10-K
8-K
Friday, February 27, 2009
Friday, February 13, 2009
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
IRS Undecided About 409A Document Correction Program
Persons will document failures would be in better position to amend that Persons in compliance.
"Catherine Creech, principal, Ernst & Young LLP, Washington, D.C., who moderated the program, noted that a plan failure is not technically a violation of Code Sec. 409A if all of the deferred amounts are nonvested. Tackney responded that there is technically a violation, but that nothing is included in income, so there are not tax consequences. He indicated that the plan could be corrected in the current year if the nonvested amounts will not vest until a later year.
Morrison contrasted Code Sec. 409A with Code Sec. 457A . Under the latter provision, deferred amounts are not taxable if the amount is not determinable, she said. For example, an amount payable under a formula based on future profits might be vested but not taxable until the formula is applied. However, under Code Sec. 409A , the taxable amounts have to be estimated, if necessary, in the case of a violation. She said that this treatment reflects a congressional stance that does not favor nonqualified deferred compensation plans and requires inclusion at the earliest time."
"Catherine Creech, principal, Ernst & Young LLP, Washington, D.C., who moderated the program, noted that a plan failure is not technically a violation of Code Sec. 409A if all of the deferred amounts are nonvested. Tackney responded that there is technically a violation, but that nothing is included in income, so there are not tax consequences. He indicated that the plan could be corrected in the current year if the nonvested amounts will not vest until a later year.
Morrison contrasted Code Sec. 409A with Code Sec. 457A . Under the latter provision, deferred amounts are not taxable if the amount is not determinable, she said. For example, an amount payable under a formula based on future profits might be vested but not taxable until the formula is applied. However, under Code Sec. 409A , the taxable amounts have to be estimated, if necessary, in the case of a violation. She said that this treatment reflects a congressional stance that does not favor nonqualified deferred compensation plans and requires inclusion at the earliest time."
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
More Dismay from 457A
Unanswered Questions Abound - From D&T
"Notice 2009-8 provides helpful information on compliance with IRC § 457A. Application of this section in practice, however, may be complicated for multinational corporations with operations and subsidiaries in different jurisdictions, including corporations that have a US corporation as the parent entity, and for tiered partnerships."
"Notice 2009-8 provides helpful information on compliance with IRC § 457A. Application of this section in practice, however, may be complicated for multinational corporations with operations and subsidiaries in different jurisdictions, including corporations that have a US corporation as the parent entity, and for tiered partnerships."
Thursday, February 5, 2009
Law Prof Blasts 409A - Should be Scuttled
Supports Curbs on CEO "Pirates" - But 409A Misses the Mark - Hurts All Except CEOs
Article Here
"The Pirates Will Party On! The Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Rules Will Not Prevent CEOs from Acting Like Plundering Pirates and Should Be Scuttled." William A. Drennan, Southern Illinois University School of Law
Abstract
The government went off course when it attempted to stop outrageous CEO compensation schemes with new income tax rules on nonqualfied deferred compensation. IRC Section 409A should be scuttled.
Suggested Citation
William A. Drennan. 2008. "The Pirates Will Party On! The Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Rules Will Not Prevent CEOs from Acting Like Plundering Pirates and Should Be Scuttled"
"CEOs and their sidekicks resemble swashbuckling pirates emptying the coffers of vulnerable prey. Although some argue that CEOs, like professional athletes, must be worth their compensation or corporations would not pay it, structural deficiencies at publicly held corporations impede natural market forces. A Delaware Chancery Court judge stated, “executive compensation seems . . . to have come spectacularly unhinged from the market for corporate talent.”"
Article Here
"The Pirates Will Party On! The Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Rules Will Not Prevent CEOs from Acting Like Plundering Pirates and Should Be Scuttled." William A. Drennan, Southern Illinois University School of Law
Abstract
The government went off course when it attempted to stop outrageous CEO compensation schemes with new income tax rules on nonqualfied deferred compensation. IRC Section 409A should be scuttled.
Suggested Citation
William A. Drennan. 2008. "The Pirates Will Party On! The Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Rules Will Not Prevent CEOs from Acting Like Plundering Pirates and Should Be Scuttled"
"CEOs and their sidekicks resemble swashbuckling pirates emptying the coffers of vulnerable prey. Although some argue that CEOs, like professional athletes, must be worth their compensation or corporations would not pay it, structural deficiencies at publicly held corporations impede natural market forces. A Delaware Chancery Court judge stated, “executive compensation seems . . . to have come spectacularly unhinged from the market for corporate talent.”"
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
409A Does Not Require A Professional Valuation
Internal valuation is permitted, although the burden of evidence shifts.
"That is not to say that an independent appraisal may not be advisable or worthwhile. In fact, if done in the manner specified in the final regulations, a valuation will create a presumption that the valuation of the stock reflects the fair market value of the stock, which presumption is only rebuttable by a showing that the valuation is grossly unreasonably."
"That is not to say that an independent appraisal may not be advisable or worthwhile. In fact, if done in the manner specified in the final regulations, a valuation will create a presumption that the valuation of the stock reflects the fair market value of the stock, which presumption is only rebuttable by a showing that the valuation is grossly unreasonably."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)