FCS 3450 HOMEWORK #4 1. Thomas Franklin arrived at the following tax information: Gross salary, $46,660 Interest earnings, $225 Dividend income, $80 One personal exemption, $3,400 Itemized deductions, $7,820 Adjustments to income, $1,150 What amount would Thomas report as taxable income? 2. If Lola Harper had the following itemized deductions, should she use Schedule A or the standard deduction? The standard deduction for her tax situation is $5,450. Donations to church and other charities, $1,980 Medical and dental expenses that exceed 7.5 percent of adjusted gross income, $430 State income tax, $690 Job-related expenses that exceed 2 percent of adjusted gross income, $1,610 3. What would be the average tax rate for a person who paid taxes of $4,864.14 on a taxable income of $39,870? 4. Based on the following data, would Ann and Carl Wilton receive a refund or owe additional taxes? Adjusted gross income, $46,186 Itemized deductions, $11,420 Child care tax credit, $80 Federal income tax withheld, $4,784 Amount for personal exemptions, $6,800 Average tax rate on taxable income, 15% 5. Would you prefer a fully taxable investment earning 10.7 percent or a tax-exempt investment earning 8.1 percent? Why? (Assume a 28 percent tax rate.) 6. On December 30, you decide to make a $1,000 charitable donation. If you are in a 28 percent tax bracket, how much would you save in taxes for the current year? If that tax savings was deposited in a savings account for the next five years at 6 percent, what would be the future value of that account? 1 Assignment 2: JPMorgan Chase Strayer University LEG 100 Discuss how administrative agencies like the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) or the Commodities Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) take action in order to be effective in preventing high-risk gambles in securities / banking, a foundation of the economy. On January 11, 2012, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) voted 3-2 to propose regulations to implement Section 619 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 (Dodd-Frank Act), commonly referred to as the “Volcker Rule.” The proposal specifically prohibits a bank or institution that owns a bank from engaging in proprietary trading that is not at the behest of its clients, and from owning or investing in a hedge fund or private equity fund, and also limits the liabilities that the largest banks can hold .Under discussion is the possibility of restrictions on the way market making activities are compensated; traders would be paid on the basis of the spread of the transactions rather than any profit that the trader made for the client. Determine the elements of a valid contract, and discuss how consumers and banks each have a duty of good faith and fair ...

1. FCS 3450 HOMEWORK #4
1.
Thomas Franklin arrived at the following tax information:
Gross salary, $46,660
Interest earnings, $225
Dividend income, $80
One personal exemption, $3,400
Itemized deductions, $7,820
Adjustments to income, $1,150
What amount would Thomas report as taxable income?
2.
If Lola Harper had the following itemized deductions, should
she use Schedule A or the standard deduction? The standard
deduction for her tax situation is $5,450.
Donations to church and other charities, $1,980
Medical and dental expenses that exceed 7.5 percent of adjusted
gross income, $430
State income tax, $690
Job-related expenses that exceed 2 percent of adjusted gross
income, $1,610
3.
What would be the average tax rate for a person who paid taxes
of $4,864.14 on a taxable income of $39,870?

2. 4.
Based on the following data, would Ann and Carl Wilton
receive a refund or owe additional taxes?
Adjusted gross income, $46,186
Itemized deductions, $11,420
Child care tax credit, $80
Federal income tax withheld, $4,784
Amount for personal exemptions, $6,800
Average tax rate on taxable income, 15%
5. Would you prefer a fully taxable investment earning 10.7
percent or a tax-exempt investment earning 8.1 percent? Why?
(Assume a 28 percent tax rate.)
6. On December 30, you decide to make a $1,000 charitable
donation. If you are in a 28 percent tax bracket, how much
would you save in taxes for the current year? If that tax savings
was deposited in a savings account for the next five years at 6
percent, what would be the future value of that account?
1

