Executive Compensation Tax Update: Final Golden Parachute Regulations and More
|
|
- Roland Simpson
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 September 2003 Executive Compensation Tax Update: Final Golden Parachute Regulations and More This summer has been an unusually busy season for important developments affecting the tax treatment of executive compensation. While some of these actions are of limited scope or remain to be formally adopted, others are long overdue and will have immediate significance. This Jones Day Commentaries provides a brief overview of each of the following developments and related practice points. Final golden parachute tax regulations Introduction of further legislation to overhaul nonqualified deferred compensation arrangements Proposal of comprehensive incentive stock option regulations A surprising appellate decision allowing a deduction for stock compensation that the employee failed to include in income IRS stock option tax shelter guidance Publication of a revenue ruling that analyzes stock option deductions after the issuer is acquired Final Golden Parachute Tax Regulations On August 1, 2003, the Treasury Department released final regulations interpreting the golden parachute tax rules sections 280G and 4999 of the Internal Revenue Code. The most significant aspects of the final regulations are as follows. The major impact is that 19 years after the enactment of section 280G, final interpretive regulations have been published, which will provide greater certainty and predictability in coping with the golden parachute tax rules. This also means that the flexibility in interpreting and applying section 280G that was previously afforded by the limited deference due to the proposed regulations will be replaced by the far greater controlling authority of the final regulations. The new safe harbor for determining the identity of shareholders for the private company shareholder approval exemption has been expanded from three months to six months prior to the section 280G change in ownership or control (a section 280G change ), regardless of when the shareholder approval vote is actually taken. The final regulations make clear that votes are permitted on only part of the payments made to one person and separately on the payments made to each person. The final regulations also permit substitution of an entity shareholder representative if the normal representative is a disqualified individual. The IRS refused, however, to reconcile the shareholder approval regulations with commercial reality by, for example, permitting shareholder approval when a contract is entered into and continued to require that disclosure be made to all of the shareholders even in situations where the necessary 75 percent approval could otherwise be obtained. Pursuant to new authorization provided in the final section 280G regulations, the IRS published additional guidance on the valuation of stock options (Revenue Procedure ) where the vesting of the option is accelerated in connection with the section 280G change and the option remains outstanding after the section 280G change (i.e., the option is not cashed out). This new guidance creates an 18- month post-section 280G change period in which to redetermine option valuations based on certain events during that period, such as a change in the continued employment of the optionee or in the stock volatility of the grantor of the option. Thus, for example, a reduction in the option term 2003 Jones Day. All rights reserved.
2 due to a termination of employment of the optionee within the 18-month period may be taken into account to reduce the section 280G option value. This flexibility will be helpful in bringing the computation of section 280G option values more in line with commercial norms. The IRS reiterated its earlier position, however, that option valuation may not be based solely on the option spread. In determining whether a section 280G change has occurred, the IRS did not budge from its denial of the effect of overlapping ownership of the companies participating in the transaction and refused to recognize other commercial realities. Taking overlapping ownership into account more accurately reflects the impact of a transaction on the ultimate shareholders and could in certain circumstances, such as in a so-called merger of equals, mean that no section 280G change would occur with respect to any participant to the transaction. The final regulations stress that in a transaction, a section 280G change will occur as to one and only one company, and that a section 280G change in ownership of assets or stock will always trump a section 280G change in control. Thus, for example, in an all-stock deal, a section 280G change will occur with respect to the smaller of two companies participating in a transaction, even if, in fact, the minnow has swallowed the whale and the board and management of the smaller company predominate after the transaction. The management of the larger company can thus be terminated without application of the golden parachute excise tax. The final regulations will generally apply to payments that are contingent on a section 280G change if the section 280G change occurs after December 31, Prior to that effective date, taxpayers may rely on the 1989 proposed regulations or the 2002 proposed regulations. In some cases, depending on the section 280G issue, it may be more or less advantageous to be under the final regulations. Consequently, it may be worthwhile to review the timing of potential end-of-year closings in light of the applicable section 280G regulations. Although it is not likely that existing change-in-control arrangements will need to be substantially revised in light of the revisions made in the final section 280G regulations since the effects of the final regulations have generally been anticipated, companies may nevertheless want to review how such arrangements will operate under the final regulations. Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Legislation On July 25, 2003, House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Bill Thomas introduced H.R. 2896, the American Jobs Creation Act of Section 1091 of the bill represents the latest legislative effort to regulate nonqualified deferred compensation arrangements and related security devices, including rabbi trusts. The proposed legislation is significant, especially in light of the nonqualified deferred compensation provisions that were contained in the May 2003 Senate bill but that were not included in the final bill enacted into law. Chairman Thomas approach is more moderate than that taken in the Senate bill and in other recent proposals aimed at curtailing the use of nonqualified deferred compensation arrangements. The Thomas bill would nevertheless substantially alter how nonqualified deferred compensation plans and related trust agreements are drafted and, if enacted, could necessitate extensive amendments to plans and trust agreements. In addition, careful planning would be needed to make the transition from current law to the new rules, which would become effective next year. The Thomas bill would greatly restrict the flexibility afforded in many nonqualified deferred compensation plans today. Haircut distributions, deferred roll-overs, and accelerated distributions based upon the financial health of the employer would be prohibited. Financial hardship distributions would be restricted to the extent currently provided in the section 457 regulations for plans of tax-exempt entities. Change-in-control payouts would be permitted only to the extent provided by regulation. Deferral election modifications would be subject to substantial constraints that would greatly impair their usefulness. Separation of service distributions for any key employee could commence no earlier than six months after the separation from service. Compared with the recent Senate bill, however, the Thomas bill would not limit deemed investment options nor prohibit stock option gain deferrals. Moreover, the Senate bill would have prohibited all change-in-control accelerations, financial hardship distributions, and deferral modifications. On the other hand, the Thomas bill would apply to all plan participants, whereas the Senate bill would have been limited to corporate insiders (and, in the case of private companies, to persons who would be insiders if the company were an SEC registrant). 2
