Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions

SOFE SOFA-CFE Exam - Topic 3 Question 69 Discussion

Which insurance arrangement, which involved insurance of a loss that had previously occurred, similarly was found not to be insurance for federal income tax purposes?
D) Tax reserves
A) annual statement
B) retroactive
C) reserved

SOFE SOFA-CFE Exam - Topic 3 Question 69 Discussion

Actual exam question for SOFE's SOFA-CFE exam
Question #: 69
Topic #: 3
[All SOFA-CFE Questions]

Which insurance arrangement, which involved insurance of a loss that had previously occurred, similarly was found not to be insurance for federal income tax purposes?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: D

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Lynna
8 months ago
I’m not convinced, seems like it should count as insurance.
upvoted 0 times
...
Carline
8 months ago
Surprised to learn retroactive isn't treated as insurance!
upvoted 0 times
...
Renay
9 months ago
Wait, I thought tax reserves were the answer?
upvoted 0 times
...
Amber
9 months ago
Totally agree, retroactive is not considered insurance.
upvoted 0 times
...
Van
9 months ago
It's B, retroactive insurance.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tran
9 months ago
I recall that retroactive insurance arrangements are tricky, but I’m not confident. Maybe it’s worth considering A or C too, just in case.
upvoted 0 times
...
Dell
9 months ago
I’m leaning towards B as well, but I’m a bit confused about the definitions. I wish I had reviewed those practice questions more thoroughly.
upvoted 0 times
...
Sherman
9 months ago
I'm not entirely sure, but I feel like it could also be D, Tax reserves. We went over some similar questions, and I remember something about reserves not being considered insurance.
upvoted 0 times
...
Elvis
9 months ago
I think the answer might be B, retroactive, because I remember it being discussed in class as not qualifying as insurance for tax purposes.
upvoted 0 times
...
Stacey
9 months ago
I'm a little confused by this question. I'm not sure I fully understand the concept of inactive classifications and why they would still show up in reports. I'll need to think this through carefully.
upvoted 0 times
...
Vincent
10 months ago
This looks like a tricky one. I'll need to think it through carefully.
upvoted 0 times
...
Adelina
1 year ago
Tax reserves? Now that's a new one. Is the IRS just making up insurance terms now? I'm sticking with B) retroactive, it's the only one that makes any sense.
upvoted 0 times
Naomi
1 year ago
Yeah, tax reserves are important for insurance companies to ensure they can cover future claims. Retroactive insurance does make the most sense in this context.
upvoted 0 times
...
Helaine
1 year ago
Yeah, I agree. Tax reserves and retroactive both seem like valid options in this case.
upvoted 0 times
...
Viola
1 year ago
I think retroactive makes sense too, it's like covering a loss that already happened.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ryan
1 year ago
I think you're right, retroactive insurance is when coverage is provided for a loss that has already occurred.
upvoted 0 times
...
Phillip
1 year ago
Tax reserves are actually a common term in insurance, it's used to cover future claims.
upvoted 0 times
...
Edna
1 year ago
Tax reserves are actually a common term in insurance, it's used to set aside funds for potential future claims.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Velda
1 year ago
Annual statement, really? That's just basic accounting, not insurance. Gotta be B) retroactive, even if it sounds a bit sketchy.
upvoted 0 times
Brandee
1 year ago
I'm going with retroactive too, it just fits the description better.
upvoted 0 times
...
Samira
1 year ago
It does sound a bit sketchy, but I think retroactive makes the most sense.
upvoted 0 times
...
Art
1 year ago
Yeah, retroactive seems like the best option here.
upvoted 0 times
...
Rolf
1 year ago
I agree, annual statement doesn't sound like insurance at all.
upvoted 0 times
...
Cletus
1 year ago
Exactly, as long as it meets the criteria, it's considered insurance.
upvoted 0 times
...
Kanisha
1 year ago
True, it's all about how the arrangement is structured.
upvoted 0 times
...
Han
1 year ago
But it's still considered insurance for federal income tax purposes.
upvoted 0 times
...
Chauncey
1 year ago
I agree, retroactive insurance does sound a bit sketchy.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Matthew
1 year ago
Hmm, this one's tricky. I'm gonna go with B) retroactive, seems like the only option that fits the description. Though I gotta say, the IRS must have a sense of humor to call that 'insurance'.
upvoted 0 times
...
Gerri
1 year ago
I'm not sure, but I think D) Tax reserves could also be a possible answer because it involves setting aside funds for potential future losses.
upvoted 0 times
...
Marica
1 year ago
I agree with Sherly, retroactive insurance involves covering losses that have already happened.
upvoted 0 times
...
Sherly
1 year ago
I think the answer is B) retroactive.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lynna
1 year ago
Whoa, retroactive insurance? That's like trying to insure your house after it's already burned down. Pretty sure that's not how it works, am I right?
upvoted 0 times
Olene
1 year ago
D) Tax reserves
upvoted 0 times
...
Marya
1 year ago
C) reserved
upvoted 0 times
...
Jackie
1 year ago
B) retroactive
upvoted 0 times
...
Geoffrey
1 year ago
A) annual statement
upvoted 0 times
...
...

Save Cancel