Answer:
i. $40,000
ii. $410,000
iii. 180 days after July 12, 2015
Explanation:
i. The taxpayer's recognized gain is $40,000 ($450,000 -$410,000). The cost of the new office - the amount received from the insurance company.
ii. The taxpayer's basis for the new office is the cost of purchasing the new office building which is $410,000.
iii. Taxpayers can qualify for deferral treatment if they reinvest proceeds into a QOF (Qualified Opportunity Funds) within 180 days of receiving the gain. Because the new office was purchased on July 12, this is the applicable date.
Any options to choose from?
Answer: No, Paul has not breached a contract.
Explanation: To answer this, we must first we must define what a contract is.
A contract is an agreement between two or more people that is legally binding, and which guides or governs the actions or conducts of the parties involved.
A quality that makes a contract legally binding is that it is enforceable by law.
In the scenario given in the question above, Paul has not breached any contract because there isn't one. The promise to buy dinner has not been legally bound, therefore, it is not enforceable by law, in essence, it is not qualified to be called a contract.
<h2>Joshua would lose and Sue would benefit from unanticipated inflation.</h2>
Explanation:
- Both Joshua and Sue are associated with fixed pension and fixed interest respectively.
- Now the value of money goes down due to inflation
- So to live as usual, Joshua need to spend some extra money. But considering the fixed income, it's a lose to Joshua
- Whereas Sue is associated with fixed interest of mortgage. She is benefited because, though the inflation has changed the value of all other products, but the fixed interest rate does not change.
- "Fixed-rate mortgage holders are inflation winners", says "Thoma, professor of economics at the University of Oregon"