3 The Thomas bill basically leaves rabbi trusts alone. Offshore trusts, however, would generally be prohibited. The Senate bill would virtually eliminate any practical use of rabbi trusts. Proposed Incentive Stock Option Regulations On June 6, 2003, the IRS released long-awaited proposed regulations that, in conjunction with existing regulations, will provide comprehensive guidance regarding incentive stock options ( ISOs ). The new proposed regulations replace regulations proposed in 1984 that were never finalized and provide interpretations for many subjects that were not addressed by the 1984 proposals. The new rules will apply to options granted more than 180 days after final regulations are published. Taxpayers are, however, permitted to rely on the new proposals for options granted on or after June 9, For the most part, the new guidance is helpful because specific rules are set forth where no formal guidance previously existed, ambiguities are clarified, and, in a few cases, prior restrictive interpretations have been relaxed to some extent. Nevertheless, even under the new proposals, obtaining and retaining the desired beneficial tax treatment for ISOs remains a difficult task that requires careful consideration of a multitude of technical rules. Some of the more significant aspects of the proposals include the following: In order to qualify as an ISO, the option must be granted under a shareholder approved plan that is subject to a limitation on the maximum number of aggregate shares that may be issued. The proposed regulations make clear that if the plan authorizes stock-based awards other than ISOs, a limitation on share issuance that satisfies the ISO rules must apply to all such awards. The IRS thus takes the position that the tax code may regulate the need for, and correct formulation of, a limitation on the aggregate number of shares that may be issued under an equity compensation plan as a condition of obtaining qualified status for ISOs. In addition, each such limitation must be expressed in a manner such that a fixed number is stated. For example, a limitation expressed as a percentage of shares outstanding from time to time will not meet this requirement. Also, certain share recycling provisions may violate this requirement. If this rule is included in the final regulations, a careful review of share issuance limitations may be advisable. If existing plans are amended to comply with this requirement, shareholder approval may be necessary ISOs may be granted only to employees (or designated classes of employees). The proposed regulations provide that if, as is often the case, stock-based awards may be made under the plan to individuals other than employees (e.g., outside directors or consultants), the plan must separately designate the employees or classes of employees eligible to receive ISOs. Plans are not necessarily drafted with this degree of precision. If this rule is finalized, these plans will need to be amended. The Code and existing and earlier proposed regulations provide rules for the preservation of ISO status in the event of substitutions and assumptions of ISOs resulting from certain transactions involving the issuer. The new proposed regulations expand upon these earlier rules, provide greater clarity, and, in general, facilitate obtaining favorable tax results. Existing regulations generally preclude adjustments to ISOs in response to a corporate transaction unless either (i) a significant number of employees are fired or transferred to a new employer, or (ii) a parent-subsidiary relationship is either created or terminated. The new proposed regulations sensibly eliminate this requirement. The new proposed regulations continue the earlier interpretation that a corporate transaction does not necessarily trigger further shareholder approval of ISOs or a plan. Generally, the prior approval by the issuing corporation s shareholders will suffice. The new proposed regulations also make clear that ISOs may be appropriately adjusted to reflect the loss of issuer value due to the payment of dividends (other than regular dividends) without forfeiting qualified status. Prior IRS private letter rulings had been inconsistent regarding this situation. One of the most contentious ISO rules is that an ISO that is modified is considered to have been regranted. If the deemed regranted ISO fails any requirement attendant to initial issuance, the most common being that an ISO cannot be in the money on the date of grant, the ISO is disqualified. In addition, the regrant causes the one- and two-year holding periods to restart and requires a retesting under the $100,000 limitation described below. Under existing rules, a modification means the grant of any additional benefit. In the new proposed regulations, the IRS has retreated from its onerous interpretation of this rule in certain limited respects. First, the IRS has eliminated one of the most troublesome sources of a potential modification by providing that no 3
4 modification occurs merely because an optionee is offered a change in the terms of an option so long as the change is not made. Previously, many practitioners believed, based on earlier authorities, that the mere unilateral offer of an additional benefit could constitute a modification. Second, the IRS has provided limited relief in the case where the original grant expressly reserves the issuer s discretion to provide an additional benefit in the following three areas: the payment of a bonus at exercise, providing a loan to assist exercise, or accepting previously owned shares in payment of the exercise price. Under the proposed regulations, the issuer s exercise of discretion in any of these three areas would not constitute a modification. An issuer s exercise of discretion outside the three areas, or even within the three areas where the original grant does not expressly reserve the discretion, on the other hand, would constitute a modification. Hopefully, the IRS will reconsider its position on this issue in the final regulations and provide greater flexibility. The new proposed regulations caution that good-faith estimates of share value for purposes of determining the ISO exercise price must take into account the effect of nonlapse restrictions and must be determined without regard to lapse restrictions. In addition, issuers must be careful to exclude from the ISO exercise price any amount that would be treated for tax purposes as interest. Failure to do so will violate the good-faith fair market value estimate rule. Compliance requires attention to ISO payment provisions to ensure that deferred payments for ISO shares are identified and properly taken into account in determining whether the full exercise price has been paid. The proposed regulations make clear that once a plan has been shareholder approved, a change in ownership of the issuer does not necessitate further shareholder approval. Thus, for example, if a stock plan has been approved by a subsidiary s sole shareholder and the subsidiary is subsequently spun off or otherwise disposed of, the change in ownership of the subsidiary, in and of itself, does not require plan approval by the new shareholders of the subsidiary. (This rule may be contrasted with the much more restrictive approach taken to shareholder approval in similar situations by the regulations issued under the $1 million cap.) However, if as a result of the transaction, the acquirer substitutes its options or assumes the subsidiary s options, the acquirer s actions must be pursuant to a plan approved by the acquirer s shareholders in order to continue ISO status of the subsidiary s options. The amount of stock subject to ISOs granted to one individual that may first become exercisable in any calendar year may not exceed $100,000. The excess is automatically treated as a nonqualified option. The proposed regulations build upon prior guidance to provide detailed rules explaining how the $100,000 limitation works in a variety of situations. The $100,000 limitation requires careful planning in structuring ISO grants and in planning for the tax consequences of accelerations of exercisability that may be triggered by a change in control, termination of employment, and other events that may be specified in option agreements. Caution is advised prior to including the $100,000 limitation as a contractual restriction on the exercisability of ISOs. Some contractual provisions inadvertently constrain the ability to exercise an option originally intended to be an ISO in a situation where the optionee would prefer to be able to exercise the option without regard to whether ISO tax benefits may be available. ISOs may be transferred to a grantor trust without losing tax benefits if the transferor is considered the sole beneficial owner of the option. ISOs that are transferred incident to a divorce or pursuant to a qualified domestic relations order immediately lose their preferred tax status. However, stock obtained by exercising an ISO may be transferred incident to a divorce without violating the holding period requirements. Unfortunately, the new proposed regulations raise or fail to address a number of important issues: The application of the alternative minimum tax to ISOs. Since taxpayers are permitted to rely on the new regulations for options granted on or after June 9, 2003, it is unclear what law applies to options granted prior to that date. It seems unlikely, however, that the IRS would assert a position that is contrary to the new proposed regulations. The impact on meeting ISO holding period requirements of entering into risk reduction strategies such as hedges with respect to stock obtained by exercising an ISO. Must the Employee Actually Include Stock Compensation Income in Order for the Employer to Get the Deduction? One of the most vexing aspects of whether an employer may obtain a deduction for stock compensation is the IRS insistence that either the employee actually include the amount in income or that the employer correctly report the amount 4
