Pagel, Inc. (Pagel) appeals from a United States Tax Court decision that income derived from Pagel’s sale of a stock option was taxable as ordinary income under 26 U.S.C. § 83 (1976). We affirm.
Pagel received a nonqualified stock option in 1977 as partial compensation for underwriting a stock offering on behalf of Immuno Nuclear Corp. (Immuno). This option gave Pagel the right to buy Immuno shares at scheduled prices but restricted Pagel from exercising or disposing of the option for thirteen months after its grant. At the time of receipt, Immuno options were not publicly traded. Pagel sold the Immuno option in 1981 and reported the sale as a capital gain.
Section 83 provides that the excess of the fair market value of property received in compensation for services over the amount, if any, paid for the property shall be taxed as ordinary income. 26 U.S.C. § 83(a) (1976). If an option received as compensation is not publicly traded and the optionee is restricted from immediately exercising or disposing of the option, the option has no readily ascertainable fair market value. Treas.Reg. § 1.83-7(b)(2) (1978). In that case, section 83 will apply at the time the option is exercised or disposed of. Id. § 1.83-7(a). Because the Immuno option had no readily ascertainable fair market value at the time Pagel received it, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue (the Commissioner) rejected Pa-gel’s claimed capital gain treatment, instead treating the proceeds of the sale as ordinary income and assessing a deficiency against Pagel.
Pagel contends sale of the Immuno option should not be taxed as ordinary income because subsection 83(e)(3) provides “section [83] shall not apply to ... the [grant] of an option without a readily ascertainable fair market value” at the time of the grant. We reject this contention. Pa-gel mistakenly reads subsection 83(e)(3) in isolation from the remainder of the statute.
See United States v. Morton,
Subsection 83(e)(4) provides that “section [83] shall not apply to ... the [exercise or disposal] of an option with a readily ascertainable fair market value” at the time it is granted. When read together, it is clear subsections 83(e)(3) and 83(e)(4) provide a blueprint for determining when section 83 shall apply to compensatory options and for avoiding income recognition both at the time of grant and at exercise or disposition. Under subsections 83(e)(3) and (e)(4), if an option has a readily ascertainable fair market value when granted, the recipient must recognize ordinary income at the time of grant but not at the time of exercise or disposal; if an option does not have a readily ascertainable fair market value when granted, the recipient must recognize ordinary income at the time of exercise or disposal but not at the time of grant.
Bagley v. Commissioner,
Pagel argues in the alternative it should have reported the option as ordinary income in its 1977-78 tax year because a number of recognized formulas are capable of measuring the fair market value of a restricted option at the time of the option’s grant.
See Pagel v. Commissioner,
The Tax Court correctly observed that “ ‘Congress has delegated to the Commissioner, not to the courts, the task of prescribing all needful rules and regulations for the enforcement of the Internal Revenue Code.’ ”
Pagel,
Noting that Treas.Reg. § 1.83-7(b)(2) adopted the definition of “readily ascertainable fair market value” contained in Treas. Reg. § 1.421-6(c)(3)(i) (1961), the Tax Court carefully tracked Congress’s activity in adopting and amending statutory provisions concerning compensatory options.
Pagel,
Having carefully considered Pagel’s contentions, we affirm the decision of the Tax Court.
