Austin v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
Ps exchanged property for ostensibly restricted stock of a newly formed S corporation (S). The governing agreements provided that Ps, upon termination of employment, would receive less than the full fair market value of their S shares only if they were terminated "for cause" during the initial term of the employment agreement.
Read the full summary
Ps exchanged property for ostensibly restricted stock of a newly formed S corporation (S). The governing agreements provided that Ps, upon termination of employment, would receive less than the full fair market value of their S shares only if they were terminated "for cause" during the initial term of the employment agreement. Section 7(B) of the employment agreement defined termination "for cause" to include termination upon "[f]ailure or refusal by Employee * * * to cure by faithfully and diligently performing the usual and customary duties of his employment." Section 1.83-3(c)(2), Income…
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
Lauber, Judge:
These consolidated cases are before this Court on respondent’s motion for partial summary judgment and petitioner’s motion for summary judgment both filed under Rule 121. The sole issue for decision is whether stock petitioners received in December 1998, which was labeled “restricted stock,” was subject to a substantial risk of forfeiture when issued to them or rather was “substantially vested” within the meaning of section 83 and section 1.83-1(a)(1), Income Tax Regs. Under the governing employment agreements, petitioners would forfeit a substantial amount of the value…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- K Mart Corp. v. Cartier, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1988
- James v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Jarecki v. G. D. Searle & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1961
- Dahlstrom v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1985
- National Labor Relations Board v. Lion Oil Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1957
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Guardian Industries Corp. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 2014
- Amazon.com, Inc. v. Comm'rUnited States Tax Court · 2017
- Larry E. & Belinda Austin v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 2013