5 in a timely statement furnished to the employee. In a recent decision, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit declined to follow the lower court decision by the Court of Federal Claims as well as earlier precedential holdings by the Tax Court and the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, and held that the employer can obtain the deduction even when the employee has not included the compensation in income and the employer failed to report the amount in a timely manner. In Robinson v. U.S., decided on July 15, 2003, the employer sold stock to an employee. The shares were subject to forfeiture on early termination of employment. In order to benefit from capital gains treatment on future stock value appreciation, the employee made a section 83(b) election to include immediately in income the excess, if any, of the value of the stock over the amount paid by the employee. The employee took the position that the amount paid was equal to the value of the shares and did not report any income when the election was made. When the employee s employment was later terminated, the owners of the employer first learned that the section 83(b) election had been made. The owners believed that the value of the shares greatly exceeded their purchase price when the shares were sold and caused the employer to file a refund claim based upon the difference in value. Since the employee had not reported such amount as income, the IRS denied the refund claim based upon its long-standing interpretation of the governing statutory provision that sets the employer s deduction equal to the amount included in the employee s income. After an extensive review of the structure of large parts of the Internal Revenue Code, the Federal Circuit concluded that included meant includible, reversed the lower court, and approved the refund claim. Thus, there is now a conflict in the courts of appeal on the issue. In the meantime, employers may want to review any similar situations and consider filing refund claims where the facts fit within the Federal Circuit s reasoning. For example, it is sometimes unclear when and whether employer shares have vested sufficiently to warrant taxation, and the resulting income may not have been timely reported to the employee nor reported by the employee. In addition, companies may want to be mindful on a termination of employment of whether any of these types of issues exist, and if they do, whether they should be addressed in the termination agreement. Stock Option Tax Shelter Guidance In the days when stock option gains were substantial, one now well-publicized technique to defer, if not eliminate, the tax on the option income was for the option holder to sell the option to a family member, family trust, or family limited partnership in exchange for an unsecured interest-bearing note with a balloon principal payment due 15 years or more after the sale. The parties would take the position that the sale was at arm s length, within the meaning of the applicable tax regulations, thus terminating the compensation phase of the stock option, and that the option holder was entitled to installment sale treatment on the note. Accordingly, the optionee did not report any income upon the sale or the exercise of the option, and presumably would not report any income until the installment obligation was satisfied. The family purchaser of the option did not report any income when the option was exercised and little, if any, income when the option shares were promptly sold. In challenging the alleged tax treatment of the transaction, the IRS published guidance on July 2, 2003, that may have application outside of the specific tax shelter arrangements that inspired the publication of the guidance. New regulations effective July 2, 2003, provide that the disposition of a nonqualified stock option to a person related to the option holder will not qualify as an arm s-length transaction. As a result, when the option is eventually exercised or otherwise disposed of, the option spread or other consideration will be taxed to the original optionee. Because the applicable relationships are defined very broadly, the regulation will apply to many transactions that bear little resemblance to the transactions that were targeted by the IRS. In addition, the IRS formally announced that it will take the position that income cannot be deferred upon a disposition of a typical nonqualified stock option in exchange for an installment payment obligation, without regard to whether or not the disposition occurs in an arm s-length transaction. Thus, an arm s-length sale of a nonqualified stock option to an unrelated third party in exchange for an installment note will, in the view of the IRS, result in the immediate taxation of the seller. 5
6 Taxation of Target s Stock Options after the Acquisition of Target In Revenue Ruling , published on July 25, 2003, the IRS appeared ready to address some of the difficult issues relating to the tax treatment of deductions generated by nonqualified stock options granted by the target corporation when the options are exercised or disposed of after the target has been acquired. Unfortunately, the four situations analyzed by the IRS in the ruling fail to raise issues that most trouble practitioners. In the first situation, all of the target stock is acquired, and the option is exchanged for an acquiring company option and later exercised for shares of the acquiring company. The facts are the same in the second situation, except that the option is canceled by the acquiring company in exchange for cash or acquiring company stock. In the third situation, the option remains exercisable for stock of the target company and is later canceled in exchange for cash or acquiring company stock. The last situation is identical to the first situation except that the target company is later merged with and into the acquiring company and the option is subsequently exercised for shares of the acquiring company. The IRS holds that in the first three situations, the target company gets the compensation deduction, and in the fourth situation, the acquiring company gets the deduction. These holdings are not surprising. In each of the four situations described in the ruling, the optionee remains employed by the issuer of the option or by the issuer s legal successor throughout the entire term of the option. The location of the compensation deduction would appear to be a foregone conclusion. Guidance is needed, however, in similar situations where the employment of the optionee is divided between the issuer and the acquirer during the term of the option and, particularly, where service during the option vesting period is divided between the issuer and the acquirer. There is no definitive authority controlling the location of the compensation deduction attributable to the option in such circumstances, including whether and on what basis, if at all, the deduction is to be allocated between the two employers. In an earlier ruling, Revenue Ruling , which addressed the treatment of compensatory stock options in spin-offs, the IRS similarly failed to consider the treatment of the option deduction when the optionee has or had multiple employers during the option term. The absence of authority on these issues may suggest that where their resolution has economic significance, the parties address the issues by contractual provisions allocating the deductions on a mutually consistent basis. In practice, however, such allocations do not appear to be common. Further Information Jones Day Commentaries are a publication of Jones Day and should not be construed as legal advice on any specific facts or circumstances. The contents are for general informational purposes only and may not be quoted or referred to in any other publication or proceeding without the prior written consent of the Firm, to be given or withheld at its discretion. The mailing of this publication is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Please contact your usual Jones Day lawyer or one of the lawyers listed below if we can be of further assistance. Joni Andrioff jlandrioff@jonesday.com Jim Carey jfcarey@jonesday.com John Cornell jrcornell@jonesday.com Dennis Drapkin dbdrapkin@jonesday.com Sarah Griffin sgriffin@jonesday.com Dan Hagen dchagen@jonesday.com Jim Landon jhlandon@jonesday.com Rory Lyons rlyons@jonesday.com Alan Miller asmiller@jonesday.com Ron Rizzo rsrizzo@jonesday.com Legal Minds. Global Intelligence. SM 6
IRS ISSUES PROPOSED REGULATIONS UNDER CODE SECTION 409A COVERING NEW DEFERRED COMPENSATION RULES
IRS ISSUES PROPOSED REGULATIONS UNDER CODE SECTION 409A COVERING NEW DEFERRED COMPENSATION RULES October 17, 2005 TABLE OF CONTENTS A. EFFECTIVE DATE; TRANSITION RULES...1 1. Effective Date of Regulations;
More informationCOMMENTARY JONES DAY. Importantly, the Notice provides generous transitional relief for correcting certain document failures in 2010.
