Tax Benefit, Burden or Break Even?
What happens when a VC requires a vesting reset of Founder Stock?
When raising a priced round, venture capitalists (“VCs”) often require founders to reset the vesting of their Founder Stock in order to incentivize founders to continue building the company.
For most high-growth companies, the founders receive their shares at or shortly after the time of incorporation at a very low price (e.g., $0.00001 per share) and, typically, subject to a 4-year vesting schedule with a 1-year cliff.
Because founders receive their shares at such a low price, they are often encouraged to file an 83(b) election with the IRS, electing to be taxed on the full value of their Founder Stock at the time of grant.
Conversely, if an 83(b) is not filed, then the founders will be taxed on the value of the Founder Stock as it vests—which could be substantially more valuable, and, thus, more costly to the founders for income tax purposes.
We’ve already covered Founder Stock, vesting, and the important of 83(b) elections extensively here
However, what happens if a founder (a) never received Founder Stock subject to vesting or (b) the Founder Stock is fully vested at the time of the priced round, and then the VC requires a vesting reset?
Should the founders file an 83(b) based on the value of the Founder Stock at the time of the vesting reset even though the value of the stock is substantially higher?
For instance, let’s say at the time of grant, a founder received 1,000,000 shares of unrestricted (i.e., not subject to vesting) Founder Stock at a price of $0.00001 per share and timely filed an 83(b) election.
In this example, the Founder would have been taxed on the full value of the stock (i.e., $10, being $0.00001 (the price per share) multiplied by 1,000,000 (the number of shares)).
However, let’s say at the time of the priced round, three years after the initial grant of Founder Stock, the latest 409A valuation has priced the company’s common stock at $5.00/share.
If the VC requires the founder to reset the vesting of 75% of her shares (750,000) over the next 3 years, should the founder file an 83(b) election?
That hardly seems fair, given that the filing of an 83(b) would seemingly result in the founder receiving phantom income in the amount of $3,750,000.
This is a hefty tax consequence for a startup founder if the revesting of her stock requires an 83(b) election in order to avoid being taxed as the stock vests over time (which could be even higher).
Thankfully, the IRS threw founders a life vest.
In fact, the IRS has stated that there is no “transfer” under Section 83 for the founder in our example who held her stock for at least three (3) years. The founder does not recognize compensation under Section 83(a) and there is no need to file a new 83(b) election.
Effectively, the new restrictions (e.g., a new vesting schedule), are ignored for stock held for at least three (3) years.
Because the founder’s stock is substantially vested, the IRS has concluded that these shares are already owned by the founder for purposes of Section 83.
Adding new restrictions has no effect for Section 83’s purposes.
In summary, a period of at least three (3) years, between issuance of Founder Stock (either vested initially or subject to vesting) and imposition of new restrictions on that stock (such as imposing a new vesting schedule), has been blessed by the IRS for the purposes of avoiding the receipt of phantom income under Section 83(a) when such previously vested stock becomes unvested.
Therefore, in our example above, when the stock owned by our founder becomes subject to new vesting restrictions imposed by a VC as a part of a priced round, the founder does not recognize compensation under Section 83(a). The founder’s basis (i.e., the original value or purchase price of an asset for tax purposes) in the stock remains at $10.00, and no new 83(b) election is necessary.
However, we note that the IRS has yet to provide definitive guidance relating to Section 83 for situations where the original grant of Founder Stock occurred less than three (3) years before a reset or new imposition of vesting.
DISCLAIMER: While I am a lawyer who enjoys operating outside of the traditional lawyer and law firm “box”, I am not your lawyer. Nothing in this post should be construed as legal advice nor does it create any attorney-client relationship. The material published above is intended for informational, educational, and entertainment purposes only. Please seek the advice of counsel, and do not apply any of the generalized material above to your individual facts or circumstances without speaking to an attorney.
Tax Benefit, Burden or Break Even?
What happens when a VC requires a vesting reset of Founder Stock?
When raising a priced round, venture capitalists (“VCs”) often require founders to reset the vesting of their Founder Stock in order to incentivize founders to continue building the company.
