- 42 - This factor is neutral because neither petitioner’s expert Mr. Gelfond nor respondent’s expert Mr. Packard proffered persuasive comparable pay data. H. Petitioner’s Salary Policy to All Its Employees Courts have considered salaries paid to other employees of a business in deciding whether compensation is reasonable. Home Interiors & Gifts, Inc. v. Commissioner, 73 T.C. at 1159. We look to this factor to determine whether Mr. and Mrs. Myers were compensated differently from petitioner’s other employees solely because of their status as shareholders. Petitioner’s other employees (its construction workers) were compensated on a totally different basis from Mr. Myers and Mrs. Myers (its two sole officer-director-shareholders and the only members of its management team). The construction workers were compensated on an hourly basis. Mr. Myers testified that the construction workers (who were nonunion) received hourly wages, including higher hourly wages for any overtime work, and were paid weekly, and that he tried to pay them above average wages for the area. However, he added, petitioner had no uniform pay 26(...continued) furnished Mr. and Mrs. Myers. In this connection, we note that top executives of large, publicly traded companies often will receive stock options and deferred compensations as part of their compensation package. However, the record in the case at hand does not disclose what, if any, stock options the executives surveyed received. See, e.g. Labelgraphics, Inc. v. Commissioner, 221 F.3d 1091, 1097-1098 n.9 (9th Cir. 2000).Page: Previous 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011