- 22 - Pacific Grains, Inc. v. Commissioner, 399 F.2d at 606; see also Estate of Wallace v. Commissioner, 95 T.C. at 553-554. B. External Comparison This second factor compares the employee's compensation with that paid by similar companies for similar services. Elliotts, Inc. v. Commissioner, 716 F.2d at 1246; see sec. 1.162-7(b)(3), Income Tax Regs. Based on their claimed knowledge of the compensation certain high-technology companies furnished their executives, petitioner's experts Culbertson and Jones were each of the opinion that the $722,913 bonus petitioner paid to Mr. Martin was reasonable. They noted that top executives at many high- technology companies typically receive stock options as part of their compensation package, and that these stock options can produce substantial compensation in the event the company's stock price rises greatly. However, as Jones noted, stock options could not be used by petitioner to compensate Mr. Martin, because Mr. Martin already owned a 100-percent stock interest in petitioner. Jones was also of the opinion that Mr. Martin was actually entitled to even more compensation than he received, because, according to her, he performed multiple executive roles, including being petitioner's chief executive officer, vice president of marketing, vice president of sales, and chiefPage: Previous 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011