Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Journal Articles

1985

Insurance

Articles 1 - 2 of 2

Full-Text Articles in Law

Miller V. Commissioner: Deductibility Of Casualty Losses After Voluntary Election Not To File An Insurance Claim, Stephen J. Dunn, Robert H. Kurnick, Matthew J. Barrett Jan 1985

Miller V. Commissioner: Deductibility Of Casualty Losses After Voluntary Election Not To File An Insurance Claim, Stephen J. Dunn, Robert H. Kurnick, Matthew J. Barrett

Journal Articles

Taxpayers who suffer casualty losses may decide, for a variety of reasons, not to file an insurance claim for recovery of those losses. Section 165 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 allows a deduction for “any loss sustained during the taxable year and not compensated for by insurance or otherwise.”' Consequently, the question arises whether a taxpayer may claim a casualty loss deduction even though the taxpayer did not seek insurance reimbursement for the loss. In Miller v. Commissioner, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, in a 6-5 en banc decision, expressly overruled its previous …


Application Of The Antitrust Laws To The Activities Of Insurance Companies: Heavier Risks, Expanded Coverage, And Greater Liability, Joseph Bauer, Earl W. Kintner, Michael J. Allen Jan 1985

Application Of The Antitrust Laws To The Activities Of Insurance Companies: Heavier Risks, Expanded Coverage, And Greater Liability, Joseph Bauer, Earl W. Kintner, Michael J. Allen

Journal Articles

Since 1945 Congress has exempted certain activities of insurance companies from federal antitrust scrutiny. This exemption, provided by the McCarran-Ferguson Act, is not unqualified; it only applies to insurance company activities that constitute the "business of insurance" and that already are regulated under state law. Moreover, the exemption does not apply to activities that involve boycotts, coercion, or intimidation. The purpose of this exemption was to preserve the long tradition of state regulation of insurance, while providing federal remedies for coercive anticompetitive activities. The authors examine recent Supreme Court interpretations of the Act in light of this legislative policy and …