audit tax advisory 0 cal state fullerton
Post on 20-Oct-2014
517 views
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
Audit Tax AdvisoryAudit Tax Advisory
1
Cal State Fullerton
CCRG’s “SEC Financial Reporting Conference”
Cal State Fullerton
CCRG’s “SEC Financial Reporting Conference”
Seth Rosen(213) 955-8814
KPMG LLPSeptember 19, 2005
Seth Rosen(213) 955-8814
KPMG LLPSeptember 19, 2005
© 2 0 0 4 K PM G L L P , t h e U . S . m e m b e r f i r m o f K PM G I n t e r n a t i o n a l , a S wi s s c o o p e r a t i v e . A l l r i g h t s r e s e r v e d .
© 2 0 0 4 K PM G L L P , t h e U . S . m e m b e r f i r m o f K PM G I n t e r n a t i o n a l , a S wi s s c o o p e r a t i v e . A l l r i g h t s r e s e r v e d .
Audit Tax AdvisoryAudit Tax Advisory
Expensing Stock Options Under New FAS 123 Expensing Stock Options Under New FAS 123
Audit Tax AdvisoryAudit Tax Advisory2
Accounting HistoryAccounting History
Intrinsic Value versus Fair Value Method
Companies have been able to select one of two approaches
APB Opinion 25 (“APB 25”) – compensation cost equals the market value of the stock at the measurement date minus the exercise price
This “intrinsic value” method results in zero cost for most “fixed plan” stock option grants
Audit Tax AdvisoryAudit Tax Advisory3
Accounting HistoryAccounting History
Intrinsic versus Fair Value Method, continued
Original FASB Statement 123 (“FAS 123”) - recommends the use of the “fair value” method of accounting
Stock options are valued at the date of grant using an option-pricing model such as Black-Scholes
If companies choose the “intrinsic value” method (APB 25) over the “fair value” method (FAS 123), they must still disclose the “fair value” in the footnotes to the financial statement
Audit Tax AdvisoryAudit Tax Advisory4
Accounting HistoryAccounting History
Intrinsic versus Fair Value AccountingMost companies have chosen intrinsic value under APB 25, with footnote disclosure of fair value pursuant to FAS 123.
Fixed Accounting (Under APB 25)If both the number of shares granted to an employee and the exercise price of the shares are known at the time of grant, the grant date is the measurement date, and compensation cost, if any, is fixed as of that date.
Variable Accounting (Under APB 25)Measurement date not known, compensation cost is remeasured by mark-to-intrinsic value until award becomes fixed.
Note: No variable accounting for equity awards under the FAS 123.
Audit Tax AdvisoryAudit Tax Advisory5
FAS 123R Changes the Ground RulesFAS 123R Changes the Ground Rules
Effective Date
Public companies – fiscal years beginning after June 15, 2005
Non-public companies -- fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2005
Audit Tax AdvisoryAudit Tax Advisory6
FAS 123R Changes the Ground Rules FAS 123R Changes the Ground Rules
Transition – Equity Awards
Recognize compensation cost based on grant date fair value for all granted, modified or settled after effective date
Recognize compensation cost for unvested portion of awards outstanding at the effective date using fair value previously reported in the notes or in income statement
May want to consider vesting underwater options pre-effective date
Audit Tax AdvisoryAudit Tax Advisory7
FAS 123R Changes the Ground RulesFAS 123R Changes the Ground Rules
Cost measured at grant based on the fair value of the instruments granted;
No valuation model is preferred
Binomial model is similar to Black-Scholes re inputs
However, lattice approach creates flexibility and complexity
Audit Tax AdvisoryAudit Tax Advisory8
FAS 123R Changes the Ground RulesFAS 123R Changes the Ground Rules
Performance Condition
Condition affecting vesting of an award that depends on (a) employee rendering service for a specified period or implied period and (b) achieving specified performance targets defined by reference to employer’s operations (e.g. sales growth, EPS, market share)
Market condition
Condition affecting exercisability or exercise price of an award that depends on the achievement of a (a) market price of the company’s stock or specified amount of intrinsic value or (b) specified market performance on the company’s stock (e.g., change in market price compared to change in S&P 500 index)
Audit Tax AdvisoryAudit Tax Advisory9
Valuation Models Valuation Models
Black-Scholes Option Pricing Model Inputs
Exercise Price
Current Stock Price
Expected Life of the Option
Expected Volatility
Expected Dividend Yield
Risk-free Interest Rate during Expected Life
Audit Tax AdvisoryAudit Tax Advisory10
Valuation Models – Binomial LatticeValuation Models – Binomial Lattice
Same six factors as for the Black Scholes Merton Formula
Plus:
Multiple number of steps
Vesting period
Sub-optimal early exercise behavior parameters:
Post-vesting forfeiture rate (e.g. vest & move)
Early exercise multiple to model non-transferability
Audit Tax AdvisoryAudit Tax Advisory11
Tax Implications Tax Implications
Share based awards result in a temporary difference
Deferred tax benefit recorded as compensation expense is recognized
Assume deduction equal to expense
Actual tax benefit in excess of amount recognized is recorded as APIC
Actual tax benefit below amount recognized results in reduction of tax benefit recognized and additional expense unless
Accumulated APIC from excess tax benefits from previous share based awards under hypothetical FAS 123 since 1995
Audit Tax AdvisoryAudit Tax Advisory12
Current and Future Plan TrendsCurrent and Future Plan Trends
Under FASB 123R…
Performance-based equity plans will be more widely used
Most common types of performance-based equity approaches will be:
Vesting contingent on a company specific Internal Financial Performance Measure(s)
Vesting contingent on Internal Financial Performance Measure(s) results versus an industry benchmark or peer group average
Vesting contingent on quantifiable individual executive goals
Audit Tax AdvisoryAudit Tax Advisory13
Current and Future Plan TrendsCurrent and Future Plan Trends
Other Changes…
Companies will consider valuation models and expense considerations prior to making awards
Non-qualified stock options
May be a reduction in size of award and population eligible
Stock appreciation rights (settled in shares)
Restricted stock units
Subject to consistency with deferred compensation rules enacted in 2004
Audit Tax AdvisoryAudit Tax Advisory14
Current and Future Plan TrendsCurrent and Future Plan Trends
Under FASB’s 123R…Several stock option plans are relatively less attractive compared to Non-qualified stock options:
Incentive stock options (ISOs)
• Lack of deductibility will increase net compensation expense (cannot assume a disqualifying disposition will occur)
ESPP plans are less attractive and there is a decline in the number of ESPP plans being utilized
Trend in 2005 has been some changes and lots of waiting to see what peer companies are doing
Technology companies tend to be sticking with options
Audit Tax AdvisoryAudit Tax Advisory15
Questions / ContactsQuestions / Contacts
Seth M. Rosen(213) [email protected]