February 2010 JONES DAY COMMENTARY IRS Releases Section 409A Documentary Correction Program Recently issued Notice 2010-6 ( Notice 2010-6 or the Notice ) provides taxpayers with the opportunity to voluntarily
More informationDeferred Compensation Legislation Urgent Need for Guidance
William F. Sweetnam Benefits Tax Counsel Department of the Treasury 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Room 3050 Washington, DC 20220 Re: Deferred Compensation Legislation Urgent Need for Guidance Dear Bill:
More informationCOMMENTARY JONES DAY. Section 409A operates in three steps. First, it identifies compensation it considers nonqualified deferred
February 2006 JONES DAY COMMENTARY Employee Benefits & Executive Compensation Section 409A s Impact on Private Companies Section 409A was added to the Internal Revenue Code in October 2004 to provide strict
More information409A PROPOSED REGULATIONS: MORE GUIDANCE AND LIMITED TRANSITION RELIEF
OCTOBER 18, 2005 VOLUME 1, NUMBER 11 409A PROPOSED REGULATIONS: MORE GUIDANCE AND LIMITED TRANSITION RELIEF The proposed regulations generally extend the plan amendment deadline to December 31, 2006, and
More informationA Revolution in the World of Deferred Compensation
Originally published in: The Tax Executive November 15, 2004 A Revolution in the World of Deferred Compensation By: Norman J. Misher and David E. Kahen I. Introduction On October 22, 2004, President Bush
More informationNONQUALIFIED DEFERRED COMPENSATION & CODE 409A
NONQUALIFIED DEFERRED COMPENSATION & CODE 409A I. REVIEW OF NQDC PRIOR TO CODE 409A A. Nonqualified Deferred Compensation ( NQDC ) Plan - a plan, agreement, or arrangement between an employer and an employee
More informationNew Deferred Compensation Legislation Summary and Action Steps
October 29, 2004 New Deferred Compensation Legislation Summary and Action Steps The House and Senate recently approved far-reaching changes in the federal tax laws that apply to nonqualified deferred compensation
More informationU.S. Tax Advisory. Final section 409A regulations What you need to know and do now
U.S. Tax Advisory. Final section 409A regulations What you need to know and do now On April 10, 2007, the U.S. Treasury Department and Internal Revenue Service issued final regulations under section 409A
More informationLEGAL ALERT. April 13, 2007
LEGAL ALERT April 13, 2007 IRS Issues Final Section 409A Regulations On April 10, 2007, the Treasury Department and the Internal Revenue Service (the IRS) released the final regulations interpreting section
More informationPRESENT LAW. See, e.g., Sproull v. Commissioner, 16 T.C. 244 (1951), aff d per curiam, 194 F.2d 541 (6th Cir. 1952); Rev. Rul , C.B. 174.
706 uct. The report also shall include a discussion of IRS findings regarding the addition of waste products to taxable fuel and any recommendations to address the taxation of such products. The report
More informationExecutive Compensation and Benefits Practice Team October 14, 2004
Client Alert Congress Approves Broad Changes to Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Arrangements Enactment Imminent Executive Compensation and Benefits Practice Team On October 11, 2004, Congress passed
More informationIRS Transition Guidance on Deferred Compensation Legislation
December 30, 2004 IRS Transition Guidance on Deferred Compensation Legislation The IRS recently issued eagerly-awaited preliminary guidance on the rules for nonqualified deferred compensation plans recently
More informationCompensation of Founders and Key Employees of Emerging Companies After The Enactment of Section 409A * Kenneth R. Hoffman Venable LLP Washington, D.C.
Compensation of Founders and Key Employees of Emerging Companies After The Enactment of Section 409A * Kenneth R. Hoffman Venable LLP Washington, D.C. October 21, 2005 The American Jobs Creation Act of
More informationHarris 1. Feedback for Notice (Guidance on the Application of 162(m) 1 ) as of 10/30/2018. NOTICE , SECTION NUMBER Section III.B.
Feedback for Notice 2018-68 (Guidance on the Application of 162(m) 1 ) as of 10/30/2018 Section III.B. Remuneration Provided Pursuant to a Written Binding Contract Clarify that compliance with requirements
More informationIn general. Section 162(m) Committee Reports. Joint Committee on Taxation Report JCX Present Law
Committee Reports COMREP 1621.00048 Special rules for tax treatment of executive compensation of employers participating in the troubled assets relief program. (Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of
More informationIRS Finalizes Regulations Under Section 409A, Finally
April 18, 2007 IRS Finalizes Regulations Under Section 409A, Finally On April 10 th, the IRS issued long-awaited final regulations under Code section 409A. The regulations primarily finalize rules contained
More informationNONQUALIFIED DEFERRED COMPENSATION LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS * FEATURE LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS COMMENTS
NONQUALIFIED DEFERRED COMPENSATION LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS * FEATURE LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS COMMENTS Types of Arrangements Affected The proposals apply broadly to deferred compensation arrangements, including
More informationTHE NONQUALIFIED DEFERRED COMPENSATION ADVISOR 2007 SUPPLEMENT
THE NONQUALIFIED DEFERRED COMPENSATION ADVISOR 2007 SUPPLEMENT PPA Restricts Trusts for Top Executives The Pension Protection Act added new restrictions to IRC Section 409A to prohibit top executives from
More informationAMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE-AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION LIMITED LIABILITY ENTITIES. Presentation on: March 16, 2006
AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE-AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION LIMITED LIABILITY ENTITIES Presentation on: March 16, 2006 NON-QUALIFIED DEFERRED COMPENSATION SECTION 409A AND PARTNERSHIPS John R. Maxfield Holland & Hart
More informationNewly Issued 457(f) Proposed Regulations Clarify Rules for Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Provided by Non-Profit and Governmental Entities
Newly Issued 457(f) Proposed Regulations Clarify Rules for Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Provided by Non-Profit and Governmental Entities J. MARC FOSSE The long-awaited Internal Revenue Service (
More informationNEW YORK STATE BAR ASSOCIATION TAX SECTION REPORT ON TREATMENT OF RESTRICTED STOCK IN CORPORATE REORGANIZATION TRANSACTIONS.
