The Gaisano Superstore Complex in Cagayan de Oro City was consumed by fire which destroyed clothing materials which were still being paid for by Gaisano with its suppliers. The insurance company paid the claims of the suppliers and sought reimbursement from Gaisano. The latter stated that the fire is a fortuitous event and hence it should not be liable. Is the contention correct?

The Gaisano Superstore Complex in Cagayan de Oro City was consumed by fire which destroyed clothing materials which were still being paid for by Gaisano with its suppliers. The insurance company paid the claims of the suppliers and sought reimbursement from Gaisano. The latter stated that the fire is a fortuitous event and hence it should not be liable. Is the contention correct?

CONCEPTS IN FED.TAX.,2020-W/ACCESS

20th Edition

ISBN:9780357110362

Author:Murphy

Publisher:Murphy

Chapter7: Losses—deductions And Limitations

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 49P

See similar textbooks

Similar questions

Swifty Corporation is being sued for illness caused to local residents as a result of negligence on the company's part in permitting the local residents to be exposed to highly toxic chemicals from its plant. Swifty's lawyer states that it is probable that Swifty will lose the suit and be found liable for a judgment costing Swifty anywhere from $ 1830000 to $ 8960000. However, the lawyer states that the most probable cost is $ 5410000. As a result of the above facts, Swifty should accrue a loss contingency of $ 1830000 and disclose an additional contingency of up to $ 7130000. a loss contingency of $ 5410000 and disclose an additional contingency of up to $ 3550000. no loss contingency but disclose a contingency of $ 1830000 to $ 8960000. a loss contingency of $ 5410000 but not disclose any additional contingency.
Superb Corporation is being sued for illness caused to local residents as a result of negligence on the company's part in permitting the local residents to be exposed to highly toxic chemicals from its plant. Superb’s lawyer states that it is probable that Superb will lose the suit and be found liable for a judgment costing Superb anywhere from $1,200,000 to $6,000,000. However, the lawyer states that the most probable cost is $3,600,000. As a result of the above facts, Superb should accrue Select one: a loss contingency of $3,600,000 and disclose an additional contingency of up to $2,400,000. a loss contingency of $3,600,000 but not disclose any additional contingency. a loss contingency of $1,200,000 and disclose an additional contingency of up to $4,800,000. no loss contingency but disclose a contingency of $1,200,000 to $6,000,000.
Bu Co. is being sued for illness caused to local residents as a result of negligence on the company's part in permitting the local residents to be exposed to highly toxic chemicals from its plant. Bu's lawyer states that it is probable that Bu will lose the suit and be found liable for a judgment costing Bu anywhere from P1,600,000 to P8,000,000. However, the lawyer states that the most probable cost is P 4,800,000. As a result of the above facts, Bu should accrue: *a. a loss contingency of P 4,800,000 and disclose an additional contingency of up to P 3,200,000b. a loss contingency of P 1,600,000 and disclose an additional contingency of up to P 6,400,000c. a loss contingency of P 4,800,000 but not disclose any additional contingencyd. no loss contingency but disclose a contingency of P 1,600,000 to P 8,000,000
A fire occurred in the City of Manila and coincided with the looting of stock of plywood of a lumber company. The lumber company, however, failed to record such loss in its books of accounts. Was the loss deductible? Briefly explain.
Wooten Co. is being sued for illness caused to local residents as a result of negligence on the company's part in permitting the local residents to be exposed to highly toxic chemicals from its plant. Wooten's lawyer states that it is probable that Wooten will lose the suit and be found liable for a judgment costing Wooten anywhere from $1,800,000 to $9,000,000. However, the lawyer states that the most probable cost is $5,400,000. As a result of the above facts, Wooten should accrue A) a loss contingency of $1,800,000 and disclose an additional contingency of up to $7,200,000. B) a loss contingency of $5,400,000 and disclose an additional contingency of up to $3,600,000. C) a loss contingency of $5,400,000 but not disclose any additional contingency. D) no loss contingency but disclose a contingency of $1,800,000 to $9,000,000.
A barge belonging to the Luzon Stevedoring Corporation, while passing under the Nagtahan Bridge in Manila, rammed the bridge supports causing damage thereto. In this action for damages instituted by the Government against the defendant corporation, the latter interposed the defense that there was no negligence or fault on its part and that the proximate cause of the accident was a fortuitous event. Decide the case
A fire occurred in the City of Pasay and coincided with the looting of stock of plywood of a lumber company. The lumber company, however, failed to record such loss in its books of accounts. Was the loss deductible? Briefly explain.
An accident solely attributable to the criminal negligence of the driver of Reckless Bus Company resulted in the death of Ricardo's wife, physical injury to Ricardo that prevented him from working for a month and the total wreck of his brand new car which he bought for P400,000. In the action for damages filed by Ricardo against the Bus Company, the Court awarded the following: For Ricardo's injury consisting mainly in the loss of his right arm P30,000 For the loss of one month salary 25,000 For the death of his wife 25,000 For moral damages on account of such loss 100,000 For the loss of his car the value of which doubled because of inflation 800,000 1. How much was the taxable income of Ricardo?"
Thompson’s house was destroyed by fire and claims were filed with the insurance company. The insurance company (insurer) hired Cannon to investigate the fire as it was suspicious about the cause. Subsequently, the insurer denied the claims based on Cannon’s report. Thompson sued the insurer and Cannon. Thompson claimed to be a third party beneficiary of the Cannon-insurer contract. Is Thompson correct? If not, what type of beneficiary is he and why?
The negligence of Aivee, driver of a certain bus company, resulted in the death of JP's wife, physical injuries to JP that prevented him from working for a month, and the total wreck of JP's brand new car which he had bought for P400.000. In the action for damages filed by JP against the bus company, the court awarded the following: • P30,000 for JP's injuries consisting mainly in the loss of his right hand; • P45,000 for JP's loss of one month salary: • P25,000 for the death of his wife: • P100,000 moral damages on account of the death of JP's wife; and • P800,000 for the loss of JP's car. How much is excluded from gross income? a Zero b. P155,000 c. P555,000 d. P955,000
27) Suzan’s office building was damaged by a fire caused by a careless tenant. After paying Suzan for her loss, the insurance company sued the tenant to recover its loss. This suit is based on the principle of
Murray reported to the Environmental Protection Agency that his employer was illegally dumping chemicals into a river. His charges were true, and Murray's employer was fined. In retaliation, Murray's employer fired him and made deliberate efforts to prevent Murray from obtaining other employment. Murray sued the employer, claiming that his reputation had been damaged. Murray won his lawsuit and received an award for "damages to his personal and professional reputa- tion and for his mental suffering." Now he would like to know whether the award is taxable. He argues that he was awarded damages as a recovery of his human capital and that a recovery of capital is not income. Is Murray's logic comrect?