Step 1 · But-for
The but-for world
What the business would have earned had the wrong never happened, projected off the pre-event trend in the actual ledger — not an assertion, an anchored counterfactual.
Damages quantification
A loss number that survives cross-examination.
Capital Toolkit Litigation Support builds the economic-loss model a dispute turns on — the but-for counterfactual against what actually happened, net of mitigation, discounted to present value and grossed up for tax — with full sensitivity ranges and an expert-ready report a CPA signs. Built straight off your CPA-reviewed books, so every assumption traces back to a source the other side can test.
A Number You Assert Isn't a Number You Can Defend.
A claimant arrives with a loss figure — “the contract was worth $2 million” — built on a hopeful projection and a round number. It feels right. Then the other side's expert opens the file.
They ask what the business would actually have earned but for the wrong, and whether the projection is tied to any real history. They point out the claimant did nothing to mitigate. They note the loss is spread over five years but was never discounted to present value, and that the award will be taxed differently than the income it replaces. They show the figure swings by half a million on a single assumption nobody stress-tested. The number doesn't survive — and a weak number invites a low settlement.
Capital Toolkit builds the whole quantification off the same CPA-reviewed ledger that runs the books — the but-for model, the mitigation, the present-value discount, the tax gross-up, the sensitivity ranges — and a CPA signs the conclusion. One pipeline from the financial record to a defensible number, with every assumption sourced.
The model
But-For · Mitigation · Present Value · After-Tax.
A damages figure isn't a single assertion. It's built in stages, each one sourced and stress-tested — so the conclusion holds up under the other side's scrutiny and the court's.
Step 2 · Mitigation
Net of mitigation
Actual results subtracted from the but-for path, less whatever the claimant could reasonably do to reduce the loss. The gross loss a court won't accept becomes the net loss it will.
Step 3 · Present value
Discounted to today
Losses spread across years brought to present value at a stated, adjustable discount rate — the form a court expects future loss to be argued in, not an undiscounted sum.
Step 4 · After-tax
Grossed up for tax
Adjusted so the after-tax award actually makes the claimant whole. This is the defensible figure the claim is advanced on — and the number a settlement is anchored to.
Every stage is computed off the ledger and footnoted, with the discount rate, the mitigation assumptions, and the tax treatment stated on the face of the model rather than buried in a spreadsheet.
When you need one
Six Common Triggers.
Breach of contract
A supplier walked, a customer cancelled, a partner broke the deal. Quantify the profit the business would have earned but for the breach, net of what it could reasonably do to replace the lost business.
Business interruption
A fire, a flood, a wrongful shutdown stopped the business cold. Model the revenue and profit lost over the interruption period against the pre-event trend, for the insurer or the court.
Shareholder & partner disputes
An oppression claim, a buyout fight, a departing partner's misconduct. Put a defensible figure on the economic harm and on the fair value at stake, anchored to the actual financial record.
Personal injury & wrongful dismissal
Economic loss from an injury or a dismissal — lost earnings and lost earning capacity over the relevant period, discounted to present value and grossed up for tax.
IP infringement
Lost profits or a reasonable royalty from infringement or misuse. Isolate the loss attributable to the infringement from everything else moving the numbers.
Fraud & misappropriation
Money diverted, assets misused, books manipulated. Reconstruct what was taken and the downstream economic loss, with the audit trail to support every figure.
How it works
From ledger to signed report.
Cleaner books and longer history make it faster, because the loss model is computed off the ledger rather than rebuilt by hand each time.
Define the matter
The claim type, the wrongful act and its date, the loss period, the discount and tax assumptions, and the standard the conclusion has to meet. Captured in the engagement scope.
Build the but-for model
The engine reads the CPA-reviewed ledger, establishes the pre-event trend, and projects the but-for path against what actually happened, isolating the loss attributable to the wrong.
Discount, gross up, stress-test
Net of mitigation, discounted to present value, grossed up for tax — then re-run across the key assumptions so the sensitivity range and the drivers are on the table, not a surprise under cross.
Sign the report
The CPA reviews every assumption, applies judgment, and signs the written report. Deliverable with the loss schedules, the sensitivity, and the supporting detail — ready for counsel.
What's inside
The work product, not just a number.
But-for model
The counterfactual projection built off the pre-event trend in the actual ledger, with every input reconciled to a source the other side can examine.
