Printer Friendly
The Free Library
14,504,694 articles and books
Member login
User name  
Password 
 
Join us Forgot password?

IRS rules INDOPCO does not require employee bonuses be capitalized.


The employer in Letter Ruling (TAM) 9527005 underwent a leveraged buyout leveraged buyout, the takeover of a company, financed by borrowed funds. Often, the target company's assets are used as security for the loans acquired to finance the purchase.  (LBO LBO

See: Leveraged buyout


LBO

See leveraged buyout (LBO).
). As a result of the LBO, employees were forced to exercise outstanding incentive stock options (ISOs). Because the employees' ISO (1) See ISO speed.

(2) (International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland, www.iso.ch) An organization that sets international standards, founded in 1946. The U.S. member body is ANSI.
 stock was immediately cashed out as part of the LBO, they suffered "disqualifying dispositions" of their stock, causing them to be taxed on the option spread as ordinary income rather than as capital gains (which would have been the case had they held their stock for one to two years after exercise of the option). Consequently, the employer gave bonuses to affected employees to cover any extra taxes. On audit, an IRS An abbreviation for the Internal Revenue Service, a federal agency charged with the responsibility of administering and enforcing internal revenue laws.  field agent took the position that the employer had to capitalize the bonus payments because they were related to the LBO. The agent relied on INDOPCO, 112 Sup. Ct. 1039 (1992), in which the Supreme Court held that professional fees incurred as part of a friendly takeover Friendly takeover

Merger when the target firm's management and board of directors is in favor of the takeover. Antithesis of hostile takeover.


friendly takeover 
 must be capitalized because of the significant longerm benefits of the business combination. The IRS National Office declined to apply INDOPCO to the employee bonuses. Rather, the Service ruled that the payments were deductible because they arose from a longstanding employer-employee relationship. The IRS position in this ruling is similar to sits position in Letter Ruling (TAM) 9326001, which held that golden parachute golden parachute, a contract given to top executives of a corporation to provide benefits in case of job loss due to a takeover by another firm or a merger. The unusually generous benefits may include substantial severance pay, a one-time bonus payment when  payments did not have to be capitalized as part 6of the merger that triggered the payments; they arose from a long-standing employment relationship and did not have their origin in the merger.

From Barbara J. Young, J.D. Washington, D.C.
COPYRIGHT 1995 American Institute of CPA's
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 1995, Gale Group. All rights reserved. Gale Group is a Thomson Corporation Company.

 Reader Opinion

Title:

Comment:



 

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:Young, Barbara J.
Publication:The Tax Adviser
Article Type:Brief Article
Date:Nov 1, 1995
Words:255
Previous Article:Passive loss relief for real estate professionals.
Next Article:Tax Court upholds 1978 regulations on calculating the bad debt deduction.(Brief Article)
Topics:



Related Articles
Bonus payments to key employees required to sell ISO stock not capitalized. (incentive stock options)
Capitalization of just-in-time manufacturing implementation costs.
Notice 96-7: request for comments on further capitalization guidance.
Acquisition-related compensation not capitalized under INDOPCO.
Life after INDOPCO: are business expansion costs deductible?
INDOPCO and the tax treatment of reorganization costs.
Rev. Rul. 96-62: a lump of coal or a nicely wrapped present?
Current deductibility of training costs.
Removal costs held deductible.(depreciable assets)
Proposed guidance on capitalization.(Treasury Department advance notice of proposed rulemaking)

Terms of use | Copyright © 2009 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters | Submit articles