Categories
C-IP2 News Law and Economics

Scalia Law’s Innovation Law Clinic Partners with BizLaunch for Online Legal Clinic on Business Entities for Startups

The following post comes from Wade Cribbs, a 2L at Scalia Law and a Research Assistant at CPIP.

a hand hovering under lightbulbs drawn on a chalkboardBy Wade Cribbs

Last week, Arlington Economic Development’s BizLaunch network co-hosted an online legal clinic event entitled “Mason Law Clinic @BizLaunch: Which Entity is Right for Your Startup?” with Antonin Scalia Law School’s Innovation Law Clinic, which is led by CPIP Executive Director Sean O’Connor. The virtual clinic addressed entrepreneurship and which business entities might best fit a business’s needs and attract investment. The panelists were Kenneth Silverberg, Senior Counsel at Nixon Peabody, and third-year Scalia Law students Mitch Gibson and Rebecka Haynes.

Mr. Gibson opened the discussion by describing the kinds of non-corporate pass-through business entities: sole proprietorships, partnerships, and limited liability companies (LLC). Sole proprietorships are operated by only one person, while partnerships can have as many participants as desired. Neither form of business entity requires registration with the State Corporation Commission; nevertheless, registering a business’s name or obtaining an employer identification number may be necessary. Similarly, partnership agreements are borderline necessary before beginning a partnership so that all parties agree on profit splits, decision making, and how much say each partner has in the venture.

An entrepreneur must register an LLC with the State Corporation Commission. An LLC is made of members and managers. A member of an LLC is anyone who owns a stake in the company—analogous to a shareholder—while a manager can be either a member or an outside person who handles the business decisions. Either members or a manager can run an LLC. To create an LLC, form LLC-1011 must be filed with the State Corporation Commission. If the business is for professional occupations—such as for doctors, lawyers, or architects—form LLC-1103 is needed.

Pass-through taxation is where the business itself is not taxed for the gains and losses. Pass-through taxation occurs at the ownership level, and its most significant advantage is that there is only a single level of taxation. Gains are taxed as the owners’ income and are taxed only once—instead of being taxed when made as profit by the business and then again when distributed to shareholders. Similarly, another advantage is pass-through losses. If the business loses money, the losses can be used to diminish other tax burdens. Liquidity, however, is a disadvantage of pass-through taxation. Liquidity occurs when the business has made a profit that remains within the business. When this happens, the owners are still taxed on the profits without receiving any of them. Another disadvantage is that there is a limit of $10,000 that can be deducted from state or local taxes per member or partner.

Ms. Haynes continued the discussion of pass-through taxation with how it applies to corporations. A corporation utilizes pass-through taxation by electing to be taxed as an S-Corporation, which is a corporation that chooses to be taxed under Subchapter S of the tax code. An S-Corporation is formed by incorporating in the desired state and submitting form 2553, “Election by a Small Business Corporation,” signed by all shareholders. For a business to be an S-Corporation, it must be a domestic corporation, have no more than 100 shareholders, and have only one class of stock. Furthermore, the kind of shareholder is limited to individuals, certain trusts, and estates. Certain financial institutions, insurance companies, and international sales corporations are ineligible to be S-Corporations. An S-Corporation is different from other tax-through businesses in that it allows for tax-free reorganization, provides stock options, and can easily convert to a C-Corporation.

A C-Corporation, on the other hand, is a corporation that does not elect to be taxed under Subchapter S of the tax code and by default is taxed under Subchapter C of the tax code. C-Corporations are closely or publicly held. A closely held corporation has a limited number of shareholders, whereas a publicly held corporation has a large number of shareholders with shares on the market. Some states allow for closely held C-Corporations to dispense with some of the formalities of operating a corporation. C-Corporations are taxed separately from their owners at a flat 21% tax rate. Any further profits distributed to shareholders are then taxed again, resulting in an effective tax rate of 41% on the distributions. The exception to this is that qualified small business stock that has been held for more than five years after its issuance is eligible for 100% exclusion from gain on disposition, not to exceed $10 million for any one shareholder. For a stock to be a qualified small business stock, there are three requirements: it must be issued by a C-Corporation at original issuance; the corporation must be engaged in active business that is not a service business; and the business’s gross assets cannot exceed $50 million. A C-Corporation’s benefits are that it can issue more than one class of stock and have unlimited deduction of state and local taxes.