NEW YORK STATE BAR ASSOCIATION TAX SECTION REPORT ON TREATMENT OF RESTRICTED STOCK IN CORPORATE REORGANIZATION TRANSACTIONS October 23, 2003 Report No. 1042 New York State Bar Association Tax Section Report
More informationLegal Updates & News. IRS Issues Final Section 409A Regulations May 2007 by Timothy G. Verrall, Paul Borden, Patrick McCabe.
Legal Updates & News Legal Updates IRS Issues Final Section 409A Regulations May 2007 by Timothy G. Verrall, Paul Borden, Patrick McCabe Related Practices: Tax On April 10, after keeping the executive
More informationSECTION 409A: A NIGHTMARE OF COMPLEXITY
JULY 25, 2007 VOLUME 3, NUMBER 6 SECTION 409A: A NIGHTMARE OF COMPLEXITY In this newsletter, we will first provide a relatively brief, high level outline of the Section 409A rules, after which we will
More informationRecent Developments Affecting Qualified and Nonqualified Deferred Compensation, Part I: New Proposed Regulations
PRACTICE POINT Recent Developments Affecting Qualified and Nonqualified Deferred Compensation, Part I: New Proposed Regulations By David Pratt, Professor of Law, Albany Law School, Albany, NY There have
More informationGetting Up to Speed on the Final Regulations for Deferred Compensation
Where published May-June 2007 THE TAX EXECUTIVE Getting Up to Speed on the Final Regulations for Deferred Compensation By: Norman J. Misher and David E. Kahen S ection 409A of the Internal Revenue Code
More informationPart I. Rulings and Decisions Under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986
This document is referenced in an endnote at the Bradford Tax Institute. CLICK HERE to go to the home page. Part I. Rulings and Decisions Under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 Section 42. Low-Income
More informationSection 280G. Golden Parachute Payments T.D DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Internal Revenue Service 26 CFR Parts 1. Golden Parachute Payments
DATES: Effective Date: August 4, 2003. These regulations apply to any payment that is contingent on a change in ownership or control if the change in ownership or control occurs on or after January 1,
More informationINVESTMENT FUNDS ALERT
October 15, 2004 INVESTMENT FUNDS ALERT NEW LEGISLATION RELATING TO NONQUALIFIED DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLANS Congress has passed, and President Bush is expected to sign into law, the American Jobs Creation
More informationAdvanced Markets Because You Asked
Advanced Markets Because You Asked June 2007 Answers to Questions Frequently Asked of the Advanced Markets Group The Impact of Section 409A on Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Plans Advanced Markets
More informationExecutive compensation ramifications of proposed Tax Cuts and Jobs Act
THOMSON REUTERS Executive compensation ramifications of proposed Tax Cuts and Jobs Act By Lori D. Goodman, Esq., Rifka M. Singer, Esq., Max Raskin, Esq., Jordan S. Salzman, Esq., and James I. Robinson,
More informationFoley & Lardner LLP. May 13, :00 p.m. 2:00 p.m. EST
Attorney Advertising Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome Models used are not clients but may be representative of clients 321 N. Clark Street, Suite 2800, Chicago, IL 60610 312.832.4500 Foley
More informationPart III. Administrative, Procedural, and Miscellaneous
Part III. Administrative, Procedural, and Miscellaneous Guidance Under 409A of the Internal Revenue Code Notice 2005 1 I. Purpose and Overview Section 885 of the recently enacted American Jobs Creation
More informationTake Stock of Estate Planning Strategies for Options
Take Stock of Estate Planning Strategies for Options Publication: Practical Tax Strategies Stock options are no longer a perquisite reserved solely for corporate management and key employees. From closely
More informationDeferred Compensation
Deferred Compensation Concept A non-qualified deferred compensation plan is an agreement between an employer and an executive to defer the payment and receipt of compensation to the future for services
More informationFrederic W. Cook & Co., Inc.
Frederic W. Cook & Co., Inc. New York Chicago Los Angeles February 28, 2005 Action Items in Response to IRS Guidance on Deferred Compensation Elections, Amendments, Cancellations and Terminations in 2005
More informationTAX PRACTICE. tax notes. IRS Rules Increasing Annuity Payments Subject to Penalty Tax. By Mark E. Griffin
IRS Rules Increasing Annuity Payments Subject to Penalty Tax By Mark E. Griffin Mark E. Griffin is a partner at Davis & Harman LLP. Previously, Griffin served as an attorney-adviser at the U.S. Tax Court
More informationIn October 2004, the American Jobs Creation Act
Long-Awaited Final Regulations Under Code Sec. 409A Are Issued As Transition Relief Nears an End * By David G. Johnson and Elizabeth Buchbinder ** Dave Johnson and Elizabeth Buchbinder discuss the new
More informationExecutive Compensation, Employee Benefits and ERISA Alert
Executive Compensation, Employee Benefits and ERISA Alert November 8, 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act On November 2, 2017, the Committee on Ways and Means of the U.S. House of Representatives released its tax
More informationFinal Golden Parachute Regulations Issued
T O O U R F R I E N D S A N D C L I E N T S August 8, 2003 Final Golden Parachute Regulations Issued The Internal Revenue Service has issued final regulations under Section 280G of the Internal Revenue
More informationLEGAL ALERT. September 14, IRS Provides Limited Relief and Additional Guidance Under Code Section 409A
LEGAL ALERT September 14, 2007 IRS Provides Limited Relief and Additional Guidance Under Code Section 409A On September 10, 2007, Treasury and the IRS released Notice 2007-78 (the Notice ), providing limited
More informationMakes permanent the provisions of EGTRRA that relate to retirement plans and IRAs. Makes the Saver s Credit permanent.