3. Assignment 2: JPMorgan Chase
Strayer University
LEG 100
Discuss how administrative agencies like the Securities and
Exchange Commission (SEC) or the Commodities Futures
Trading Commission (CFTC) take action in order to be effective
in preventing high-risk gambles in securities / banking, a
foundation of the economy.
On January 11, 2012, the Commodity Futures Trading
Commission (CFTC) voted 3-2 to propose regulations to
implement Section 619 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform
and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 (Dodd-Frank Act),
commonly referred to as the “Volcker Rule.” The proposal
specifically prohibits a bank or institution that owns a bank
from engaging in proprietary trading that is not at the behest of
its clients, and from owning or investing in a hedge fund or
private equity fund, and also limits the liabilities that the
largest banks can hold .Under discussion is the possibility of
restrictions on the way market making activities are
compensated; traders would be paid on the basis of the spread
of the transactions rather than any profit that the trader made

4. for the client.
Determine the elements of a valid contract, and discuss how
consumers and banks each have a duty of good faith and fair
dealing in the banking relationship.
A contract may be defined as an agreement made between two
or more corporations or persons that the courts will enforce.
Contract law differs from many other areas of the law in that
the parties need only follow the principles set out in the law to
create their own rights and duties that the courts will then
enforce. In some respects, the parties create their own “law”
that they are obliged to follow.
The creation of a binding contract that the courts will
enforce requires the contracting parties to meet a number of
requirements that are prescribed by the law of contract. While
these requirements are not numerous, they must, nevertheless,
be met before the agreement creates rights and duties that may
be enforceable at law. These requirements are referred to as the
elements of a valid contract and consist of the following:
1. An intention to create a legal relationship
2. Offer
3. Acceptance
4. Consideration
5. Capacity to contract
6. Legality
In addition to the six basic elements, certain types of contracts
must be in writing, in an electronic substitute, or take on a
special form, to be enforceable. But in general, all contracts
must have these six elements present to be valid and binding.
The concept of a contract as a bargain or agreement struck
by two parties is based upon the
premise that the end results will be a meeting of the parties’
minds on the terms and conditions
that will form their agreement with each other. Each will
normally agree to do, or perhaps not
do, certain things in return for the promise of the other to do
certain things of a particular nature. Both parties have a duty of

5. good and fair dealing with each other. One of the essential
elements of an agreement is a promise. Obviously, not all
promises can be taken as binding on the party making them.
Some may be made by persons with no intention of becoming
legally obligated to fulfill them, for example, promises made
between family members. This type of promise cannot be taken
as the basis for a contract. The first requirement, then, for a
valid contract must be the intention on the part of the person
making a promise (the promisor) to be bound by the promise
made. This intention to create a legal relationship is an essential
element of a valid contract. It is generally presumed to exist at
law in any commercial transaction where the parties are dealing
with one another at arm’s length.
The tentative promise (called an offer) made subject to a
condition is not binding on the offering party (the promisor or
offeror) until the proposal is accepted. It is only when a valid
acceptance takes place that the parties may be bound by the
agreement. These two additional requirements constitute the
second and third elements of a valid contract: offer and
acceptance. It is important to note that an offer must be
communicatedby the offeror to the other party (the offeree)
before the offer can be accepted. The essential point to make
here is that no person can agree to an offer unless he or she is
aware of it.
The bargain theory of contract suggests that a contract is
essentially an agreement between parties where each gets
something in return for his or her promise. If this is the case,
then every promise by an offeror to do something must be
conditional. The promise must include a provision that the
offeree, by conveying acceptance, will promise something to the
offeror.
The “something” that the promisor receives in return for the
promisor’s promise is called consideration—an essential
element of every simple contract.
Consideration can take many forms. It may be a payment of
money, the performance of a particular service, a promise not to

