close

For more than four decades, Fenwick & West LLP has helped some of the world’s most recognized companies become, and remain, market leaders. From emerging enterprises to large public corporations, our clients are leaders in the technology, life sciences and cleantech sectors and are fundamentally changing the world through rapid innovation.  MORE >

Fenwick & West was founded in 1972 in the heart of Silicon Valley—before “Silicon Valley” existed—by four visionary lawyers who left a top-tier New York law firm to pursue their shared belief that technology would revolutionize the business world and to pioneer the legal work for those technological innovations. In order to be most effective, they decided they needed to move to a location close to primary research and technology development. These four attorneys opened their first office in downtown Palo Alto, and Fenwick became one of the first technology law firms in the world.  MORE >

From our founding in 1972, Fenwick has been committed to promoting diversity and inclusion both within our firm and throughout the legal profession. For almost four decades, the firm has actively promoted an open and inclusive work environment and committed significant resources towards improving our diversity efforts at every level.  MORE >

At Fenwick, we are proud of our commitment to the community and to our culture of making a difference in the lives of individuals and organizations in the communities where we live and work. We recognize that providing legal services is not only an essential part of our professional responsibility, but also an excellent opportunity for our attorneys to gain valuable practical experience, learn new areas of the law and contribute to the community.  MORE >

Year after year, Fenwick & West is honored for excellence in the legal profession. Many of our attorneys are recognized as leaders in their respective fields, and our Corporate, Tax, Litigation and Intellectual Property Practice Groups consistently receive top national and international rankings, including:

  • Named Technology Group of the Year by Law360
  • Ranked #1 in the Americas for number of technology deals in 2015 by Mergermarket
  • Nearly 20 percent of Fenwick partners are ranked by Chambers
  • Consistently ranked among the top 10 law firms in the U.S. for diversity
  • Recognized as having top mentoring and pro bono programs by Euromoney

MORE >

We take sustainability very seriously at Fenwick. Like many of our clients, we are adopting policies that reduce consumption and waste, and improve efficiency. By using technologies developed by a number of our cleantech clients, we are at the forefront of implementing sustainable policies and practices that minimize environmental impact. In fact, Fenwick has earned recognition in several areas as one of the top US law firms for implementing sustainable business practices.  MORE >

At Fenwick, we have a passion for excellence and innovation that mirrors our client base. Our firm is making revolutionary changes to the practice of law through substantial investments in proprietary technology tools and processes—allowing us to deliver best-in-class legal services more effectively.   MORE >

Mountain View Office
Silicon Valley Center
801 California Street
Mountain View, CA 94041
650.988.8500

San Francisco Office
555 California Street
13th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94104
415.875.2300

Seattle Office
1191 Second Avenue
10th Floor
Seattle, WA 98101
206.389.4510

New York Office
1211 Avenue of the Americas
32nd Floor
New York, NY 10036
212.921.2001

Shanghai Office
Unit 908, 9/F, Kerry Parkside Office
No. 1155 Fang Dian Road
Pudong New Area, Shanghai 201204
P.R. China
+86 21 8017 1200


Playing with Fire: Loans to Exercise Options

There is a current debate as to whether we are in a period of high valuations, irrational exuberance or a down-right bubble. I don’t know, but I have seen one artifact from the actual bubble rear its ugly head in recent times: the use of loans to exercise stock options. In short, it is an extraordinarily dangerous thing to do with potentially very damaging consequences.

The Basics

Currently, the federal long term capital gains rate is capped at 20 percent and the income tax rate for top earners is 39 percent. In general, individuals who sell shares that have been held for at least one year are taxed at the lower cap gains rate, while those who sell shares that have been held for less than a year are taxed at the higher income tax rate. This means if your clients receive a stock option and don’t exercise it in advance, they will be taxed at a rate that is 20 percent higher. Accordingly, for startup employees there can be a big tax benefit to purchasing shares so that the lower rate will apply upon a successful exit.

Unfortunately, with today’s high valuations, many employees are unable to afford to exercise their stock options. This is particularly true for higher level employees joining promising startups that already have traction. These folks tend to have large option grants—and such companies have expensive shares—so exercising options is often cost prohibitive for all but the wealthiest employees.

One potential workaround is a loan. A company can loan its employees money to exercise their options. In these situations the money doesn’t even change hands. The employee signs a note promising to pay the company the required exercise amount sometime in the future and the employee uses that note to pay the exercise price of the option. The transaction is neutral to the company and the employee’s tax position is improved. What could possibly be wrong with this?

The Rub

For one thing, from the Internal Revenue Service’s perspective, the long term capital gains holding period only begins when the shares are “purchased.” If the purported purchase is made by use of a loan, that purchase will only be considered valid if the borrower has a personal liability to pay all or a substantial part of such indebtedness. So if the loan is a nonrecourse loan (i.e., the company can only go after the shares as collateral if the loan is not repaid), the IRS does not regard this as a sale. Accordingly, the note holder (the company) must have recourse to the assets of the buyer (the employee) to start the capital gains clock ticking (i.e., the borrower will be personally liable for at least a substantial portion of the loan).

The Reality

Employees entering into such transactions have often gotten comfortable that the loan isn’t “real”; in their minds, the company is certain to be successful so the loan will easily be repaid from the massive proceeds of a stock sale in the inevitable IPO, or (worst case) profitable acquisition. If anything were to go wrong, the management team would work something out with the impacted employees. The problem is what happens when the ship goes down.

While everyone thinks that their startup will be a success, the fact is that many, many startups fail. While some do so in tidy ways that involve the orderly repayment of creditors or an acqui-hire, many simply fold up shop without repaying their creditors. Even with well-intentioned management, startups often find themselves shutting their doors in a situation with assets worth far less than their liabilities. When that happens, the creditors effectively own the company (whether through a formal bankruptcy or another process) and appoint a person acting on their behalf to comb through all the company’s assets to see how they can recover the money they are owed. The loans that employees used to exercise their options are among those assets. Unsurprisingly, the creditors want these notes to be repaid.

I’m writing this because I’ve seen this go wrong—badly wrong. When the technology bubble burst in 2001, many people who had used loans to exercise options ended up being very surprised when those loans came due. First off, the shares that they owned were worthless. Secondly, the board and officers had often resigned en masse, leaving the affairs of the company to be run by a committee of creditors (or a person appointed by such a committee).

These creditor committees were relentless in their desire and ability to extract assets from noteholders. They foreclosed on people’s houses and cars, put liens on bank accounts, and sought garnishment of future wages. The former board members and officers had no authority to stop this process. During this period, I received numerous distressed calls from former employees of once high-flying companies. They were generally shocked to find out that they had to repay the money that they had borrowed.

If your clients have the assets to pay the loan off, but would prefer to put the cash to work elsewhere, it might be a reasonable risk to use a loan to exercise stock options. The bottom line, however, is that your clients should only borrow this money if they can afford to pay it back. That seems like common sense, but in good times such as these, our collective common sense seems to fail us. This problem is compounded by the survivor-biased reporting of employees of successful companies who wish (with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight) that they had exercised their options early. It’s great to exercise options as a tax planning device, but don’t let the tax tail wag the economic dog.

 

Originally published in the Daily Journal on June 24, 2014.