Austin v. Commissioner postponing income recognition with employment agreements as stock restrictions Kevin A. Diehl
By: Diehl, Kevin A
.
Material type: 
ArticlePublisher: 2017Subject(s): RETENCIONES DEL TRABAJO | RENDIMIENTOS DE TRABAJO | IMPUESTOS | PARTICIPACION DE LOS TRABAJADORES | OPCIONES SOBRE ACCIONES | ESTADOS UNIDOS
In:
Journal of Taxation of Investments v. 35, n. 1, Fall 2017, p. 71-78Summary: Austin v. Commissioner provides guidance to taxpayers on how to utilize employment agreements to postpone income recognition.The case arose in the context of a distressed debt loan portfolio operation, an employee stock ownership plan, an S corporation, and irrevocable grantor trusts. While the taxpayers in this case ultimately owed the difference between fair market value and basisunder Section 83 because the restrictions lapsed on their stock, and their simultaneous surrender and repurchase was judged to lack economic substance, tax planners can glean helpful tips onthe use employment agreements to postpone income recognition.
| Item type | Current location | Home library | Call number | Status | Date due | Barcode |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IEF | OP 235/2017/35/1-4 (Browse shelf) | Available | OP 235/2017/35/1-4 |
Browsing IEF Shelves Close shelf browser
| No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | ||
| OP 235/2017/35/1-1 Physical presence and state taxing authority | OP 235/2017/35/1-2 Monetizing certain deferred tax assets in a rising interest rate environment | OP 235/2017/35/1-3 The still - rising tide | OP 235/2017/35/1-4 Austin v. Commissioner | OP 235/2018/2 Journal of Taxation of Investments | OP 235/2018/2-1 IRS expands scope of private letter ruling program for spin-offs | OP 235/2018/2-2 The deductibility of settlement payments |
Disponible también en línea a través de la Biblioteca del Instituto de Estudios Fiscales. Resumen. Conclusión.
Austin v. Commissioner provides guidance to taxpayers on how to utilize employment agreements to postpone income recognition.The case arose in the context of a distressed debt loan portfolio operation, an employee stock ownership plan, an S corporation, and irrevocable grantor trusts. While the taxpayers in this case ultimately owed the difference between fair market value and basisunder Section 83 because the restrictions lapsed on their stock, and their simultaneous surrender and repurchase was judged to lack economic substance, tax planners can glean helpful tips onthe use employment agreements to postpone income recognition.
There are no comments for this item.