compensate for (something)

(redirected from compensated for)
Also found in: Dictionary, Thesaurus.

compensate for (something)

1. To offset (or attempt to offset) something. His sudden honesty cannot compensate for all the lies he told me over the past year.
2. To reimburse someone for something. In this usage, the recipient is named between "compensate" and "for." If you take the job, we will compensate you for all of your relocation expenses.
See also: compensate

compensate someone for something

to pay someone [back] money for something. Don't worry. I will compensate you for your loss. Let us compensate you for your expenses.
See also: compensate

compensate for something

to counterbalance or counteract something; to make up for something. Your present kindness will not compensate for your previous rudeness.
See also: compensate
References in periodicals archive ?
The FLSA requires that covered employees be compensated for overtime at the rate of one and one-half times their regular hourly wage.
Under a fee-only arrangement, the CPA-financial planner is compensated for the professional services he or she provides solely by the client and not as a result of the purchase or sale of any financial product.
The rest of the venture was compensated for by combination of RIPTA and other government allows, such as $340,000 in American Recovery and Reinvestment Act money for service maintenance.
73-580 that compensated for "services performed in connection with a corporate merger."
not covered by insurance or otherwise and compensated for." Before final passage of the bill, the Senate Finance Committee changed the wording to "losses .
165 appear to lend credence to the position that "compensated for" does not mean "covered by." Regs.
Judge Quealy stated: "Any economic disadvantage which petitioner may have sustained was not as a result of any casualty loss not being compensated for by insurance but rather was as a result of his choosing not to accept the funds available in compensation for any casualty loss." (11)
Judge Fay, in his concurring opinion, believed the "covered by" versus "compensated for" discussion was premature since it was not at issue in Axelrod (no cause or amount was ever established).
Bartlett (13) was the first case in which the "compensated for" versus "covered by" conflict was examined in a reported decision.
Since this was the first time the "covered by" versus "compensated for" issue was addressed, the court certainly could have examined the legislative history of Sec.
78-141, (15) in which the Service made no argument regarding the "compensated for" means "covered by" issue but launched its attack on the failure of the taxpayer (an attorney) to file an insurance claim.
The Service dropped the "covered by" versus "compensated for" issue and therefore implied that the taxpayer was not compensated for by insurance.