Leading Proposals Affecting Defined Contribution and Other Retirement Arrangements (Other Than Pension Funding and Hybrid Plan Proposals) [Note: Includes discussion of H.R. 1000, which passed the House
More informationClient Alert. New Tax Law Will Require Substantial Changes to Many Non-Qualified Deferred Compensation Arrangements.
October 19, 2004 Client Alert An informational newsletter from Goodwin Procter LLP New Tax Law Will Require Substantial Changes to Many Non-Qualified Deferred Compensation Arrangements Employers must take
More informationRecent Developments for Sections 409A and 457: Proposed Regulations and Chief Counsel Memorandum
CLIENT MEMORANDUM Recent Developments for Sections 409A and 457: Proposed Regulations and Chief Counsel Memorandum September 6, 2017 Earlier this summer, the Office of the Chief Counsel of the Internal
More informationReal Estate INSIGHT: The Taxation of Commercial Real Estate Collateralized Loan Obligations
Daily Tax Report July 23, 2018 Real Estate INSIGHT: The Taxation of Commercial Real Estate Collateralized Loan Obligations BNA Snapshot Jason Schwartz, Gary Silverstein, and Daniel Ng of Cadwalader, Wickersham
More informationINITIAL GUIDANCE ON NEW DEFERRED COMPENSATION RULES
CLIENT MEMORANDUM INITIAL GUIDANCE ON NEW DEFERRED COMPENSATION RULES The Treasury has issued initial guidance under Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code. Section 409A, added to the Code as part of
More informationIRS ATTEMPTS TO SHUT THE DOOR ON CONTROVERSIAL OPTION DEDUCTION ISSUE WITH PROPOSED REVISIONS TO NEXT DAY RULE REGULATION
COMPENSATION & FRINGE BENEFITS IRS ATTEMPTS TO SHUT THE DOOR ON CONTROVERSIAL OPTION DEDUCTION ISSUE WITH PROPOSED REVISIONS TO NEXT DAY RULE REGULATION ANNE BATTER AND KAI KRAMER On March 5, 2015, Treasury
More information12 Separation Pay Arrangements
12 Separation Pay Arrangements Joseph M. Yaffe Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP I. Introduction... II. Key Separation Pay Concepts... A. Separation Pay Plan... B. Separation Pay... C. Window Program...
More informationNew IRS Guidance On Deferred Compensation
October 2005 New IRS Guidance On Deferred Compensation The IRS has issued long-awaited Proposed Regulations under new Internal Revenue Code Section 409A, relating to non-qualified deferred compensation.
More informationOpportunity Zone Funds Offer New Tax Incentive for Long-Term Investment in Low-Income Communities
08 / 01 / 18 If you have any questions regarding the matters discussed in this memorandum, please contact the attorneys listed on the last page or call your regular Skadden contact. The Tax Cuts and Jobs
More informationSEC ADOPTS A RADICALLY DIFFERENT RULE 16b-3
August 2, 1996 SEC ADOPTS A RADICALLY DIFFERENT RULE 16b-3 On May 31, 1996, the SEC adopted a new Rule 16b-3 1 (New Rule) which does not differ significantly from the rule change proposed this past October.
More informationStock Options & Restricted Stock
Stock Options & Restricted Stock By Charles A. Wry, Jr. mbbp.com @MorseBarnes Boston, MA Cambridge, MA Waltham, MA mbbp.com CityPoint 230 Third Avenue, 4th Floor Waltham, MA 02451 781-622-5930 mbbp.com
More informationAMERICAN JOBS CREATION ACT OF 2004
AMERICAN JOBS CREATION ACT OF 2004 OCTOBER 26, 2004 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page REPEAL OF EXCLUSION FOR EXTRATERRITORIAL INCOME AND DEDUCTIONS FOR DOMESTIC PRODUCTION ACTIVITIES... 1 TAX SHELTERS... 2 Information
More informationTax Reform: Comparison of House and Senate Versions of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (H.R. 1)
December 5, 2017 Tax Reform: Comparison of House and Senate Versions of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (H.R. 1) Modification of Non- Discrimination Rules Retirement Provisions If an employer closes a DB plan
More informationEX-10.Z(1) 6 dex10z1.htm AMENDED AND RESTATED 2009 ALCOA STOCK INCENTIVE PLAN Exhibit 10.Z(1)
EX-10.Z(1) 6 dex10z1.htm AMENDED AND RESTATED 2009 ALCOA STOCK INCENTIVE PLAN Exhibit 10.Z(1) AMENDED AND RESTATED 2009 ALCOA STOCK INCENTIVE PLAN Adopted May 8, 2009; Amended February 15, 2011 SECTION
More informationAMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION. Technical Session Between the SEC Staff and the Joint Committee on Employee Benefits. Questions and Answers.
AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION Technical Session Between the SEC Staff and the Joint Committee on Employee Benefits Questions and Answers May 8, 2007 The following questions and answers are based on informal
More informationINCENTIVE COMPENSATION ARRANGEMENTS. William C. Staley Attorney (818)
INCENTIVE COMPENSATION ARRANGEMENTS William C. Staley Attorney www.staleylaw.com (818) 936-3490 Pasadena Discussion Group Los Angeles Chapter CALIFORNIA SOCIETY OF CPAS June 20, 2005 11057.DOC William
More informationDeferred Compensation for Dummies: The Section 409A Compliance Clock is Ticking
Deferred Compensation for Dummies: The Section 409A Compliance Clock is Ticking OCTOBER 17, 2008 PUBLICATIONS Most of us involved in the practice of law are familiar with the benefits of tax deferral.
