Paper Stock Certificates: A Thing of the Past?

As public companies are increasingly opting out of providing paper certificates to shareholders in favor of providing electronic registration (a movement known as “dematerialization”), most private companies and their shareholders have yet to follow suit.  Issuing uncertificated shares is allowed under most states’ laws, and, as many on the public company side can attest, numerous cost and time efficiencies can be gained by going paperless with shares.  As we accept electronic statements to represent our public company holdings and exhibits to Operating Agreements to note our LLC ownership interests, do we really still need as evidence of our private company ownership a hokey, bordered piece of paper with an eagle on it?

Disadvantages of Issuing Paper Stock Certificates

Consider the inefficiency and chances for errors in the typical cumbersome process to issue paper stock certificates:  Continue reading →

LLC Choice of Entity for Emerging Technology Companies

The recent $1 Billion Qualifying Therapeutic Discovery Project Credit program will be a real benefit to many area small life science and medical device companies. A surprise to many though when reading the requirements of the program is that limited liability companies (LLCs) that have as an owner a tax-exempt organization are not eligible for a grant under the program. Having a tax-exempt organization as an owner is more common than one might think. Many university technology transfer offices, such as the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation (WARF), are tax-exempt organizations and frequently hold an equity interest in the startups to which they license patents. As a result, those LLC biotech licensees are not eligible for a grant under the program. As the CEO of an LLC with which I work (but did not set up) said earlier this week about being excluded from eligibility, “Ouch! That stings! Another painful learning experience.”

LLCs are Typically Not the Best Choice of Entity for Emerging Technology Companies

The “LLC issue” for emerging companies extends well beyond this grant issue for therapeutic companies. I say this even though many attorneys recommend LLCs for virtually all contexts. Sure, LLCs have their place. I frequently advocate using them as holding companies, investment vehicles, and joint venture entities. Among other situations, it also can be appropriate to use them when there is a limited, small group of owners actively participating in the business or when the owners want to have a certain allocation of profits and losses that cannot be accomplished when using an S or C corporation. But for many emerging companies that have or plan to have outside investors, the LLC is often not the best choice of entity. Continue reading →

Changing Your Choice of Entity: Cross-Species Mergers and Conversions

With increasing frequency, companies are considering a change in their form of entity.  The reasons for the change vary considerably: sometimes companies are underwhelmed by the tax benefits of being a limited liability company and are overwhelmed by its complexities (international tax withholding issues, multi-state K-1’s, profits interests management, phantom income, and employee education regarding equity-based incentives), while other times companies are frustrated by the restrictions on S corporations and desire the flexibility that limited liability companies afford.  In other cases still, institutional investors may require a certain form of entity (e.g., a C corporation), while other investors (e.g., active angel investors) are looking to take advantage of pass through losses. 

Today, most states make it fairly easy to change the type of entity or even to change the state of organization of the entity.  It is important to keep in mind though that while the mechanics of converting to a new entity from a legal perspective are not typically too complex, the related tax issues can be incredibly intricate, especially for an organization with a long operating history and a complex capitalization structure.  While in many situations converting to a different type of entity will be tax-free, that will not always be the case.  Your tax advisor and accountants should be consulted early in the process when considering a change in entity form.  Assuming a change in structure is justified and the tax issues are manageable, this article focuses on the mechanics of converting from one type of entity to another.  

While there are variations among the states, there are generally two ways to change your type of entity from a legal perspective: merging with and into another entity of a different type and effectuating a conversion.  The method selected, as well as some of the finer details associated with the particular method selected, is often driven by tax considerations.

Change of Entity Form Through Merger

The more traditional way to change the form of an organization is through a merger.  Sometimes people refer to this as a cross-species merger.  A merger enables two or more entities to combine into a single entity.  The surviving entity can be recently created just to effectuate the change in entity form or it can have an operating history. The surviving entity typically files with the applicable state a plan of merger and a statement that the plan was approved in accordance with applicable law.  In most states, the plan of merger identifies the parties to the merger, the surviving entity, and the manner and basis of converting equity interests in each entity into interests in the surviving entity.  The plan of merger also includes any applicable amendments to governing documents (e.g., articles) for the surviving entity.  

After the merger, only the surviving entity continues to exist and it is responsible for all liabilities of each business entity that is a party to the merger.  Subject to certain exceptions and filing requirements, title to assets automatically vests with the surviving business entity.

Change of Entity Form Through Conversion

Within the last decade, most states have adopted statutes that allow organizations to convert their form of entity by just filing the applicable conversion documentation.  For example, in Wisconsin, a business that desires to convert to another type of legal entity must submit to the Department of Financial Institutions a certificate of conversion with a plan of conversion and a statement that the plan was approved in accordance with the laws applicable to the pre-converted entity. 

Similar to a plan of merger, most states require that a plan of conversion include the name, form of business entity and jurisdiction governing the entity both before and after the conversion.  In addition, the post-conversion articles of incorporation or other charter document is an attachment to the plan of conversion.  Some states however require a separate filing for the charter document.  Like with a plan of merger, the plan of conversion must also include the terms and conditions of the conversion and the manner and basis of converting the ownership interests in the old entity to the ownership interests in the new entity. 

Upon conversion, the new entity continues to be subject to the liabilities incurred prior to the conversion.  If a business owner had any personal liability by reason of the owner’s position in the entity (such as the general partner of a limited partnership), such liability will continue, but only to the extent accrued prior to the conversion.  The new entity continues to be vested with title to all its properties, subject to modest exceptions and certain filing requirements.  Any legal proceeding pending against the old entity will be continued against the new entity.  

Conducting Due Diligence When Changing Your Form of Entity

Despite the fact that the legal filing requirements for cross-species mergers and conversions are rather straight forward and mechanical, there are a number of due diligence issues that should be considered prior to making the change in entity form.  For example, in contracts, a merger is sometimes treated as an assignment of a contract from one entity to another and many contracts prohibit such assignments without prior consent.  Businesses should review all their material contracts and consider seeking consent for assignment where necessary.  Trademark and patent filings in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) will need to be updated to reflect new company names in a conversion.  Mergers are treated as an assignment that also needs to be recorded with the USPTO.  Likewise, regulatory approvals, permits and licenses may need to be updated.  Because a conversion, rather than a merger, involves only a single entity, many consider that general contract anti-assignment provisions do not apply to conversions unless conversions are specifically addressed and prohibited.  In either case, however, there is frequently a company name change that may need to be reflected on a variety of documents. 

In addition to third party contracts and government filings and licenses, there are a number of organizational documents that may need to be created as a result of the merger or conversion.  For example, if an entity changes from a limited liability company to a corporation, many of the provisions from the organization’s operating agreement prior to the cross-species merger or conversion will be incorporated into a combination of the new corporation’s bylaws and perhaps a separate shareholders agreement, investor rights agreement or voting agreement.  Some of these organizational-related documents can be adopted wholesale with no or modest changes.  Others, however, will need considerable changes or even termination because of statutory requirements, efficiency, or custom.  

Conclusion

While it would be convenient to have all the facts up front prior to choosing an entity’s form when creating it, even the most diligent and seasoned entrepreneurs experience change in facts or laws that necessitate changing the organization’s form of entity.  With proper planning and involvement of your attorney and accountant, the process of converting your form of entity is usually manageable.  In the end, like with most things, the decision often becomes a cost-benefit analysis.