Posted on

How to Report Stock Compensation Paid to Non-employees

The accounting rules for reporting stock compensation have been expanded. They now include share-based payments to non-employees for providing goods and services, under recent guidance issued by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB).

Old Rules

Under existing U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), the FASB requires businesses that give stock awards to independent contractors or consultants to follow a separate standard from the one used for employee stock compensation.

Under Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) Subtopic 505-50, Equity — Equity-Based Payments to Non-Employees, the measurement date for nonemployees is determined at the earlier of the date at which:

  • The commitment for performance is complete, or
  • The counterparty’s performance is complete.

This requires judgment and tracking issues that have led to inconsistencies in financial reporting, especially if nonemployees are awarded stock options on a one-by-one basis, rather than a single large grant.

The FASB originally chose to apply different stock compensation guidance to nonemployees because independent contractors and consultants were perceived as having significant freedom to move from company to company. In theory, independent contractors could watch stock price movements to determine where to work.

However, the FASB now believes the assumptions behind the dual standards were overstated, because full-time employees also have the freedom to move from job to job.

New Rules

In June 2018, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update (ASU) No. 2018-07, Compensation — Stock Compensation: Improvements to Non-employee Share-Based Payment Accounting. It eliminates the separate guidance for stock compensation paid to non-employees and aligns it with the guidance for stock compensation paid to employees.

Under the aligned guidance, all share-based compensation payments will be measured with an estimate of the fair value of the equity the business is obligated to issue at the grant date. The grant date is the date the business and the stock award recipient agree to the terms of the award. Essentially, compensation will be recognized in the same period and in the same manner as if the company had paid cash for goods or services instead of stock.

The guidance doesn’t cover stock compensation that’s used to provide financing to the company that issued the shares. It also doesn’t include stock awards tied to a sale of goods or services as part of a contract accounted for under the new-and-improved revenue recognition standard.

Effective Dates

The updated standard is effective for public companies for fiscal years that begin after December 15, 2018. Private companies have an extra year to implement the changes for annual reports.

Early adoption is generally permitted, but businesses aren’t allowed to follow the changes in ASU No. 2018-07 until they’ve implemented the new revenue recognition standard. Contact us for more information.

© 2019

Posted on

Auditing Cashless Transactions

Like most businesses, you’ve probably experienced a significant increase in the number of customers who prefer to make cashless payments. And you may be wondering: How does the acceptance of these types of transactions affect the auditing of your financial statements?

Cashless transactions require the exchange of digital information to facilitate payments. Instead of focusing on the collection and recording of physical cash, your auditors will spend significant time analyzing your company’s electronic sales records. This requires four specific procedures.

1. Identifying accepted payment methods

Auditors will ask for a list of the types of payments your company accepts and the process maps for each payment vehicle. Examples of cashless payment methods include:

  • Credit and debit cards,
  • Mobile wallets (such as Venmo),
  • Digital currencies (such as Bitcoin),
  • Automated Clearing House (ACH) payments,
  • Wire transfers, and
  • Payments via intermediaries (such as PayPal).

Be prepared to provide documents detailing how the receipt of cashless payments works and how the funds end up in your company’s bank account.

2. Evaluating roles and responsibilities

Your auditors will request a list of employees involved in the receipt, recording, reporting and analysis of cashless transactions. They will also want to see how your company manages and monitors employee access to every technology platform connected to cashless payments.

Evaluating who handles each aspect of the cashless payment cycle helps auditors confirm whether you have the appropriate level of security and segregation of duties to prevent fraud and misstatement.

3. Testing the reconciliation process

Auditors will review prior sales reconciliations to test their accuracy and ensure appropriate recognition of revenue. This may be especially challenging as companies implement the new accounting rules on revenue recognition for long-term contracts. Auditors also will test accounting entries related to such accounts as inventory, deferred revenue and accounts receivable.

4. Analyzing trends

Cashless transactions create an electronic audit trail. So, there’s ample data for auditors to analyze. To uncover anomalies, auditors may, for example, analyze sales by payment vehicle, over different time periods and according to each employee’s sales activity.

If your company has experienced payment fraud, it’s important to share that information with your audit team. Also tell them about steps you took to remediate the problem and recover losses.

Preparing for a cashless future

Before we arrive to conduct fieldwork, let’s discuss the types of cashless payments you now accept — or plan to accept in the future. Depending on the number of cashless methods, we’ll amend our audit program to review them in detail.

© 2019

Posted on

Public Companies to Disclose Stock Hedging Policies and Practices

Does your company have policies in place regarding the use of hedging transactions by company insiders? Final Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) guidance will soon require public companies to disclose whether their officers, employees and directors are allowed to offset a decrease in the market value of the company’s stock. Here’s what you should know to provide up-to-date disclosures.

