit and instead had to concentrate on improving the long-term productivity of their companies. Today, with few exceptions, the stock of large United States corporations is held by large institutions—pension funds, for example—and because these institutions are prohibited by antitrust laws from owning a majority of a company’s stock and from actively influencing a company’s decision-making, they can enhance their wealth only by buying and selling stock in anticipation of fluctuations in its value. A minority shareholder is necessarily a short term trader. As a result, United States productivity is unlikely to improve unless shareholders and the managers of the companies in which they invest are encouraged to enhance long-term productivity (and hence long-term profitability), rather than simply to maximize short-term profits.Since the return of the old-style capitalist is unlikely, today’s short-term traders must be remade into tomorrow’s long-term capitalistic investors. The legal limits that now prevent financial institutions from acquiring a dominant shareholding position in a corporation should be removed, and such institutions should be encouraged to take a more active role in the operations of the companies in which they invest. In addition, any institution that holds twenty percent or more of a company’s stock should be forced to give the public one day’s notice of the intent to sell those shares. Unless the announced sale could be explained to the public on grounds other than anticipated future losses, the value of the stock would plummet and, like the old-time capitalists, major investors could cut their losses only by helping to restore their companies’ productivity. Such measures would force financial institutions to become capitalists whose success depends not on trading shares at the propitious moment, but on increasing the productivity of the companies in which they invest.Q. It can be inferred from the passage that which of the following is true of majority shareholders in a corporation?

View answer

Top Courses for CLATView all

Legal Reasoning for CLAT

Lucent for GK

Current Affairs: Daily, Weekly & Monthly

CLAT Mock Test Series 2025

Crash Course for CLAT

Top Courses for CLAT

View all

What impact do U.S. sanctions have on Indian companies involved in supplying components to Russian firms?a) They lead to increased trade with the U.S.b) They can exclude these companies from the U.S. marketc) They have no significant effect on business operationsd) They primarily target domestic sales within IndiaCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?

Share with a Friend

Answer this doubt

Question Description
What impact do U.S. sanctions have on Indian companies involved in supplying components to Russian firms?a) They lead to increased trade with the U.S.b) They can exclude these companies from the U.S. marketc) They have no significant effect on business operationsd) They primarily target domestic sales within IndiaCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? for CLAT 2025 is part of CLAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CLAT exam syllabus. Information about What impact do U.S. sanctions have on Indian companies involved in supplying components to Russian firms?a) They lead to increased trade with the U.S.b) They can exclude these companies from the U.S. marketc) They have no significant effect on business operationsd) They primarily target domestic sales within IndiaCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CLAT 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for What impact do U.S. sanctions have on Indian companies involved in supplying components to Russian firms?a) They lead to increased trade with the U.S.b) They can exclude these companies from the U.S. marketc) They have no significant effect on business operationsd) They primarily target domestic sales within IndiaCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for What impact do U.S. sanctions have on Indian companies involved in supplying components to Russian firms?a) They lead to increased trade with the U.S.b) They can exclude these companies from the U.S. marketc) They have no significant effect on business operationsd) They primarily target domestic sales within IndiaCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CLAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CLAT Exam by signing up for free.

Here you can find the meaning of What impact do U.S. sanctions have on Indian companies involved in supplying components to Russian firms?a) They lead to increased trade with the U.S.b) They can exclude these companies from the U.S. marketc) They have no significant effect on business operationsd) They primarily target domestic sales within IndiaCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of What impact do U.S. sanctions have on Indian companies involved in supplying components to Russian firms?a) They lead to increased trade with the U.S.b) They can exclude these companies from the U.S. marketc) They have no significant effect on business operationsd) They primarily target domestic sales within IndiaCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for What impact do U.S. sanctions have on Indian companies involved in supplying components to Russian firms?a) They lead to increased trade with the U.S.b) They can exclude these companies from the U.S. marketc) They have no significant effect on business operationsd) They primarily target domestic sales within IndiaCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of What impact do U.S. sanctions have on Indian companies involved in supplying components to Russian firms?a) They lead to increased trade with the U.S.b) They can exclude these companies from the U.S. marketc) They have no significant effect on business operationsd) They primarily target domestic sales within IndiaCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice What impact do U.S. sanctions have on Indian companies involved in supplying components to Russian firms?a) They lead to increased trade with the U.S.b) They can exclude these companies from the U.S. marketc) They have no significant effect on business operationsd) They primarily target domestic sales within IndiaCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.

Explore Courses for CLAT exam