Even if you did, "no strings attached". That's goodwill that's rare to see these days; these offers are usually a trade of a meager (relative to potential damages in a successful lawsuit) but expedient and guaranteed payout in exchange for indemnification and other promises.
My more optimistic take is that if they take years to resolve claims, then passengers could (should be able to?) rightfully claim more damages for the hardship in those delays. It saves them money overall by providing compensation early without prejudicing future claims. And that's of benefit to those impacted, too.
There's a big difference between physical injuries and mental/emotional injuries. I can't imagine that all (or even most) of the passengers can shrug the whole thing off with "oh, well. i wasn't hurt".
I suppose they could pay "$30K after taxes", but that would be prohibitively involved, from an accounting standpoint.
Conceptually, it's odd to me that payouts due to damages are taxed. Of course, it's hardly the strangest thing that gets taxed, so it's hardly a surprise.
14 comments
[ 3.0 ms ] story [ 40.7 ms ] threadBased on the article, there aren't any of those, so I think they're doing a good thing here
This is an important detail! Great move then, IMO.
Conceptually, it's odd to me that payouts due to damages are taxed. Of course, it's hardly the strangest thing that gets taxed, so it's hardly a surprise.
US citizens that were on the flight will have to declare it as income.