Hedging concerns

Starting in the 1980s and 1990s, many companies adopted stock-compensation programs to help align the financial interests of executives and other company insiders with those of public shareholders. However, in the years leading up to the 2008 financial crisis, the growing prevalence of hedging instruments made many investors suspect those common interests had eroded.

Critics said a short-sale hedge could protect an executive, employee or director who receives stock incentives against a subsequent drop in the stock price. Similarly, selling a stock future increases the value of the insider’s position as the stock price drops.

Disclosure requirements

SEC Release No. 33-10593, Disclosure of Hedging by Employees, Officers, and Directors, was issued on December 20, 2018. Mandated by Section 955 of the Dodd-Frank Act, the rule amends Item 402 of Regulation S-K under the Securities Act of 1933.

The new rule doesn’t direct companies to establish policies regarding hedging. Rather, it requires a company to describe any policies it has adopted regarding the ability of its employees (including officers) or directors to purchase financial instruments that hedge or offset any decrease in the market value of equity securities granted as compensation, or held directly or indirectly by the employee or director. The new disclosure is required in a proxy statement or information statement relating to an election of directors.

The rule requires companies to disclose fully their hedging policies and practices for securities of:

  • The company,
  • Any parent company,
  • Any subsidiary of the company, or
  • Any subsidiary of the company parent.

Alternatively, companies can choose to provide a summary of hedging practices that includes a description of any categories of hedging transactions that are specifically permitted or disallowed. If a company doesn’t have any such policies, it needs to disclose that fact or state that hedging is generally permitted.

Effective date

The new disclosure rule goes into effect for fiscal years beginning on or after July 1, 2019. However, companies that qualify as smaller reporting companies (SRCs) or emerging growth companies (EGCs) will get an extra year to comply.

An SRC has a public float of less than $250 million. EGC is a class of company established in 2012 that’s eligible for lighter disclosure and reporting requirements for the first five years after going public. Listed closed-end funds and foreign private issuers (FPIs) won’t be subject to the new disclosure requirements.

Contact us to help your public company comply with the new SEC rule. We can draft comprehensive disclosures and, if necessary, help you implement effective hedging policies.

© 2019

Posted on

Fundamental Tax Truths for C-Corporations

The flat 21% federal income tax rate for C corporations under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) has been great news for these entities and their owners. But some fundamental tax truths for C corporations largely remain the same:

C corporations are subject to double taxation.

Double taxation occurs when corporate income is taxed once at the corporate level and again at the shareholder level as dividends are paid out. The cost of double taxation, however, is now generally less because of the 21% corporate rate.

And double taxation isn’t a problem when a C corporation needs to retain all its earnings to finance growth and capital investments. Because all the earnings stay “inside” the corporation, no dividends are paid to shareholders, and, therefore, there’s no double taxation.

Double taxation also isn’t an issue when a C corporation’s taxable income levels are low. This can often be achieved by paying reasonable salaries and bonuses to shareholder-employees and providing them with tax-favored fringe benefits (deductible by the corporation and tax-free to the recipient shareholder-employees).

C corporation status isn’t generally advisable for ventures with appreciating assets or certain depreciable assets.

If assets such as real estate are eventually sold for substantial gains, it may be impossible to extract the profits from the corporation without being subject to double taxation. In contrast, if appreciating assets are held by a pass-through entity (such as an S corporation, partnership or limited liability company treated as a partnership for tax purposes), gains on such sales will be taxed only once, at the owner level.

But assets held by a C corporation don’t necessarily have to appreciate in value for double taxation to occur. Depreciation lowers the tax basis of the property, so a taxable gain results whenever the sale price exceeds the depreciated basis. In effect, appreciation can be caused by depreciation when depreciable assets hold their value.

To avoid this double-taxation issue, you might consider using a pass-through entity to lease to your C corporation appreciating assets or depreciable assets that will hold their value.

C corporation status isn’t generally advisable for ventures that will incur ongoing tax losses.

When a venture is set up as a C corporation, losses aren’t passed through to the owners (the shareholders) like they would be in a pass-through entity. Instead, they create corporate net operating losses (NOLs) that can be carried over to future tax years and then used to offset any corporate taxable income.

This was already a potential downside of C corporations, because it can take many years for a start-up to be profitable. Now, under the TCJA, NOLs that arise in tax years beginning after 2017 can’t offset more than 80% of taxable income in the NOL carryover year. So it may take even longer to fully absorb tax losses.

