Category: Tax

Reviewing Compensation Arrangements for Employees Subject to U.S. Income Tax Before Year-End Could Avoid Costly Tax Penalties

We have written about this in the past [here], but the message bears repeating each year. It is easy to overlook that employment agreements, change-in-control agreements, and severance agreements with U.S. taxpayers frequently contain provisions that subject them to U.S. Internal Revenue Code Section 409A (“Section 409A”), and failure to comply can result in onerous tax penalties. However, to the extent that rights under such agreements are not yet vested, it may be possible to correct them before year-end without penalty. Even if rights under an agreement are vested, in some cases correction is available with payment of reduced penalties under IRS correction programs. It is important to remember that U.S. residents, and U.S....

Tax Reform to Impact Compensation Deduction Claimed by Foreign Private Issuers

While the recently enacted U.S. tax reform legislation did not overhaul executive compensation to the extent proposed in early forms of the bill, Section 162(m) of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code was dramatically revised in a way that affects Canadian companies that file reports with the SEC and that employ, or may in the future employ, executives in the United States. Previously, Section 162(m) limited the amount of compensation that an SEC reporting company that was a “domestic issuer” for securities law purposes, or its subsidiaries, could deduct with respect to its most senior executives. Important for many of our Canadian clients, we believe that under the rule changes, U.S. tax deductions for...

Do You Need a Risk Factor for Proposed U.S. Federal Income Tax Reform?

Tax reform efforts by Congress are ongoing, and the substance of the tax bills remains fluid. However, for foreign corporations with U.S. operations, there are some specific potential risks to consider, such as additional limitations on the deductibility of interest, the migration from a “worldwide” system of taxation to a territorial system, and the use of certain border adjustments. Canadian corporations with U.S. operations may want to consider including a risk factor in their periodic reports or offering documents regarding the potential impact of U.S. tax reform. A sample risk factor (based on the current iteration of the tax bills) is below. As the tax bills are amended during the legislative process, the...

Common U.S. Tax Withholding and Reporting Errors with Respect to Certain RSUs

A Canadian company (the employer) historically has not issued equity-based awards to employees of its U.S. subsidiaries, but it now is considering doing so. Past posts have addressed potential U.S. income tax pitfalls and the need for careful review of the plan and award agreements prior to the grant of restricted stock units (RSUs) and deferred share units (DSUs) to individuals who are subject to U.S. federal income tax on compensatory income. You can read the DSU blog entry here and the RSU blog entry here. Let’s assume careful review and drafting have addressed potential U.S. tax issues in terms of the written documents. What are common mistakes that can arise in administering...

Loans to U.S. Subsidiaries Should Be Carefully Structured and Documented to Obtain U.S. Tax Benefits

Canadian companies should carefully structure and document loans and advances to their U.S. subsidiaries. If loans to U.S. subsidiaries are not properly structured and documented, such loans may be recharacterized as equity investments for U.S. federal income tax purposes, and important U.S. tax benefits will be lost. Properly structured loans are treated as debt for U.S. federal income tax purposes with favorable tax treatment. The U.S. subsidiary may deduct interest paid in computing taxable income. Such interest payments to its Canadian parent corporation are generally not subject to U.S. withholding tax under the Canada – U.S. income tax treaty. Repayment of the principal amount is generally not subject to U.S. tax for both...

Unexpected Risks of Early Exercise Incentive Stock Options

Canadian companies and their outside counsel occasionally ask about the ability to grant early exercise incentive stock options (“ISOs”) to limit the impact of the U.S. alternative minimum tax (“AMT”) to their U.S. employees. However, due to fairly counterintuitive U.S. federal tax regulations, structuring options in this manner may expose optionees to negative tax consequences in the event of a disqualifying disposition (defined below). This post reviews the tax effects of early exercise ISOs and compares the tax results to alternative structures. Early Exercise ISO Tax Consequences With any early exercise option, the optionee is permitted to initially exercise their entire stock option by paying the full option exercise price, but will receive...

Delaware Corporations – Don’t Authorize Too Many Shares, or “No Par Value” Shares

Occasionally, we will see Canadians or Canadian companies assume that they can authorize as many shares for issuance as they want when forming a Delaware corporation, or that they can authorize shares without par value. That’s technically true, but Delaware will make you pay dearly for it, up to $180,000 per company per year. A Delaware corporation must pay the state an annual franchise tax. This tax is initially based on the number of authorized shares. Provided the authorized shares have a stated par value, the tax assessment can be re-calculated on an assumed par value basis using a formula that involves the number of shares authorized for issuance by the certificate of...

Tax Consequences to U.S. Shareholders of Holding Shares in a Passive Foreign Investment Company or PFIC

If a non-U.S. corporation (the “Company”) is a “passive foreign investment company” or “PFIC” for any tax year during which a U.S. shareholder owns shares in the Company, certain adverse U.S. federal income tax consequences of the acquisition, ownership, and disposition of shares will generally apply to such U.S. shareholder. A U.S. shareholder will be subject to the rules of Section 1291 of the Internal Revenue Code (described below) with respect to (a) any gain recognized on the sale or other taxable disposition of shares and (b) any “excess distribution” received on the shares. A distribution generally will be an “excess distribution” to the extent that such distribution (together with all other distributions...

RSU Awards to U.S. Taxpayers Require Careful Review Before Grant

Recently we blogged about pitfalls and potential adverse tax consequences for U.S. taxpayers with respect to deferred share unit awards that pay out following the participant’s termination of services. Read that blog entry here. But what about restricted share units (RSUs) that are subject to vesting based on continued service and that are settled/paid out immediately after the scheduled vesting date(s)? If you only have a handful of employees in the U.S. who would receive RSUs under your existing RSU Plan, you may wonder whether review by U.S. tax counsel really is necessary. Common sense would suggest that there is no way such RSUs could run afoul of the U.S. tax rules related...

When Will a Canadian Corporation be Treated as a Passive Foreign Investment Company?

A Canadian corporation will generally be a passive foreign investment company or “PFIC” if, for a tax year, (a) 75% or more of its gross income is passive income (the “PFIC income test”) or (b) 50% or more of the value of its assets either produce passive income or are held for the production of passive income, based on the quarterly average of the fair market value of such assets (the “PFIC asset test”). Gross income generally includes all sales revenues less the cost of goods sold, plus income from investments and from incidental or outside operations or sources, and passive income generally includes, for example, dividends, interest, certain rents and royalties, certain...