Senators move to block preferential employee stock options tax treatment
Four US senators will today introduce a new bill, the 'Ending the Double Standard for Stock Options Act', that will require US corporations to treat employee stock options in the same way in both their tax returns and financial statements.
The bill’s sponsors are Democratic senators Carl Levin of Michigan and Dick Durbin of Illinois, and Republican senators John McCain of Arizona and Peter Fitzgerald of Illinois.
According to senator Levin's office, US corporations currently enjoy an accounting 'double standard', in which they can deduct the expense of the difference between the stock option excercise price and the underlying stock at the date of excercise on their tax returns, without reporting the expense on their financial statements.
Under the new bill, stock option tax deductions would be limited to stock option expenses reported on financial statements.
The new bill proposes no changes in accounting standards for stock options. That issue is currently under review by the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB), which is scheduled to release an exposure draft on the matter in Q4 2002. In a September meeting, the IASB agreed in principle that stock options issued for employee compensation and as payment to other firms should be recognised as expenses on a company’s financial statements. Since September, the IASB has been focusing on how tomeasure stock option fair values.
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Regulation
EU officials tamp down hopes for bank capital relief
Capital cuts are not a done deal in EC’s review of competitiveness, despite US deregulation
EU regulators clash over ceding supervision to Esma
Belgian and Spanish regulators differ on drive for centralised oversight of cross-border firms
Why Trump’s latest Truth should make TradFi twitchy
Wall Street is becoming the villain in US president’s crypto movie
EBA guidance prompts banks to rethink CSRBB perimeters
Banks will likely have to expand their credit spread risk coverage following recommendations
Market players warn against European repo clearing mandate
Regulators urged to await outcome of US mandate and be wary of risks to government bond liquidity
Esma won’t soften regulatory expectations for cloud and AI
CCP supervisory chair signals heightened scrutiny of third-party risk and operational resilience
BPI says SR 11-7 should go; bank model risk chiefs say ‘no’
Lobby group wants US guidance repealed; practitioners want consistent model supervision and audit
Esma supervision proposals ensnare Bloomberg and Tradeweb
Derivatives and bonds venues would become subject to centralised supervision