Do you have questions about C corporation tax issues post-TCJA? Contact us.

© 2019

Posted on

Private Companies: Have You Implemented the New Revenue Recognition Standard?

Private companies that follow U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) must comply with the landmark new revenue recognition standard in 2019. Many private company CFOs and controllers report that they still have significant work to do to meet the demands of the sweeping rules. If you haven’t started the implementation process, it’s time to get the ball rolling.

Lessons from public company peers

Affected private companies must start following Accounting Standards Update (ASU) No. 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Accounting Standards Codification Topic 606), the first time they issue financial statements in 2019. For private companies with a fiscal year end or issuing quarterly statements under U.S. GAAP, that could be within the next few months. Other private companies have until the end of the year or even early 2020. No matter what, it’s crunch time.

Public companies, which had to begin following the standard in 2018, reported that, even if the new accounting didn’t radically change the number they reported in the top line of their income statements, it changed the method by which they had to calculate it. They had to comb through contracts and offer paper trails to back up their estimates to auditors. Public companies largely reported that the standard was more work than they anticipated. Private companies can expect the same challenges.

An overview

The revenue recognition standard erases reams of industry-specific revenue guidance in U.S. GAAP and attempts to come up with the following five-step revenue recognition model for most businesses worldwide:

1. Identify the contracts with a customer.2. Identify the performance obligations in the contract.3. Determine the transaction price.4. Allocate the transaction price to the performance obligations.5. Recognize revenue as the entity satisfies a performance obligation.
In many cases, the revenue a company reports under the new guidance won’t differ much from what it reported under old rules. But the timing of when a company can record revenues may be affected, particularly for long-term, multi-part arrangements. Companies also must assess:

  • The extent by which payments could vary due to such terms as bonuses, discounts, rebates and refunds,
  • The extent that collected payments from customers is “probable” and won’t result in a significant reversal in the future, and
  • The time value of money to determine the transaction price.

The result is a process that offers fewer bright-line rules and more judgment calls compared to old U.S. GAAP.

We can help

Our accounting experts can help you avoid a “fire drill” right before your implementation deadline and employ best practices learned from public companies that made the switch in 2018. Contact us for help getting your revenue reporting systems, processes and policies up to speed.

© 2019

Posted on

Evaluating Your Audit Committee

Under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, the audit committee — not management or the full board of directors — is directly responsible for appointing, compensating and overseeing external auditors. Periodically, it’s a good idea to assess the effectiveness of your audit committee by performing a self-evaluation. Here are reasons to conduct a self-evaluation, along with some common techniques.

Why?

If your company is listed on the New York Stock Exchange, an annual self-evaluation is required. However, the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) recommends that all other companies, including not-for-profit entities and private firms, complete voluntary self-evaluations. The benefits include:

• Improving audit committee performance,
• Promoting candid discussions, and
• Identifying practices and procedures to conduct more effective meetings.

In general, a self-evaluation strives to make your audit committee more effective at assessing fraud risks and evaluating internal and independent auditors.

How?

There’s no universal right way to conduct a self-evaluation. Some companies do it strictly in-house, while others use outside evaluators. Some rely on written questionnaires, while others use personal interviews. According to the AICPA’s Audit Committee Effectiveness Center, common approaches to self-evaluation include:

Introspection. The committee members — and, possibly, the board chair — evaluate the committee’s performance by answering specific questions about the committee’s impact on the financial reporting process and its relationships with management and internal and independent auditors.

Performance improvement. The chief audit executive, CFO, CEO and independent auditor are asked to comment on the committee’s performance.

360-degree. Each committee member (including the chair) evaluates all the other members. To minimize the risk of alienating committee members, consider beginning the process by assessing the committee’s overall performance and then move on to individual performance reviews.

Competence. The committee, others within the company or an outside evaluator assesses the financial literacy of committee members. They look at, among other things, recent training on enterprise risk management, accounting, auditing, financial reporting developments, and current business and industry practices.

Leadership. The committee members discuss the committee chair’s performance, communicating any concerns to the board chair or the chair of the corporate governance committee.

Whichever approach or combination of approaches your company uses, it’s important to phrase questions in terms designed to elicit ideas for improvement rather than to highlight weaknesses.

Need help?

Whether your company is required to perform audit committee self-evaluations or you conduct them voluntarily, careful planning is critical to maximize the benefits. Contact us to help design an effective self-evaluation process based on your company’s specific needs.

© 2019

Posted on

M&A Due Diligence: Don’t Accept Financial Statements at Face Value

The M&A market was hot last year, and that momentum is expected to continue in 2019. Before acquiring another business, however, it’s important to do your homework. Conducting comprehensive due diligence can be a daunting task, especially if you’ve never negotiated a deal before. So, consider seeking input from an experienced accounting professional.

