Strom

Strom v. United States

Good Law
641 F.3d 1051·2011 WL 1279020
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 6, 201109-35175, 09-35197California10,552 words

Opinion

Opinion

Berzon, J.

Ordinarily, when an employee is compensated with nonstatutory stock options that do not have a readily ascertainable fair market value at the time of the grant, the employee realizes income for tax purposes upon exercising the options. See 26 U.S.C. §§ 83 (a) & (e)(3)-(e)(4); 26 C.F.R. § 1.83-7 (a). The taxpayer is taxed on an amount equal to the fair market value of the stock on the date of exercise minus the option price paid for the stock. See 26 C.F.R. § 1.83 -l(a)(l); id. § 1.83-7(a). Internal Revenue Code § 83(c)(3), however, allows taxpayers to defer recognition and valuation of income so long as a profitable sale of the stock acquired through the exercise of the options “could subject a person to suit under section 16(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.” 26 U.S.C. § 83 (c)(3)! Section 16(b), in turn, forbids a corporate insider from profiting on a purchase made within six months of a sale (or a sale made within six months of a purchase) of the corporation’s stock. See 15 U.S.C. § 78p(b). If a taxpayer is permitted to defer tax consequences under IRC § 83(c)(3), the taxpayer will be later taxed on an amount equal to the fair market value of the stock on the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.