Mitigation
The actual-versus-but-for gap, net of what the claimant could reasonably do to reduce the loss — the difference between a gross figure and one a court accepts.
Present value
Future losses discounted to today at a stated, adjustable rate, in the form courts expect future loss to be argued in.
Tax gross-up
Adjustment so the after-tax award actually makes the claimant whole — with the tax treatment stated and defensible, not buried.
Sensitivity ranges
The model re-run across growth, discount rate, margin, and mitigation, showing the range the number moves within and which assumptions drive it.
Loss schedules
Year-by-year, line-by-line schedules behind the headline figure — exportable to PDF, Word, and CSV for counsel, the court, and the other side's expert.
Expert-ready report
A written report a CPA reviews and signs, structured for a litigation file: the model, the assumptions, the sensitivity, and the conclusion.
Audit trail
Every assumption, adjustment, and figure captured on the platform and reproducible years later if the matter, an appeal, or a cross-examination comes back to it.
Who it's for
Built for the number a case turns on.
Business owners
You're in a dispute and need to know what the loss is actually worth before you spend on litigation. Get a defensible figure — and the sensitivity range — so you settle or fight from a position of understanding, not a hopeful number.
Lawyers
Bring your client's financials and get a quantification built to the standard a court expects: the but-for model, mitigation, present value, tax, and the sensitivity your opponent will probe — with a CPA to sign and, where appropriate, testify.
CPAs & experts
Run your damages and forensic practice on the platform that holds the client's books. The loss model, the schedules, and the sensitivity compute off the ledger, so your time goes to judgment and the signed conclusion — not spreadsheet assembly.
Honest status
What's shipped and what's next.
The Litigation Support engine is live: the but-for loss model, the mitigation netting, the present-value discount, the tax gross-up, the sensitivity ranges, and the exportable loss schedules all compute directly off the CPA-reviewed ledger. The CPA reviews the model, applies judgment, and signs the report. Deeper claim-specific templates are on the roadmap.
Live today
- But-for model projected off the actual ledger.
- Mitigation netting and loss-period scoping.
- Present-value discounting at an adjustable rate.
- Tax gross-up on the after-tax award.
- Sensitivity ranges across the key assumptions.
- Loss schedules and a signed PDF / Word / CSV report.
On the roadmap
- Claim-specific report templates by matter type.
- Industry benchmark inputs for the but-for trend.
- Pre-judgment interest scheduling.
- Multi-scenario comparison side by side.
- Rebuttal mode against an opposing expert's model.
- Court-ready exhibit and appendix assembly.
Note:A damages quantification is a litigation work product, not an audit or a review engagement. It is built on the books and records made available and the analyst's judgment; it does not express an audit opinion. The expert's independence, qualifications, and admissibility are the engaging lawyer's and the expert's responsibility.
What sits around Litigation Support
A loss number is built on the financial record.
A damages model is only as defensible as the numbers it is built on. The modules below supply the clean ledger, the certified statements, and the valuation the but-for model and the loss schedules depend on. Engagements often run two or three together.
The Books
The loss model reads straight off the CPA-reviewed general ledger. A clean ledger is what lets the but-for trend and the schedules compute instead of being rebuilt by hand.
See module →Financial Statements
The model reconciles to the issued statements. Compilation, review, or audit-grade financials are the basis the loss conclusion is tied back to.
See module →Valuation
Many disputes turn on lost business value, not just lost profit. A defensible valuation conclusion is what the damages figure is anchored to in oppression, buyout, and total-loss claims.
See module →Quality of Earnings
The same normalization and add-back discipline that builds a QoE bridge sharpens the but-for earnings the loss model projects from.
See module →FP&A
The projection engine behind the but-for counterfactual is the same one that powers FP&A forecasting — the trend, the drivers, and the assumptions a court will probe.
See module →CSBFP
Rebuilding after a loss often needs capital. Government-backed CSBFP financing is one route the same advisor can run once the matter resolves.
See module →
Questions people ask first.
Know what the loss is worth before you litigate it.
Twenty-minute demo. Bring the matter that's driving it — a breach, an interruption, a shareholder dispute — and we'll walk through the loss model and the sensitivity on your own numbers.
Don't have a CPA on the platform yet? Sign up directly — your engagement is temporarily held by a qualified professional on the platform until you bring in your own.