8 ms·
Slightly off-topic: The title made me wonder if it was going to be about the vast difference in equity grants between founders and employees (oh well). But bac
by boulos 11y ago
Slightly off-topic: The title made me wonder if it was going to be about the vast difference in equity grants between founders and employees (oh well).
But back on topic, harj et al. what's your opinion of Restricted Stock for early employees? I believe the issue is just that granting Restricted Stock once the company / share valuation is high enough is a definite tax impact. But it seems like nearly every pre-Series-A company could give the early employees 100% Restricked Stock. Is there some reason I'm missing that this never seems to happen?
Edit: s/RSUs/Restricted Stock/ since that's what I actually mean (the weirdness of RSUs remains funny).
- harryh 11y agoIf you are starting at a pre-Series-A company you are probably much better off getting options (that you early exercise) instead of RSUs to get cap gains tax treatment.
- boulos 11y agoOops, I should have said Restricted Stock (not RSUs). Founders get restricted stock (with vesting), so why not the first several employees?
- harryh 11y agoYa. That's prolly a good idea in many cases. You just have to be careful that the FMV doesn't climb too high, and employees correctly handle their 83b paperwork or there will be tax problems. Honestly I suspect this is why it isn't more standard. It's kind of a pain in the ass to get right. Options are just easier.