6. do something by the promisee, the relinquishment of a right, the
delivery of property, or a many other things, including a
promise in return for the promise. However, in every case, the
consideration must be something done with respect to the
promise offered by the promisor. Consideration requires
consumers and banks are to be fair dealing in the banking
relationship.
Not everyone is permitted to enter into contracts that would
bind them at law. Certain classes of promisors must be
protected as a matter of public policy, either for reasons of their
inexperience and immaturity or due to their inability to
appreciate the nature of their acts in making enforceable
promises.
While not strictly a contract formation issue, business
persons will gather considerable quantities of personal
information about the person with whom they are creating a
contract. This information must be gathered and maintained (at
least) according to PIPEDA, the federal government’s Personal
Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act.
Provincial acts may require even higher standards of
accountability. One goal of the PIPEDA was to ensure effective
alternatives to paper documents for all manner of modern
government operations -information, filings, payments, secure
signatures, and submissions of evidence (especially important in
the banking industry). Secondly, on the personal information
side, the Act requires essentially all private sector enterprises
and health care providers to obtain the consent of individuals to
collect, use, or disclose personal information for commercial
activity or health care. Furher, such information must only be
used for the pre-identified purposes for which it was collected,
and organizations are legally liable for maintaining privacy and
control over that personal data.
Compare and contrast the differences between intentional and
negligent tort actions
Tortious acts have two types: unintentional, or more

7. commonly known as negligent, and intentional. Negligent torts
are actions done by the tortfeasor in which he failed to exercise
his duty of reasonable care toward other people, resulting to an
injury-inducing accident. Being negligent is failing to do what a
“reasonable person” would do when caught in the same
situation. Meanwhile, intentional torts are civil wrongs in
which the tortfeasor deliberately or knowingly violated his duty
of care to another party. Unlike in the other type of tort, the
tortfeasor have the intention or wants to cause the consequences
of his action, or believes that the consequences will reasonably
occur.
Even if intentional torts are somewhat similar to crimes, it is
distinct from it, as crimes are prosecuted by the federal
government. Also, in both types of torts, damages should be
paid by the tortfeasor, but the damages for intentional ones are
generally broader and more generous.
The main difference between negligence and intentional
torts is that the intent of the defendant to cause injuries to the
plaintiff must be proven. It doesn’t just mean that the defendant
knows that his actions will result to harm; rather he must know
that it will result in “certain consequences.”
A doctrine called transfer intent even states that the plaintiff
doesn’t have to prove that the tortfeasor acted with intent to
cause a specific injury. Another factor that must be proven is
that the action done by the defendant was “wrongful.”
Discuss the tort action of “Interference with Contractual
Relations and Participating in a Breach of Fiduciary duty” and,
if the bank you’ve chosen were to behave as JP Morgan did,
would you be able to prevail in such a tort action.
The tort of interference with contractual relations permits a
plaintiff to recover damages based upon a claim that a
defendant interfered with the plaintiff's contractual relations.
The elements of an intentional interference with contractual
relations claim are (1) a valid contract between plaintiff and a
third party; (2) defendant's knowledge of this contract; (3)

8. defendant's intentional acts designed to induce a breach or
disruption of the contractual relationship; (4) actual breach or
disruption of the contractual relationship; and (5) resulting
damage.
To be considered tortious, a defendant's actions must
substantially exceed fair competition and free expression, such
as persuading a bank not to lend a competitor any more money.
A “fiduciary duty,” is the duty [i.e. the legal obligation] the
law recognizes and imposes on one who is acting as a fiduciary.
When someone fails to fulfill their legal obligations we say they
have “breached” their “duty” to someone else. Accordingly,
when someone who is entrusted to act for the benefit of another
fails to act properly, they are said to have “breached their
fiduciary duty.” In 2012 the court concluded that JPMorgan had
breached its fiduciary duty in 2000 when it sold what are known
as variable prepaid forward contracts to the trust, a complex
fee-rich product that the judge determined was unsuitable for
the trust.
References:
White, Edward G. (2003) Tort Law in America: An Intellectual
History. Oxford University Press, Inc.
Mitchell, Lawrence E. (1990) The Death of Fiduciary Duty in
Close Corporations. Retrieved from:
http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?collection=journals&ha
ndle=hein.journals/pnlr138&div=65&id=&page on 03/03/2013;

9. Plant, Marcus L. (1980) Comparative Negligence and Strict Tort
Liability. Retrieved from:
http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?collection=journals&ha
ndle=hein.journals/louilr40&div=23&id=&page on 03/03/2013;
MacMillan Catharine (2006). Element of The Law of Contract.
University of London Press,Inc.