More informationCertified Equity Professional Institute
Exam Overview Webinars Certified Equity Professional Institute L2 Exam Overview Webinar Taxation Certified Equity Professional Institute 2011 http://cepi.scu.edu The information presented herein is of
More informationAn Update on Implementation of New Management Contract Safe Harbors for Property Financed with Tax-Exempt Bonds
An Update on Implementation of New Management Contract Safe Harbors for Property Financed with Tax-Exempt Bonds (Rev. Proc. 2017-13) Michael G. Bailey Foley & Lardner LLP An Update on Implementation of
More informationCOMMENTARY. Update on Qualified Small Business Stock: New Federal Legislation and Status of California Rules JONES DAY
March 2013 JONES DAY COMMENTARY Update on Qualified Small Business Stock: New Federal Legislation and Status of California Rules Eligible investors in qualified small businesses are entitled to certain
More informationGeneral Information for 401k Plan Sponsor
General Information for 401k Plan Sponsor Welcome to our 401k Guide for the Plan Sponsor! The information contained on this site was designed and developed by various governmental agencies, and compiled
More informationWhite Paper: Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Plans
White Paper: Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Plans www.selectportfolio.com Toll Free 800.445.9822 Tel 949.975.7900 Fax 949.900.8181 Securities offered through Securities Equity Group Member FINRA, SIPC,
More informationSUMMARY PLAN DESCRIPTION PIXAR Employee's 401(k) Retirement Plan
SUMMARY PLAN DESCRIPTION PIXAR Employee's 401(k) Retirement Plan This information is not intended to be a substitute for specific individualized tax, legal, or investment planning advice. Where specific
More informationINTRODUCTION. Penalties waived until 6/30/15? Description of Payment/Reimbursement Arrangement: Employer with 50 or more FTEs
The purpose of this publication is to present highly focused information on the healthcare reimbursement aspects of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) based on the information available as of the date of this
More informationPractising Law Institute ERISA: The Evolving World 2014 An Introduction to Executive Compensation/ Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Plans/SERPs
Practising Law Institute ERISA: The Evolving World 2014 An Introduction to Executive Compensation/ Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Plans/SERPs August 4, 2014 Regina Olshan Charmaine L. Slack Introduction
More informationNewly Issued Code Section 457(f) Proposed Regulations Offer Clarity and New Opportunities in Designing Executive Compensation
A P R O F E S S I O N A L C O R P O R A T I O N ERISA AND EMPLOYEE BENEFITS ATTORNEYS Newly Issued Code Section 457(f) Proposed Regulations Offer Clarity and New Opportunities in Designing Executive Compensation
More informationCode Section 409A: Revisiting the Basics
409A Basics A Webinar Series Code Section 409A: Revisiting the Basics Presenters: Althea R. Day Daniel L. Hogans Leslie E. DuPuy www.morganlewis.com March 29, 2012 Section 409A Background The American
More informationStandards of Services in Tax Matters for Business Taxpayers
Standards of Services in Tax Matters for Business Taxpayers In the course of delivering tax services to our clients or to third parties (you), BST & Co. CPAs, LLP (we or us) applies customary practices
More informationGlobal Employer Rewards. Nonqualified Deferred Compensation: The Effect of Section 409A Now and in the Future
Global Employer Rewards Nonqualified Deferred Compensation: The Effect of Section 409A Now and in the Future 1 Contents Introduction...1 Section 409A: Overview...2 Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Plans:
More informationPublic companies will need to identify specified employees in advance in order to comply with document requirements.
Final Deferred Compensation Regulations On April 10, 2007, the IRS issued its long-anticipated Final Regulations governing deferred compensation plans under Code Section 409A ( 409A ). The Final Regulations
More informationDefined Contribution Plan Issues In Pension Reform Legislation
Defined Contribution Plan Issues In Pension Reform Legislation The pending pension reform legislation contains critical reforms of the rules relating to defined benefit plan funding, hybrid plans, and
More informationUse of Corporate Partner Stock and Options to Compensate Service Partners -- Part 2. by: Sheldon I. Banoff
Use of Corporate Partner Stock and Options to Compensate Service Partners -- Part 2 by: Sheldon I. Banoff As described in the first part of this article, 1 key executives of partnerships in which a corporation
More informationTax Reform: Comparison of House, Senate and Conference Report Versions of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (H.R. 1)
December 19, 2017 Tax Reform: Comparison of House, Senate and Conference Report Versions of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (H.R. 1) Provision Current Law House Version Senate Version Conference Report Retirement
More informationKIRKLAND ALERT Tax Cuts and Jobs Act Would Affect Compensation Plans and Arrangements. Attorney Advertising
KIRKLAND ALERT November 8, 2017 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act Would Affect Compensation Plans and Arrangements On November 2, 2017, the House Ways and Means Committee unveiled the first draft of the Tax Cuts
More informationNEW YORK STATE BAR ASSOCIATION TAX SECTION
Report No. 1336 NEW YORK STATE BAR ASSOCIATION TAX SECTION REPORT ON NOTICE 2015-54, TRANSFERS OF PROPERTY TO PARTNERSHIPS WITH RELATED FOREIGN PARTNERS AND CONTROLLED TRANSACTIONS INVOLVING PARTNERSHIPS
More informationExecutive Benefits for ESOP Owned S Corporations Post IRC Secs. 409A and 409(p)
Journal of Financial Service Professionals May 2007 Executive Benefits for ESOP Owned S Corporations Post IRC Secs. 409A and 409(p) Daniel M. Zugell, CLU, ChFC, LUTCF Pete Shuler Fred H. Thomas Abstract:
More informationDenny s Corporation. Shares of Common Stock offered under the Denny s Corporation 2008 Omnibus Incentive Plan
PROSPECTUS Denny s Corporation Shares of Common Stock offered under the Denny s Corporation 2008 Omnibus Incentive Plan This prospectus relates to shares of common stock of Denny s Corporation (the Company
More informationCLX COMMUNICATIONS AB 2018 SERIES 4-6 STOCK OPTION PLAN
CLX COMMUNICATIONS AB 2018 SERIES 4-6 STOCK OPTION PLAN Article 1. Establishment & Purpose 1.1 Establishment. CLX Communications AB (the Company ), hereby establishes the 2018 Series 4-6 Stock Option Plan
More informationIRS Issues Long-Awaited Proposed Regulations under Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code
IRS Issues Long-Awaited Proposed Regulations under Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code NOVEMBER 11, 2005 Background Code Section 409A On September 29, 2005, the Internal Revenue Service ( IRS ) and
More informationNONQUALIFIED DEFERRED COMPENSATION: THE EFFECT OF THE NEW RULES NOW AND IN THE FUTURE
NONQUALIFIED DEFERRED COMPENSATION: THE EFFECT OF THE NEW RULES NOW AND IN THE FUTURE By Deloitte Tax LLP This special report was authored by Deborah Walker, partner (former deputy to the benefits tax
More informationConference Agreement on the "Tax Cuts and Jobs Act" includes significant executive compensation and employee benefits provisions
December 20, 2017 Conference Agreement on the "Tax Cuts and Jobs Act" includes significant executive compensation and employee benefits provisions This Alert highlights the changes in tax law related to
More informationBack to Basics: Taxation
The 10th Annual New England NASPP Regional Conference co-hosted by the Boston and Connecticut NASPP Chapters July 11 th, 2018 Agenda 1. General Introduction to Concepts Related to Equity Compensation 2.
