Backdating Investigations
April 30, 2007
As federal investigators examine the stock option programs of more than 160 companies, innumerable other companies launch internal investigations. As top executives resign, shareholders file dizzying numbers of derivative class action suits. Finally, as the Securities Exchange Commission and Department of Justice bring enforcement actions and criminal charges, the media is vilifying the so-called stock option backdating scandal as the biggest example of corporate abuse since Enron. The option backdating media frenzy focuses upon investigations by federal prosecutors and other regulatory agencies into public companies that have employed stock option compensation plans for corporate executives and employees.
Backdated Options
April 30, 2007
On Feb. 8, 2007, the Internal Revenue Service ('IRS') made an usual offer to employers: on very short notice ' by Feb. 28, 2007, employers could inform the IRS of their intent to pay the back taxes and penalties owed by (non-insider) employees who exercised stock options with 'an exercise price of less than fair market value of the underlying stock on the date of grant in 2006.' Under this Program, companies with backdated options programs were 'allowed' to calculate and pay, by June 30, 2007, on behalf of their employees who exercised such options, a 20% penalty tax, and an additional 1% interest on underpayments, owed by such employees under ' 409A of the Internal Revenue Code ('IRC').
Climate Change: Why It Matters for Your Business
April 30, 2007
Climate change? Sustainable development? Greenhouse gases? Global warming? Traditionally, these concepts conjured up tree hugger-led environmental activists' warnings of the Earth's doom resulting from industrial fallout and natural resource use and misuse. Today, these hotly debated, frequently misunderstood scientific theories more often are the subject of critical analysis in corporate boardrooms, among business management and between leading U.S. CEOs. Despite some conflicting reports on the true effects of greenhouse gas emissions and other industrial-related impacts, all agree that the Earth's climate is warmer and continues to heat up annually. No consensus exists as to what can or should be done, how it shall be accomplished or by whom.
Whistleblowing with a French Twist
April 30, 2007
A long accepted and familiar concept in Anglo-Saxon countries, whistleblowing, for cultural and historical reasons, has proven to be a rather unwelcome legal obligation. France's total opposition to whistleblowing has softened over time and has been accompanied by a greater understanding and appreciation of its implications. Nevertheless, strong pervasive principles of French law continue to govern this domain.
Permanent Injunctions in Patent Cases: Generating Evidentiary Support
April 27, 2007
The Supreme Court recently changed the longstanding rules for obtaining a permanent injunction in patent infringement cases. <i>eBay Inc. v. MercExchange LLC</i>, 126 S.Ct. 1837 (2006). Prior to the Supreme Court's ruling in eBay, it was generally accepted that a successful plaintiff in a patent infringement trial was entitled to a permanent injunction virtually automatically. The Federal Circuit's rule was 'courts will issue permanent injunctions against patent infringement absent exceptional circumstances.' The few exceptions to this rule were generally limited to situations where public health would be affected by enjoining the infringer.
Recruiting and Retaining Associates
April 27, 2007
Partners in law firms of all sizes and specialties now realize it is one thing to attract high-quality associates, but an even more difficult challenge to retain them. Competition for top-quality associates continues to intensify, so effective associate retention is more important than ever.
Unfunded Retirement Plans: An Ongoing Problem
April 27, 2007
During the past year, we witnessed a marked increase in the number of law firms, both large and small, which are finding that their existing unfunded retirement plans are becoming significant, disruptive forces. The underlying problem created by these plans is that the plans result in current income being diverted to former partners, thereby reducing the compensation of the remaining active partners. Today, the combination of an expected spike in retirements related to the baby boom generation and, for many firms, greatly increased benefit exposure due to sharp increases in firm profitability that is factored into the value of retiree benefits, stand ready to test the financial viability of even the strongest firms.
Increased Flexibility for 401(k) Plan Sponsors
April 27, 2007
In the first half of this decade, a series of events wreaked havoc on pension plans. Enron and other major corporations collapsed with the result that employees and other investors lost billions of dollars in savings, including in many cases significant pension investments. Sept. 11 accelerated and deepened the fall of the financial markets. Lower securities prices, coupled with low interest rates, resulted in modest investment returns and increased funding obligations for sponsors of traditional defined benefit plans. In turn, major legacy air carriers and other historical industry leaders struggled (sometimes without success) to avoid bankruptcy. In response to these and other upheavals, Congress enacted the Pension Protection Act ('PPA') on Aug. 17, 2006, only three weeks after its introduction in the House of Representatives, in an effort to reform outdated aspects of federal pension laws and to provide greater stability and overall protection to pension plan members.
Midsize Firms Seek Former Large-Firm Clients
April 27, 2007
Being one of a client's go-to law firms used to be a pretty secure situation. But gone are the days of lifelong client loyalties. In fact, disloyalty is increasingly the norm according to the BTI Consulting Group's latest survey of clients ' a situation that creates challenges and opportunities for savvy firms.
Forfeited Capital Contributions
April 27, 2007
Beginning in the fall of 2004, partners in Dallas-based Jenkens & Gilchrist who left the firm also left behind their capital contributions, which in some cases totaled hundreds of thousands of dollars, due to the firm's 'contingent liabilities.'