Prof. Silverberg addressed how the various tax and business structures apply to someone who wants to start, run, and sell a business. Prof. Silverberg did this by examining the sale of a hypothetical landscaping business. Through this hypothetical example, Prof. Silverberg looked at what motivates a purchaser to buy a business and how this affects the taxation of the transaction. The buyer and seller have to agree on the purchase price and how that price is allocated to different assets. Prof. Silverberg then discussed the amount pocketed by the entrepreneur after selling the business under pass-through taxation; he also discussed the sales structure under the different possible business structures and compared it to taxation under a C-Corporation. Looking at the numbers, Prof. Silverberg highlighted the tension between the seller’s desire to sell the business as stock under a C-Corporation and the buyer’s desire to buy assets under a sole proprietorship or the like.

The event page can be found on AED’s website and on the Eventbrite page. The video of the event is available below:

Categories
Innovation Inventors Patent Law Uncategorized

Jennifer Lawrence Movie “Joy” Highlights the Need for Patent Protection

The following guest post comes from Rebecca Cusey, a second year law student at George Mason University School of Law and a movie critic at The Federalist.

By Rebecca Cusey

Rebecca_Cusey_Headshot

There are two patents in the movie “Joy”: the one the titular character failed to get and the one for which she is willing to fight tooth and nail.

The first, for an idea she had in high school to improve dog collars, fills her with regret as she sees a similar product successfully sold in shops. As a single mother working to care for not only her children, but her extended family, Joy instinctively knows that owning that idea and marketing the product would have put her life on a different track.

When she has an idea to vastly improve the household mop, she sets out to found a new business empire on ownership of her idea. Joy has a million ideas and the passion to see them through. What she does not have is experience with patents. Her main investor, who happens to also be her father’s girlfriend, gets some bad advice from a lawyer with no patent expertise. His cursory patent search turns up an owner of a similar idea in Hong Kong and his legal advice is to pay advance royalties to this owner.

The owner’s United States representative is only too happy to take her money and, furthermore, he has connections with a factory that can make the parts for her product. A match made in heaven!

However, Joy increasingly loses confidence in the manufacturer. When she flies out to investigate, she discovers the representative is taking steps to fully patent her idea himself and freeze her out. She learns that paying him royalties may have weakened her legal claim to the patent.

That’s when Jennifer Lawrence goes all black leather and aviator sunglasses. She becomes a bad-to-the-bone (but still legal) heroine, an infringer avenger, and a crusader for intellectual property rights. Joy is going to fight to own her idea for a better mop.

The movie does an excellent job of showing why it matters. The mop is more than a mop. It is literally the roof over her kids’ heads. She has taken financial risks, put all her assets into her invention. That alone is enough, but there is more to it than that. Her lifelong dream has been to invent ways to make the world better. An innovator is who she is, down in her core. If some fly-by-night outfit can just take her idea, they take something from her that is the essence of who she is.

Sadly, perhaps, for patent lawyers, and probably only for patent lawyers, the final battle of the film does not happen in a courtroom. Joy finds, shall we say, alternate means of protecting her property. The point stands, however, in a surprisingly ringing endorsement of intellectual property rights. The idea for the mop belongs to Joy and no one has the right to take it from her.

In fact, the movie notes that, in the years after winning her first battle, Joy Mangano secured over a hundred patents. One became the highest selling product ever on the Home Shopping Network. Not bad for a girl who started with just with an idea and a dream.

Written and directed by David Russell and starring Jennifer Lawrence, Bradley Cooper, and Robert Di Nero, Joy is currently playing in theaters.