The NASPP Blog

Tax withholding can be a challenge in the United States, but the challenges increase exponentially for stock compensation issues to non-U.S. employees. Today we feature a guest blog entry by Jennifer Kirk and Narendra Acharya of Baker & McKenzie, on the nuts and bolts (not to mention hammers and wrenches) of withholding taxes for ESPPs and RSUs for non-U.S. employees. Jennifer and Narendra will lead the session “Mastering ESPP and RSU Withholding Outside the United States” at the 19th Annual NASPP Conference.

Mastering ESPP and RSU Withholding Outside the United States
By Jennifer Kirk and Narendra Acharya of Baker & McKenzie

In today’s world, your company cannot afford to be noncompliant with its global stock plan withholding and reporting obligations. On a daily basis, we hear about the fiscal challenges affecting governments around the world. In addition to the cutbacks of programs and increased taxes and fees, governments remain focused on greater enforcement of existing tax obligations. In a number of countries, revenue collected from employer tax withholding (including employer and employee contributions to social taxes) is often the largest source of tax revenue–but still not sufficient. Whether through increased frequency of payroll audits, hiring more specialized teams of auditors, and/or more robust or extra reporting requirements, it is reasonable to expect that stock plan withholding practices will be facing increased scrutiny on a global basis.

As a general example, in December 2010, the UK tax authorities (HMRC) published a discussion document aptly titled “Improving the Operation of PAYE – Collecting Real-Time Information.” Not content to rely on payroll filings, which may only be made annually, and the periodic audit, HMRC in the discussion document envisions a process where it is electronically notified whenever payment is made to an employee and would confirm that the appropriate income tax and social taxes (National Insurance Contributions) have been deducted. The latest version of the discussion document no longer contains the more controversial proposal of having the compensation funds flow from the employer to HMRC (as a “central calculator” and disbursement agent) and then to the employee. Regardless of the outcome of the proposals, they are a great example of government’s focus on getting the money sooner and greater review of payroll calculations.

While a “central calculator” may not be imminent in the UK, even the current employer withholding and reporting requirements in the UK, as an example, can be challenging. First, there are additional reporting requirements beyond traditional payroll reporting that apply to equity compensation plans. This includes the annual share schemes return (Form 42) where the details of equity grants need to be specifically reported. The HMRC is then better able to cross-check the annual payroll reporting done by the UK employer to confirm that the taxable amount of equity compensation is indeed reported (and withheld upon) correctly. Second, there are timing requirements such that if the appropriate UK tax is not collected within 90 days, the employee is deemed to receive an additional benefit from the employer equal to the tax that should have been withheld, but on a grossed up basis. In short, noncompliance in the UK can be quite expensive.

During the 19th Annual NASPP Conference, the session “Mastering ESPP and RSU Withholding Outside the United States” will answer the key questions: the who, what, where, why and how of withholding for global stock plans. Don’t allow your company to be an easy target for foreign governments seeking tax revenue, as the penalties (and unwelcome scrutiny from foreign tax agencies) will be a much greater burden than ensuring that it gets done correctly in the first place.