Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Business Acquisition

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Business Acquisition

    Client has been operating as a programming consultant, Sch C -- he works for a couple different firms and has been receiving 1099-Misc (when he's been paid). Has done considerable work for another Sch C business (a one-man software company). The unpaid invoices for services rendered are now over $50,000. That company has offered to give some of the business assets to client in exchange for wiping out the amount due. The assets to be transferred are the source code for one program, the domain names, the working website which sells the program, and 2 years of free use of the company server to host the website.

    The client does not want the business assets in his name (there has been litigation in the past regarding the product that may not be entirely cleared up), so is planning on forming a Corp to receive the assets.

    2 questions:
    1) Both businesses are cash basis, so at first blush since no cash is changing hands, no tax impact. But to me this smells of a barter exchange for which client would recognize an amount of Self-Employment earnings, and then allocate that same amount toward asset purchase. Although not the preferred treament, would this be correct? Then would it be the full $50,000, or some potentially reduced amount -- all the assets are difficult to price.

    2) Since client never wants to own the assets (fear of litigation) and put them right into a corp, how is this done? Would client need to first form the Corp, and assign his outstanding invoices to the Corp in exchange for shares of the Corp (basically, a reorganization of his biz from Sch C to Corp)? If this would work, then it would be the Corp that would receive the assets in exchange for cancelling the debt. Would client also need to contribute cash to obtain shares of the Corp, or would the contribution of Accounts Receivable be sufficient? I hope I'm on the right track...

    Bill

    #2
    save a few bucks

    He can certainly assign his accounts receivable to the corporation. Once again I will say that the corporate shield might provide far less liability protection than he hopes for. Especially since he EXPECTS trouble, he should get competent legal help on structuring the corporation formation and titling the assets. This is not the time to download some generic forms to save a few bucks.

    Comment


      #3
      Bill...........

      ............ you are definetly on the right track with all your questions. Somehow a valuation has to be done of the assets to be rec'd. I would evaluate on the low side since there is possible litigation involved. Whatever that value is it would be income to the schedule C. The balance of the $50,000 just goes away. Upon forming and funding the Corporation I would use the same amount as a contribution to capital.

      If you assign the receivables you still have to value the receivables and that amount needs to be taken in as income to the sched C.
      Last edited by BOB W; 10-27-2006, 01:37 PM.
      This post is for discussion purposes only and should be verified with other sources before actual use.

      Many times I post additional info on the post, Click on "message board" for updated content.

      Comment


        #4
        Barter income to which entity?

        Originally posted by BOB W
        ....Whatever that value is it would be income to the schedule C. The balance of the $50,000 just goes away.
        Would the barter income be to the Sch C or the Corp? If the A/R is contributed to the Corp, and then the A/R is cancelled in exchange for the business assets, why wouldn't the barter income be attributed to the Corp?

        Bill

        Comment


          #5
          Additional Protection..

          .. can be had by forming multiple corporation (2), one owning the other and then you owning the one that owns the one that is the operating corp. Drives lawyers crazy.
          This post is for discussion purposes only and should be verified with other sources before actual use.

          Many times I post additional info on the post, Click on "message board" for updated content.

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by Bill Tubbs
            Would the barter income be to the Sch C or the Corp? If the A/R is contributed to the Corp, and then the A/R is cancelled in exchange for the business assets, why wouldn't the barter income be attributed to the Corp?

            Bill
            I don't believe you can get a basis in the corp without getting income for that transaction.
            You are a cash basis taxpayer. Transferring/Assigning the A/R means picking up $50,000 of income. Why? The A/R needs to be discounted first (like factoring) for the potential risks.
            Last edited by BOB W; 10-27-2006, 02:25 PM.
            This post is for discussion purposes only and should be verified with other sources before actual use.

            Many times I post additional info on the post, Click on "message board" for updated content.

            Comment


              #7
              paid by the hour

              >>Drives lawyers crazy<<

              Unfortunately, it is as hard on defense lawyers as plaintiffs' lawyers. If your liability plan depends on somebody getting confused, you are forgetting that lawyers get paid by the hour.

              Comment


                #8
                But,

                The lawyers will tell their client it will be more involved and most will back off as the fee preception might get out of hand.
                This post is for discussion purposes only and should be verified with other sources before actual use.

                Many times I post additional info on the post, Click on "message board" for updated content.

                Comment


                  #9
                  That is true

                  That is true. The legal profession is well-known for discouraging clients from bringing lawsuits that require legal services.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Ha Ha....

                    But it is the client that is the decission maker to go forward.

                    All I'm saying it that it is another layer before it gets to the indiviual level.
                    Last edited by BOB W; 10-27-2006, 02:57 PM.
                    This post is for discussion purposes only and should be verified with other sources before actual use.

                    Many times I post additional info on the post, Click on "message board" for updated content.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      insurance, insurance, insurance

                      Properly used, incorporation can certainly provide real protections. Often it is not so important for individuals, though, at least compared to insurance. First of all, individuals are always responsible for their own actions (including inactions and the supervision of others), regardless of the how the property may be titled.

                      Secondly, whether a person is separate from his company is a matter of facts and circumstances, not names. One of the nice things about an LLC is that the requirements for corporate minutes and so on are much less, but you still have the problem of who is doing the work, who benefits, commingling of assets, and a whole raft of similar issues. Courts are increasingly consumer-oriented in their interpretations, especially when somebody gets hurt in a medical sense.

                      They used to say the three most important factors in real estate are location, location, location. Nowadays it's insurance, insurance, insurance.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Legal problems

                        "The client does not want the business assets in his name (there has been litigation in the past regarding the product that may not be entirely cleared up), so is planning on forming a Corp to receive the assets."

                        Your client had better make sure that these assets are free and clear of any encumbrances before he accepts them as payment. If there are any legal actions currently against that business those assets may already be tied up as possible settlement of any judgement.
                        "A man that holds a cat by the tail learns something he can learn no other way." - Mark Twain

                        Comment


                          #13
                          clarify who gets the barter income

                          Thank you all for your comments thus far.

                          One question that I still have is: who would have to recognize the barter income for the A/R exchanged for the assets? Is it:
                          A) The Sch C because in order to get basis in the corporation, the wages would be recognized when the A/R is assigned to the corp?
                          B) The Corp when the A/R is actually exchanged for the bus. assets
                          C) other?

                          Bill

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Unfortunately

                            >>make sure that these assets are free and clear<<

                            Unfortunately, that is the exact problem in the original post. We KNOW these assets are subject to a prior claim. That is why you need legal help in structuring the transfer. Without some form of indemnification clause, the worker might end up receiving nothing except new liabilities.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              assets

                              Originally posted by jainen
                              >>make sure that these assets are free and clear<<

                              Unfortunately, that is the exact problem in the original post. We KNOW these assets are subject to a prior claim. That is why you need legal help in structuring the transfer. Without some form of indemnification clause, the worker might end up receiving nothing except new liabilities.
                              Yes, I know that an attorney should be involved to form the corp (especially because of known past issues), and that the client needs to find out more about the status of the prior claim. That said, any comment on my previous post about whether it's the Sch C or the Corp that would need to recognize the barter income?

                              Bill

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X