For most high-growth companies, the founders receive their shares at or shortly after the time of incorporation at a very low price (e.g., $0.00001 per share) and, typically, subject to a 4-year vesting schedule with a 1-year cliff.
Because founders receive their shares at such a low price, they are often encouraged to file an 83(b) election with the IRS, electing to be taxed on the full value of their Founder Stock at the time of grant.
Conversely, if an 83(b) is not filed, then the founders will be taxed on the value of the Founder Stock as it vests—which could be substantially more valuable, and, thus, more costly to the founders for income tax purposes.
We’ve already covered Founder Stock, vesting, and the important of 83(b) elections extensively here
However, what happens if a founder (a) never received Founder Stock subject to vesting or (b) the Founder Stock is fully vested at the time of the priced round, and then the VC requires a vesting reset?
Should the founders file an 83(b) based on the value of the Founder Stock at the time of the vesting reset even though the value of the stock is substantially higher?
For instance, let’s say at the time of grant, a founder received 1,000,000 shares of unrestricted (i.e., not subject to vesting) Founder Stock at a price of $0.00001 per share and timely filed an 83(b) election.
In this example, the Founder would have been taxed on the full value of the stock (i.e., $10, being $0.00001 (the price per share) multiplied by 1,000,000 (the number of shares)).
However, let’s say at the time of the priced round, three years after the initial grant of Founder Stock, the latest 409A valuation has priced the company’s common stock at $5.00/share.
If the VC requires the founder to reset the vesting of 75% of her shares (750,000) over the next 3 years, should the founder file an 83(b) election?
That hardly seems fair, given that the filing of an 83(b) would seemingly result in the founder receiving phantom income in the amount of $3,750,000.
This is a hefty tax consequence for a startup founder if the revesting of her stock requires an 83(b) election in order to avoid being taxed as the stock vests over time (which could be even higher).
Thankfully, the IRS threw founders a life vest.
In fact, the IRS has stated that there is no “transfer” under Section 83 for the founder in our example who held her stock for at least three (3) years. The founder does not recognize compensation under Section 83(a) and there is no need to file a new 83(b) election.
Effectively, the new restrictions (e.g., a new vesting schedule), are ignored for stock held for at least three (3) years.
Because the founder’s stock is substantially vested, the IRS has concluded that these shares are already owned by the founder for purposes of Section 83.
Adding new restrictions has no effect for Section 83’s purposes.
In summary, a period of at least three (3) years, between issuance of Founder Stock (either vested initially or subject to vesting) and imposition of new restrictions on that stock (such as imposing a new vesting schedule), has been blessed by the IRS for the purposes of avoiding the receipt of phantom income under Section 83(a) when such previously vested stock becomes unvested.
Therefore, in our example above, when the stock owned by our founder becomes subject to new vesting restrictions imposed by a VC as a part of a priced round, the founder does not recognize compensation under Section 83(a). The founder’s basis (i.e., the original value or purchase price of an asset for tax purposes) in the stock remains at $10.00, and no new 83(b) election is necessary.
However, we note that the IRS has yet to provide definitive guidance relating to Section 83 for situations where the original grant of Founder Stock occurred less than three (3) years before a reset or new imposition of vesting.
DISCLAIMER: While I am a lawyer who enjoys operating outside of the traditional lawyer and law firm “box”, I am not your lawyer. Nothing in this post should be construed as legal advice nor does it create any attorney-client relationship. The material published above is intended for informational, educational, and entertainment purposes only. Please seek the advice of counsel, and do not apply any of the generalized material above to your individual facts or circumstances without speaking to an attorney.
What’s a Rich Text element?
The rich text element allows you to create and format headings, paragraphs, blockquotes, images, and video all in one place instead of having to add and format them individually. Just double-click and easily create content.
lefslsdsdl
-
jkjkfsldjlksd
Test
Static and dynamic content editing
A rich text element can be used with static or dynamic content. For static content, just drop it into any page and begin editing. For dynamic content, add a rich text field to any collection and then connect a rich text element to that field in the settings panel. Voila!
How to customize formatting for each rich text
Headings, paragraphs, blockquotes, figures, images, and figure captions can all be styled after a class is added to the rich text element using the "When inside of" nested selector system.
