The statement, investor perception on the risk of bonds will raise their desired return is true.
The higher an investment's risk, the greater its potential returns should be. By contrast, a very safe and low-risk investment should generally offer low returns. So, this investor perception will raise the desired return of the risk of bonds.
Generally, the higher the potential return of an investment, the higher the risk. Thus, there is no guarantee that you will actually get a higher return by accepting more risk. In this matter diversification is useful.
Hence, you can minimize the risk by making sure the company's bond you own is not a high risk company with a high probability of paying back.
To learn more about risk of bonds here:
brainly.com/question/14850768
#SPJ4
Answer: D. Derek assumed the risk of a bear attack by joining the tour group, so he cannot hold the tour company liable
Explanation:
Derek has to accept that by joining the tour group, he assumed some the risk of some elements of danger amongst them the bear attack.
Even though there had been no prior attack by bears in the mountain, a mountain hike still has some inherent danger in it and this includes bears. He cannot hold the tour company liable using this reason alone.
Answer:
c. May be able to avoid liability to the extent she had no reason to know of the deficiency (and did not have actual knowledge) when filing the return. The burden of proof will be on her.
Explanation:
The doctrine of <em>innocent spouse relief</em> might apply here. Mrs. Jones will have to prove that:
- the income that was omitted was earned by her husband, not her.
- she must prove that when she signed the tax filings, she was not aware of the omission.
- after examining all the facts surrounding the omission, the IRS must decide that blaming her would not be fair.
