Documenting a Non-Compete Allocation

Published Categorized as Federal Income Tax, Tax
Planning For And Documenting Covenant Not To Compete Allocation
Planning For And Documenting Covenant Not To Compete Allocation

The importance of planning and documenting transactions is a critical aspect of tax law that can impact taxpayers across various industries and transactions of all sizes. It is a lifesaver when the IRS attacks.

Documenting transactions can help taxpayers provide evidence of the details of the transaction, such as the parties involved, the terms of the agreement, and the value of the transaction. This can be critical in cases where the IRS challenges the transaction or if there are disputes between the parties involved. Proper documentation and planning can also help taxpayers avoid potential tax issues and penalties, saving them time and money in the long run.

The recent Becker v. Commissioner, 92 T.C.M. 481 (2006) provides a prime example of this. The transaction in the Becker case involved the sale of a family-owned business and a non-compete agreement that was entered into as part of the sale.

Facts & Procedural History

Becker was an employee of and partial owner of a family business that is controlled by his father. Family discord resulted in Becker no longer being employed by the family business and agreeing to sell his business interest back to the business. The business was to pay Becker $24 million in exchange for his interest in the business and, as part of this agreement, Becker executed an agreement not to complete with the family business for a period of three years.

Becker’s accountant later informed Becker that he missed a tax planning opportunity by not allocating part of the $24 million dollar proceeds to the covenant not to compete. Negotiations ensued. Becker and the family business were not able to agree on an amount of the cost to allocate to the covenant not to compete. The parties reported different allocations on their tax returns.

The IRS noticed the different allocations and issued protective notices of deficiency to each party. These notices led to the dispute and the court’s decision in the Becker case.

The Tax Savings Opportunity

Had Becker allocated a portion of the monies received to the covenant not to complete, that amount would have been taxed at the ordinary tax rates (rather than the lesser capital gains tax rate), but the family business would have been able to take an amortization deduction for the portion allocated to the covenant not to compete. The family business would not have been able to deduct the cost otherwise.

These competing interests can be solved with proper tax planning, as adjustments can be made to the purchase and sale values to account for the tax liabilities.

Many taxpayers fail to plan for this issue and do not include the tax liability in their valuations. This is evidenced by the number of tax disputes involving this very issue. The U.S. tax court’s opinion in Becker describes a number of these prior court cases. The court cases focus on the intent of the parties and the underlying documentation.

Based on this prior case law, the court in Becker held that no portion of the funds received by Becker was allocable to the covenant not to compete. Becker lost. His loss was primarily due to the lack of contemporaneous documentation supporting his position.

The Take Away

Transactions like this one should be documented at the time the deal is done. Identifying the issue after the fact will almost certainly result in a tax dispute with the IRS and, ultimately, result in the U.S. Treasury collecting more tax than it otherwise would.

It should be noted that this same type of situation often comes up in the context of divorcing spouses and divorce settlements, employees and employee benefits, and even companies and personal injury settlements.

Watch Our Free On-Demand Webinar

In 40 minutes, we'll teach you how to survive an IRS audit.

We'll explain how the IRS conducts audits and how to manage and close the audit.