5 ms·
This sounds great, though requiring "offering 80% of the workforce stock" and excluding highest paid executives seems vague - is this at time of hiring, when st
by martin_ 10y ago
This sounds great, though requiring "offering 80% of the workforce stock" and excluding highest paid executives seems vague - is this at time of hiring, when stock is issued, fully vested, when taxes are due, somewhere inbetween? I parted ways with a startup in the valley last year and exercised some shares on January 13th. If I had exercised just two weeks earlier, I'm told I would've been hit with north of 50k in AMT, I have until next year to figure it out now but I wonder if I'm eligible. Also curious how long it typically takes to get from house, through the senate and passed.
- breerly 10y agoSounds like it's 80% of employees must have been offered stock in the year you began employment. My guess is that this applies in most common cases, although I wonder what the situation they were trying to guard from was...
- tetrep 10y agoFrom the bill, a corporation qualifies (aka the current state of affairs) if... such corporation has a written plan under which, in such calendar year, not less than 80 percent of all employees who provide services to such corporation in the United States (or any possession of the United States) are granted stock options, or restricted stock units, with the same rights and privileges to receive qualified stock.
- martin_ 10y agoSo there's no way it could be retroactively applied, then. Bummer!