On march 1, 2010, thomas company acquired a machine for $3,000,000 and estimates a 10 year life, $150,000 salvage and uses the double-declining- balance method for this class of asset. at the end of 2013 (after recording depreciation for the current year), thomas determined it was necessary to evaluate this equipment for impairment. the company estimates this equipment will generate cash inflows of $400,000 per year and cash outflows of $150,000/year for each of the next four years. the company uses a 15% discount rate to evaluate operating assets. determine the amount of any impairment loss to be recognized if thomas plans to dispose of this asset. the present value of an ordinary annuity of 15% is 2.85498; present value of $1 is 0.57175; and future value of annuity is 4.99338. thomas believes the present value is a good indicator of fair value in today's market. they also feel that a reasonable estimate for disposal costs is $13,745

Cooper sues company a in state court in south carolina, where he lives, for negligence alleging personal injury and property damage of $100,000 after a truck driven by an employee of company a rear-ended his pickup truck. company a is incorporated in delaware, has its headquarters in new york, but does a substantial amount of business in south carolina. claiming diversity of citizenship, company a seeks removal to federal district court, but cooper opposes the motion. which of the following is true regarding whether the case may be properly removed to federal district court? the amount in controversy satisfies diversity requirements; and if company a's nerve center is in a state other than south carolina, then the case may be properly removed to federal court.the amount in controversy satisfies diversity requirements; and because company a is incorporated and has its headquarters in a state other than south carolina, the case may be properly removed to federal court.because the amount in controversy satisfies diversity requirements and company a is incorporated in a state other than south carolina, the case may be properly removed to federal court regardless of where company a's headquarters, nerve center, or principal place of business is located.because the amount in controversy satisfies diversity requirements and company a is headquartered in a state other than south carolina, the case may be properly removed to federal court regardless of where company a is incorporated and regardless of the location of its nerve center.because the amount in controversy fails to satisfy jurisdictional requirements, regardless of the location of company a, the case may not be removed to federal court.