More informationInterim Final Rule on TARP Standards for Compensation and Corporate Governance
June 15, 2009 Effective Date June 26, 2009 Interim Final Rule on TARP Standards for Compensation and Corporate Governance New Compensation Restrictions Imposed Appointment of Special Master to Review and
More informationCompensating Owners and Key Employees of Partnerships and LLC's
College of William & Mary Law School William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository William & Mary Annual Tax Conference Conferences, Events, and Lectures 2013 Compensating Owners and Key Employees of
More informationAMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION. Technical Session Between the SEC Staff and the Joint Committee on Employee Benefits. Questions and Answers.
AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION Technical Session Between the SEC Staff and the Joint Committee on Employee Benefits Questions and Answers May 6, 2003 The following questions and answers are based on informal
More informationWays & Means Committee Draft ( W&M Draft )
General The United States House of Representatives released on November 2, 2017. The House Committee on Ways & Means released its W&M on November 10, 2017 and the W&M was later approved by the House of
More informationTHIS DOCUMENT CONSTITUTES PART OF A PROSPECTUS COVERING SECURITIES THAT HAVE BEEN REGISTERED UNDER THE SECURITIES ACT OF BGC PARTNERS, INC.
THIS DOCUMENT CONSTITUTES PART OF A PROSPECTUS COVERING SECURITIES THAT HAVE BEEN REGISTERED UNDER THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933. BGC PARTNERS, INC. SECOND AMENDED AND RESTATED LONG TERM INCENTIVE PLAN To:
More informationProspectus. Alcoa Corporation. Common Stock. Alcoa Corporation 2016 Stock Incentive Plan (As Amended and Restated)
Prospectus Alcoa Corporation Common Stock Alcoa Corporation 2016 Stock Incentive Plan (As Amended and Restated) This prospectus relates to shares of common stock, par value $0.01 per share (the Common
More informationSTATEMENT OF MANAGERS REVENUE PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN THE CONFERENCE REPORT (H. REPT ) TO ACCOMPANY H.R RELATING TO
STATEMENT OF MANAGERS ON REVENUE PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN THE CONFERENCE REPORT (H. REPT. 106-478) TO ACCOMPANY H.R. 1180 RELATING TO EXTENSION OF EXPIRED AND EXPIRING TAX PROVISIONS, AND OTHER TAX PROVISIONS
More informationExecutives and Others Face Tough Tax Liability Unless Deferred Compensation Deals Timely Updated For New Internal Revenue Code Section 409A Compliance
Executives and Others Face Tough Tax Liability Unless Deferred Compensation Deals Timely Updated For New Internal Revenue Code Section 409A Compliance By Cynthia Marcotte Stamer American businesses and
More informationREVISED TAX SHELTER REGULATIONS
REVISED TAX SHELTER REGULATIONS FEBRUARY 20, 2004 SIMPSON THACHER & BARTLETT LLP REVISED TAX SHELTER REGULATIONS TABLE OF CONTENTS Page TAX SHELTER DISCLOSURE STATEMENTS... 2 PARTICIPATION IN REPORTABLE
More informationExecutive Compensation & Employee Benefits July 30, 2004
Planning Should Begin Now To Prepare For Changes To Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Arrangements Under Legislative Proposals Executive Compensation & Employee Benefits Both the Senate and the House
More informationNuts & Bolts of Section 409A: Practical Issues to Consider in Every Practice
Nuts & Bolts of Section 409A: Practical Issues to Consider in Every Practice June 9, 2016 Sponsored by the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits and the American College of Employee Benefits Counsel
More informationFrederic W. Cook & Co., Inc. IRS Issues Long-Awaited Proposed Regulations on Golden Parachute Payments
Frederic W. Cook & Co., Inc. New York Chicago Los Angeles April 8, 2002 IRS Issues Long-Awaited Proposed Regulations on Golden Parachute Payments Overview On February 19, 2002, the Internal Revenue Service
More informationGlossary. 701(g)(3) Account Certification (Activation) 144K. Alternate Identification. Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT)
Glossary 144 SEC Rule 144 is a means by which restricted and control securities may be sold in compliance with federal law and regulations. Rule 144 requirements depend on who owns the security, the length
More informationTAX MEMORANDUM. CPAs, Clients & Associates. David L. Silverman, Esq. Shirlee Aminoff, Esq. DATE: April 2, Attorney-Client Privilege
LAW OFFICES DAVID L. SILVERMAN, J.D., LL.M. 2001 MARCUS AVENUE LAKE SUCCESS, NEW YORK 11042 (516) 466-5900 SILVERMAN, DAVID L. TELECOPIER (516) 437-7292 NYTAXATTY@AOL.COM AMINOFF, SHIRLEE AMINOFFS@GMAIL.COM
More informationMunicipal Finance Post-Issuance Legal Compliance
Municipal Finance Post-Issuance Legal Compliance Erin McCrady, Partner Dorsey & Whitney LLP Montana League of Cities and Towns Annual Conference September 28, 2017 Post-Issuance Legal Compliance The municipal
More informationTreasury Issues TARP Guidance on Compensation and Corporate Governance
Frederic W. Cook & Co., Inc. New York Chicago Los Angeles San Francisco Atlanta June 18, 2009 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Treasury Issues TARP Guidance on Compensation and Corporate Governance On June 15, 2009,
More informationBack to Basics: Taxation
The 10th Annual New England NASPP Regional Conference co-hosted by the Boston and Connecticut NASPP Chapters July 11 th, 2018 Agenda 1. General Introduction to Tax Law Related to Equity Compensation 2.
More information