I have written a bunch of different posts over time on the different types of equity incentives a startup or emerging company can offer its workers. Below is a list of some of them.
What Type of Equity Incentive Should I Use?
What’s Better for an Equity Incentive–Restricted Stock or a Stock Option?
Incentive Stock Options vs. Nonqualified Stock Options
Top 6 Reasons to Grant NQOs Rather Than ISOs
LLC Compensatory Equity Awards: Difficult and Complex
ISOs or NQOs?
I still regularly get asked this question: Should I grant NQOs or ISOs?
One thing you have to remember if you are going to grant ISOs is that they are subject to more limitations and restrictions than NQOs, and their tax consequences are more complex and difficult to ascertain than the tax consequences of NQOs. In short, ISOs are more complex than NQOs. Thus, if you want to keep your life simpler, you would just choose to use NQOs so that you don’t have to worry about the varying consequences and limitations of the two different types of worker stock options.
What Are The ISO Tax Benefits?
When Congress put in place Section 422 of the Internal Revenue Code, it was trying to make life easier for workers. The benefits that Congress was trying to put in place were:
- No ordinary income tax on exercise; and
- Capital gain on ultimate sale of the stock, if the two holding periods were met.
- The spread on the exercise is an Alternative Minimum Tax Adjustment, that has to be reported to the IRS. The AMT taxes due can be significant. They can in fact be so significant they effectively prohibit exercise because the employee can’t afford the taxes.
- The employee has to meet two holding periods to qualify for the benefit. They have to hold the option shares for at least one year after exercise and at least two years after option grant. Most employees exercise in connection with a liquidity event and thus don’t meet the holding period requirements. If you don’t meet the holding period requirements the option is taxed as an NQO.
Summary of Differences
- ISOs can only be granted to employees. You can’t grant ISOs to independent contractors or board members who are not employees. What this means is that–if you decide to grant ISOs to your employees, you are almost certainly going to have to also utilize NQOs. One reason I favor using NQOs for all types of awards is because it is simpler–you only have to figure out and explain the tax consequences of one type of award to your workers–not two.
- ISOs have two holding periods. Most employees won’t meet these requirements and thus not benefit from the ISO tax benefits.
- ISOs have to be priced differently for 10% or greater shareholders.
- For 10% or greater shareholders, ISOs can only have a 5 year term. NQOs are typically 10 year duration options.
- ISOs give rise to Alternative Minimum Tax consequences. The AMT can be hard to figure out. This additional complexity makes life more difficult for everyone–the company and the employee.
- You have to give the employee and the IRS notice of the amount of the spread on the ISO that is subject to AMT, by January 31st of the year following exercise. This creates somewhat of a trap for employees. With an NQO, you have to calculate the tax withholding on exercise. An employee can’t exercise until the company has calculated the withholding tax and made the employee write a check to the company for the employee withholding portion. This avoids a situation where the employee doesn’t understand the tax consequences until the subsequent year. There have been plenty of employees who realized too late they owed too much AMT–and that they couldn’t afford to pay it. This is a result that is usually avoided with NQOs.
- There is a $100,000 annual limitation on the amount of ISOs that can become exercisable during any calendar year.
- You can’t grant immediately exercsable ISOs without problems.
- NQOs give rise to a tax deduction for the company. The spread on an ISO exercise is not deductible by the company. The spread on NQO exercises can add up to very substantial tax savings for companies.
ISOs Still Better for Employees
Having said all of this–ISOs are still more favorable to employees than NQOs. It is still possible for an employee to achieve a better tax result with an ISO than with an NQO. It might be unlikely, but it is possible.
If you really want to give your employees the best they can possibly get–use ISOs. If you want to keep your life simpler, and you understand that for the most part employees are typically not going to benefit from the potential tax benefits of ISOs, use NQOs.
Public Policy Recommendation
Congress ought to repeal the tax on transfers of illiquid stock to workers.
This would allow companies to transfer stock directly to workers without requiring the employee to write a big check to the employer to cover the employee’s share of income and employment tax withholding.
I am not sure of the public policy rationale for making it harder for companies to give workers equity. It doesn’t make sense to me.