Reviewing historical performance

For starters, the target company’s historical financial statements must be reviewed. This will help you understand the nature of the company’s operations and the types of assets it owns — and the liabilities it owes.

When reviewing historical results, it’s important to evaluate a full business cycle, including any cyclical peaks and troughs. If a seller provides statements during only peak years, there’s a risk that you could overpay.

Historical financial statements also may be used to determine how much to offer the seller. An offer should be based on how much return the business interest is expected to generate. An accounting expert can project expected returns, as well as provide pricing multiples based on real-world comparable transactions.

Evaluating the target’s historical balance sheet also may help you decide whether to structure the deal as a stock purchase (where all assets and liabilities transfer from the seller to the buyer) or as an asset purchase (where the buyer cherry-picks specific assets and liabilities).

Looking to the Future

Prospective financial statements are typically based on management’s expectations for the future. When reviewing these reports, the underlying assumptions must be critically evaluated, especially for start-ups and other businesses where prospective financials serve as the primary basis for your offer price.

It’s also important to consider who prepared the prospective financials. If forecasts or projections are prepared by an outside accountant, do the reports follow the AICPA standards? You may have more confidence when reports provided by the seller conform to these standards. However, it’s a good idea to hire your own expert to perform an independent analysis, because management may have an incentive to paint a rosy picture of financial performance.

Digging deeper

A target company’s historical balance sheet tells you about the company’s tangible assets, acquired intangibles and debts. But some liabilities may not appear on the financial statements. An accounting expert can help you identify unrecorded liabilities, such as:

•Pending lawsuits and regulatory audits, •Warranty and insurance claims, •Uncollectible accounts receivable, and •Underfunded pensions.
You also need to be skeptical of representations the seller makes to seal a deal. Misrepresentations that are found after closing can lead to expensive legal battles. An earnout provision or escrow account can be used to reduce the risk that the deal won’t pan out as the seller claimed it would.

Avoiding M&A mishaps

Do-it-yourself acquisitions can lead to costly mistakes. In addition to evaluating historical and prospective financial statements, we can help identify potential hidden liabilities and misrepresentations, as well as prepare independent forecasts and projections. We also can help you determine the optimal offer price and deal terms based on an objective review of the target’s historical, prospective and unreported financial information.

© 2019

Posted on

How Do Profits and Cash Flow Differ?

Business owners sometimes mistakenly equate profits with cash flow. Here’s how this can lead to surprises when managing day-to-day operations — and why many profitable companies experience cash shortages.

Working capital

Profits are closely related to taxable income. Reported at the bottom of your company’s income statement, they’re essentially the result of revenue less the cost of goods sold and other operating expenses incurred in the accounting period.

Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) require companies to “match” costs and expenses to the period in which revenue is recognized. Under accrual-basis accounting, it doesn’t necessarily matter when you receive payments from customers or when you pay expenses.

For example, inventory sitting in a warehouse or retail store can’t be deducted — even though it may have been long paid for (or financed). The expense hits your income statement only when an item is sold or used. Your inventory account contains many cash outflows that are waiting to be expensed.

Other working capital accounts — such as accounts receivable, accrued expenses and trade payables — also represent a difference between the timing of cash flows. As your business grows and prepares for increasing future sales, you invest more in working capital, which temporarily depletes cash.

The reverse also may be true. That is, a mature business may be a “cash cow” that generates ample cash, despite reporting lackluster profits.

Capital expenditures, loan payments and more

Working capital tells only part of the story. Your income statement also includes depreciation and amortization, which are noncash expenses. And it excludes changes in fixed assets, bank financing and owners’ capital accounts, which affect cash that’s on hand.

To illustrate: Suppose your company uses tax depreciation schedules for book purposes. In 2018, you purchased new equipment to take advantage of the expanded Section 179 and bonus depreciation allowances. The entire purchase price of these items was deducted from profits in 2018. However, these purchases were financed with debt. So, actual cash outflows from the investments in 2018 were minimal.

In 2019, your business will make loan payments that will reduce the amount of cash in the company’s checking account. But your profits will be hit with only the interest expense (not the amount of principal that’s being repaid). Plus, there will be no “basis” left in the 2018 purchases to depreciate in 2019. These circumstances will artificially boost profits in 2019, without a proportionate increase in cash.

Look beyond profits

It’s imperative for business owners and management to understand why profits and cash flow may not sync. If your profitable business has insufficient cash on hand to pay employees, suppliers, lenders or even the IRS, contact us to discuss ways to more effectively manage the cash flow cycle.

