Internal Revenue Code
Subscribe to Internal Revenue Code's Posts

View From McDermott: Fifth Circuit Focuses on Process in ESOP Valuations

Though the Supreme Court’s 2014 unanimous ruling in Fifth Third Bank v. Dudenhoeffer announced the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) standards for stock valuation in the context of a large public employee stock ownership plan (ESOP), the vast majority of ESOPs are still grappling with valuation issues. ESOPs that hold stock of closely-held corporations—approximately 90% of all ESOPs— remain almost unaffected by Dudenhoeffer’s valuation discussions, and face continued scrutiny by the Department of Labor (DOL). Appraisal of closely-held stock is an inexact science that involves an inherent level of uncertainty in assessing a variety of potential fact patterns.

This article summarizes valuation issues in acquisitions of closely-held corporation stock by ESOPs in the context of Perez v. Bruister, a recently decided Fifth Circuit case. The case stressed the importance of ‘‘process’’ in valuation determinations being utilized for acquisitions of a corporation’s stock by an ESOP. In reviewing the case, this article provides a detail of the process that should be followed to ensure consideration of the appropriate factors by fiduciaries in reviewing valuations for ESOP transactions. The article concludes with a discussion of guidance provided by the court in Bruister that may be instructive as to best practices for ESOP fiduciaries charged with establishing the value to be used by an ESOP holding shares of stock of a private company.

View full report.




read more

IRS Provides New 409A Guidance: New Proposed Regulations Provide Additional Clarity, Warn of Abusive Practices and Present Planning Opportunities

On June 21, 2016 the IRS issued proposed regulations to modify and clarify existing regulations under Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code. Many of these changes resulted from practitioner comments and the IRS’ experience with Section 409A after issuing the final regulations. Overall, most of the proposed changes are favorable, and may provide some planning opportunities.

Read the full article. 




read more

IRS Issues Regulations Affecting Compensation Arrangements at Tax-Exempt Organizations

On June 21, the IRS issued long awaited proposed regulations under Section 457 of the Internal Revenue Code that affect a broad range of compensation arrangements at tax exempt organizations. If a compensation arrangement is subject to Section 457(f), the employee is immediately taxed upon earning a vested right to receive “deferred compensation” that might not be paid until years later. These regulations address important issues under Section 457(f) that were identified by the IRS back in 2007, including whether severance pay is subject to Section 457(f), if changes to a vesting schedule could delay when deferred compensation is taxable and if covenants not to compete would be respected as bona fide vesting conditions

A severance pay arrangement will be treated as deferred compensation under Section 457(f) under the proposed regulations unless (1) the total amount of severance pay is limited to two times total annual compensation; (2) payments are completed within two full calendar years following termination of employment; and (3) the events triggering the right to severance pay are limited to a bona fide involuntary termination, which may include certain types of “good reason” terminations of employment by an employee and failure to renew an employment agreement.

There have been questions as to whether vesting conditions imposed after a compensation arrangement has been established will be respected for tax purposes. In that event, the time for income taxation under Section 457(f) is delayed until the new vesting requirement is met. If certain requirements are met, the proposed regulations provide that additional vesting conditions will be taken into account when determining the time of taxation under Section 457. These conditions include that the deferred amount subject to a new vesting date has to be more than 25 percent greater than the old amount with the former vesting date, the delay in vesting has to be at least two years (except in the case of death, disability or a qualifying involuntary termination), and the change in vesting is entered into sufficiently in advance of the original vesting date under special timing rules.

The proposed regulations also allow for noncompetes to be used as vesting conditions under Section 457(f), but only if:

  • The right to payment is expressly conditioned on satisfying the noncompete;
  • The noncompete has to be evidenced by an enforceable written agreement between the employer and employee;
  • The employer has to make reasonable ongoing efforts to verify compliance with the noncompete;
  • When the noncompete agreement becomes binding, the facts and circumstances have to show that both the ability to compete and the harm of competition are genuine and substantial;
  • The noncompete must be enforceable under applicable law; and
  • The employer must show that the likelihood of enforcement of the noncompete is substantial.

There had been concern that the IRS might not allow any form of noncompete to be a substantial risk of forfeiture under Section 457(f).

These regulations are generally scheduled to go into effect as of January 1 of the calendar year after being finalized. These rule [...]

Continue Reading




read more

IRS Regulations Provide That Certain Employees of Partnerships Now Have Self-Employment Status for Employee Benefit and Tax Purposes

The IRS and US Department of Treasury have issued final and temporary regulations which address benefit and self-employment tax issues regarding partners in a partnership which is the sole owner of a second, wholly owned legal entity. The regulations are intended to clarify that where the partners are separately working for the second legal entity, such individuals may not be treated as employees, and must be treated as self-employed individuals for both self-employment and employee benefit plan purposes.  As a result, the partners may not be provided the tax benefits provided employees with respect to benefit plans such as cafeteria plans, parking and transit benefits, health benefits and health insurance.

Read the full article.




read more

View From McDermott: Conduct Regular Reviews to Ensure Compliance with FICA Tax Withholding Rules

Sponsors of nonqualified deferred compensation plans should pay close attention to the special tax withholding rules under the Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA) to avoid paying interest and penalties, and potentially being sued by plan participants. FICA tax on nonqualified deferred compensation must be withheld when compensation vests, not later when actually paid out. Failure to withhold FICA tax at the time of vesting will cause the compensation plus any earnings to be subject to FICA tax later as it is distributed to the participant, potentially resulting in higher overall FICA taxes for both the employer and the participant. As shown by the case of Davidson v. Henkel, employees may even successfully sue the employer for causing them to receive lower benefits due to the higher tax burden created by a failure to follow the correct withholding rules.

This article explores the common FICA and Additional Medicare Tax withholding errors and the potential remedies that may be available to employers who fail to timely withhold FICA and/or Additional Medicare Tax on nonqualified deferred compensation.

Read the full article.




read more

Cadillac Tax Delayed to January 1, 2020; Extension of ACA Health Plan Information Reporting Due Dates

Recent year-end delays to important Affordable Care Act requirements have given employers and other stakeholders much needed reprieve. President Obama signed into law a two-year delay of the Cadillac Tax on December 18, 2015.

This two-year delay is part of Congress’s $1.8 trillion omnibus spending deal, the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016. In addition, the IRS recently announced a delay in health information reporting requirements for 2015 Forms 1094 and 1095.

Read the full article.




read more

Employers Need 2015 Year-End Planning to Meet Employee Reporting and Withholding Requirements

To avoid tax reporting and withholding penalties as 2015 draws to a close, employers need to properly plan and check their reporting for employees under non-qualified deferred compensation, fringe benefits, health benefits or other remuneration. Year-end planning for employers is important, because employee information reporting, including both Form W-2 and the new Affordable Care Act (ACA) Forms, is now subject to significantly increased penalties.

Read the full article.




read more

BLOG EDITORS

STAY CONNECTED

TOPICS

ARCHIVES

Top ranked chambers 2022
US leading firm 2022