Advertisement

May 20, 2013

409 Valuations in Venture Capital

A few months ago, I wrote a blog on the good old days of sweat equity pricing. The option exercise price was supposed to be set at the fair market value of the common stock on the date the option was granted. The “technical” problem of figuring out fair market value was as much ritual as science: the process typically culminated in a boilerplate board resolution that implied a timely, exhaustive, good faith effort by the board – that in reality was mostly driven by rules of thumb. Among those rules, the “common is worth 1/10th the preferred at the time of a first round venture financing” was one of the most popular. Life was more or less good for founders, employees and investors alike.  If you stuck to the rules of thumb and backed it up with the appropriate boilerplate, the IRS generally looked the other way.

And then came 2004, and Internal Revenue Code Section 409A, and the game was up. 

Recently, Alex Klingelberger of Whitehawk Advisory passed on a valuable presentation to me that covers 409A‐related frequently asked questions, the nature and effect of limitations placed on valuations by valuation specialist review groups, and an empirical study of results for valuations conducted during the past five years.  I am, in turn, passing it along to our Venture Best blog readers, as I have found the presentation to be quite informative and useful to entrepreneurs and several of our clients.

Click here to view Klingelberger’s presentation on 409 Valuations.

© MICHAEL BEST & FRIEDRICH LLP

About the Author

paul a. jones, of counsel, michael best law firm
Of Counsel

Craig Johnson is a member of the Business and Health Care Practice Groups in the Madison office. Mr. Johnson worked as a patient advocate for the UW clinical program Center for Patient Partnerships for a year and a half while attending law school. During the fall of 2007, he worked as a Judicial Intern for Hon. William C. Griesbach for the Eastern District of Wisconsin.

608-283-0125

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.