© 2019

Posted on

4 Ideas for Fostering a Partnership Between Internal and External Auditors

External audits aren’t required for every business. But whether required or not, they can provide lenders and investors with assurance that your financial statements are free from material misstatement and prepared in accordance with U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP).

How can you help facilitate efficient, timely audit fieldwork? The keys are frequent communication and coordination between a company’s internal audit department and its external audit firm throughout the year. Here are four ways to foster this partnership.

1. Encourage frequent communication

Scheduling regular meetings between members of the internal and external audit teams sets the stage for a more efficient audit process. You might discuss emerging issues, such as how the company intends to apply a new accounting standard or the status of internal control remediation efforts.

In preparation for an audit, auditors can meet to compare the internal audit department’s workplan to the external auditor’s audit plan. This comparison can help minimize duplication of effort and identify areas where the teams might work together — or at least complement each other’s efforts.

2. Provide access to internal audit reports

The external audit team can’t rely exclusively on the internal audit department’s reports to plan their audit. But sharing in-house findings provides the external audit with a bird’s-eye view of the company’s operations, including high-risk areas that deserve special attention.

Designate an individual on your internal audit team to act as liaison with external auditors. He or she should be charged with sharing reports in a timely manner. This gives external auditors adequate time to review in-house reports and avoids hasty decision making.

3. Help external auditors navigate the organization

During fieldwork, external auditors need access to employees, executives and data dispersed throughout the enterprise. Internal auditors can share key documents compiled during their audit procedures.

Examples include the company’s organization charts, copies of audit reports from previous years, and a schedule of unresolved internal control deficiencies. This information helps educate external auditors and identifies employees to interview during audit inquiries.

4. Conduct joint training sessions

Both internal and external audit teams require continuing professional education (CPE) to maintain their licenses and improve their understanding of issues they might encounter during an audit. For example, training sessions might explain new accounting standards, emerging fraud scams and technology-driven auditing methods.

Joint training sessions help auditors share best practices and forge lasting bonds with members of the other audit team. Plus, it might be more cost-effective for internal and external auditors to share the fixed costs of providing CPE courses.

Win-win situation

These four ideas are just a starting point. Let’s brainstorm additional ways to foster collaboration between your internal audit department and our external auditors. This exercise will allow both teams to improve efficiency and increase the likelihood of producing timely, accurate financial statements.

© 2019

Posted on

Time to Celebrate! FASB Expands VIE Exception for Private Companies

The Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) recently gave private companies long-awaited relief from one of the most complicated aspects of financial reporting — consolidation of variable interest entities (VIEs). Here are the details.

Old rules

Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) Topic 810, Consolidation, was designed to prevent companies from hiding liabilities in off-balance sheet vehicles. It requires businesses to report on their balance sheets holdings they have in other entities when they have a controlling financial interest in those entities.

For years, the decision to consolidate was based largely on whether a business had majority voting rights in a related legal entity. In 2003, in the wake of the Enron scandal, the FASB amended the standard to beef up the guidelines on when to consolidate.

New rules

The updated standard introduced the concept of VIEs. Under the VIE guidance, a business has a controlling financial interest when it has:

  • The power to direct the activities that most significantly affect an entity’s economic performance,
  • The right to receive significant benefits from the entity, and
  • The obligation to absorb losses from the entity.

Private companies contend that some of their most common business relationships could be considered VIEs under ASC 810. These relationships are set up for tax or estate planning purposes — not to trick investors or pump up stock prices.

Private company alternative

Private companies told the FASB that the VIE model forced them to consolidate multiple affiliated and subsidiary businesses onto a parent’s balance sheet. This frustrated lenders and creditors, who wanted cleaner balance sheets. In addition, in companies where ownership is shared among close relatives, determining who holds the power may not always be clear.

In 2014, the FASB issued an updated standard that let private companies ignore the VIE guidance for certain leasing transactions. Private companies applauded this update, but problems persisted with the consolidation guidance for transactions that didn’t involve leases.

So this past October, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update (ASU) No. 2018-17, Consolidation (Topic 810): Targeted Improvements to Related Party Guidance for Variable Interest Entities, which expands the exception to include all private company VIEs. However, a private company that makes use of the latest amendments to Topic 810 must disclose in its financial statements its involvement with, and exposure to, the legal entity under common control.

Right for you?

The amendments in ASU No. 2018-17 are effective for private companies for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2020, and interim periods within fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2021. Early adoption is permitted. Contact us to determine whether this election makes sense for your business — and, if so, when you should adopt the simplified alternative.

© 2018