2. Structural Alternatives (Outline)

Disclaimer

There are at least three basic structures for Crypto Companies, which will be discussed in separate posts:

A.     International Structure  (very hard to make work)
    1. In order to have any reasonable argument that this structure work, you have to assume: 
      1. Existing network development is extremely limited (e.g., pre White Paper); and
      2. Sale of Tokens will be part of an operating business where the Sponsor provides software or services to users.
    2. OpCo forms a wholly owned foreign subsidiary ("ForCo")
    3. OpCo and ForCo enter into a "Cost Sharing Agreement" pursuant to which each will fund a portion of the development costs of the Network, based on the projected share of income from foreign sources and domestic sources.  OpCo funds a portion of its share of those costs by contributing all the foreign rights to the Network to ForCo
    4. Each of OpCo and ForCo sell Tokens or SAFTS to raise money to fund the expenses of developing the network and operating the system
 (Read more: here)
B.     Corporate Structure
      1. Ideally:
        1. Founders contribute their IP to OpCo, and either
          1. reserve a certain percentage of the Tokens or 
          2. receive, in addition to their common stock in OpCo, a SAFT with a market (very low) purchase price entitling them to Tokens upon network launch.
        2. The Company may also offer employees the right to purchase Tokens for the fair market value of the Tokens before the first SAFT;
          1. In order to avoid the risk that the Company (and its "Responsible Persons") are subject to a failure to withhold penalty, the Company might consider having the purchase price of the Tokens be variable (i.e., adjusted upward if the IRS ultimately determines that the FMV on the issue date was higher than the one set by the Company in the documents).
        3. If those common shares and SAFTs are subject to vesting, the Founders file an 83(b) election (and possibly the repurchase right related to the SAFTs is in favor of the other founders rather than the Company.
        4. Following the ICO, the Company invests a portion of the proceeds in an old-fashioned tax shelter to move losses into a year that can be carried back to the year of the ICO.
      2. If the IP is already owned by a corporation (so there is no opportunity to retain tokens when the IP is contributed) and the IP is too developed to justify a low SAFT price (e.g., the corporation has done a SAFT without having previously addressed employee/founder issues), then there are few structuring alternatives.
(Read more: here)
C.    LLC Structure:
      1. Founders contribute IP to a newly formed LLC, 
      2. LLC contributes all the IP other than X% of the Network's tokens (to be reflected in the Genesis Block) to the capital of a newly formed corporation ("OpCo")
      3. LLC issues equity to investors for cash or crypto currency and contributes that to the capital of OpCo;
      4. After the Network Launch and expiration of all lock ups on Tokens, LLC liquidates and distributes any Tokens it owns and the stock of OpCo to its shareholders;
(Read more: here)

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Should I sell my Tokens and realize a loss before year end?

Disclaimer     I have now been asked almost a dozen times about the "Wash Sale Rules" and whether token holders should sell and repurchase tokens before year end. The Wash Sale rules (IRC Section 1091) provide that if you sell a security at a loss and repurchase a substantially identical security within 30 days, your loss will be disallowed (and added to your tax basis in the purchased security). People have been hearing that the Wash Sale rule doesn't apply to tokens because the IRS has not designated tokens as securities.  (Remember that the characterization of tokens as securities by the SEC or as something else by the CFTC is not relevant for tax law purposes.  Tokens may be securities for some purposes and not for others.) If that's true, you could sell your BTC today and buy back BTC an hour later and trigger a loss that you can use to offset capital gain (or up to $3,000 of ordinary income) from some other source. That's a very reasonable argument...
Read more

1. So you want to do an ICO

Disclaimer The number of token offerings through ICOs or otherwise that have crossed my desk in the last 12 months has exploded.  Many of those transactions have been put together with such speed that corporate structure and tax treatment are an afterthought with expensive consequences.  Even now, most of the focus seems to be on the securities law treatment of Tokens.  The following is a brief outline of some issues that are worth considering -- primarily in order to avoid adverse tax issues for founders, issuers and investors.  Following posts will discuss different structures mentioned below in greater detail. Before we get to actual structures, however, it's important to understand what kinds of adverse things can happen to you.  Many people think that selling Tokens should be taxed the same way as a stock sale is taxed -- but there is a specific Internal Revenue Code section that provides stock sales are tax free -- and it doesn't apply to Token sales. ...
Read more

Taxes on Token Sales (in particular CA State taxes)

Disclaimer  Assuming you have successfully designed a Token Network and are selling Tokens (whether directly or through SAFTs) you need to determine where you owe tax and at what rate. The new federal rules  (Section 14202 of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act) may provide significant benefits to Token sellers who can show that their income from Token sales is "foreign derived" (a reduced rate to 13.125%).  Unfortunately, the term "foreign derived" is not well defined and its unclear if Token sellers merely need to prove that the buyers have a foreign address or will need to show actual foreign residence and use, but it's worth watching and tracking whatever information you have on buyers. Fortunately, the California rule is more straight forward and may offer some opportunities. It says that the income from sales of intangible property may be allocated instate (subject to CA tax) and out of state (not subject to CA tax) as follows: "Sales from intangible ...
Read more