
James F. McDonough
Of Counsel
732-568-8360 jmcdonough@sh-law.comFirm Insights
Author: James F. McDonough
Date: July 12, 2018
Of Counsel
732-568-8360 jmcdonough@sh-law.comShareholder Agreements, Buy-Sell Agreements, Partnership and Operating Agreements (collectively, “Agreements”) are frequently-used terms to describe agreements among business owners. Hopefully, the Agreement, whatever its title, covers issues such as contributions of property and services, management, voting, dispute resolution, and ownership transition.
One of the uglier issues facing business owners is the personal liability for the trust fund portion of payroll taxes withheld from employee wages. As anyone who has been employed knows, an employer is obligated to withhold payroll taxes from the wages of an employee. This withholding is known as the Trust Fund Portion and is in addition to the payroll tax the employer must pay from its own funds. When the Trust Fund Portion is not paid over to the government, the tax collector invokes the responsible person doctrine. In its elementary form, the doctrine imposes personal liability upon owners, officers and managers for payment. The doctrine extends its reach to those individuals who have the ability to direct the payment of funds. While this blog does not attempt to analyze years of case law, a rule of thumb is that check signing authority makes an individual a responsible person. A caveat to that rule is that anyone who exerts direct or indirect control over who the business pays will also be considered as a responsible person. Many cases exist where one who is essentially a bookkeeper with check signing authority is controlled by an owner who does not have check signing authority in an effort to protect the owner from liability. As the owner typically has more money, they become a natural target of the tax collector.
In United States v Commander, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a District Court decision holding Mr. Commander liable for unpaid payroll taxes of 1.5m. What is interesting is that Mr. Skerianz, the equal partner, was dismissed during the pendency of the case after he died. We do not know whether a settlement was reached between the decedent’s estate and the government. But we do know that Mr. Commander was not relieved of responsibility for the entire liability which is not apportioned in accordance with ownership.
Agreements typically have buy-sell provisions that are triggered at death and often use life insurance to fund the buy-out. Recently, I discussed a situation with a prospective client where the life insurance policies obtained on the lives of two equal partners were intended to be paid to a third party acting as trustee and be used to extinguish the decedent’s half of the liability. Unfortunately, each spouse was designated as the beneficiary for the policy on the life of his or her owner-spouse. When the life insurance proceeds arrived made payable to a surviving spouse, who was not a responsible person, it was not hard to anticipate that the surviving spouse held onto the funds. Although the government has weapons it can use against the estate and transferees, it is easier to chase the living than the dead.
One avenue open to the surviving partner is to file suit against the surviving spouse in Chancery court claiming a constructive trust over the proceeds. This would, if successful, give effect to the arrangement that was contemplated. Proving what was intended, however, is often difficult.
The facts described in the two preceding paragraphs raise questions about the purpose and use of life insurance proceeds. Clearly, the value of the business is negligible if not negative; therefore, the notion of a buy-sell under these conditions is inappropriate. Should the proceeds be applied to extinguish the tax debt? Would such application give the surviving owner a debt-free business and leave the estate hoping for payout? What would be the value of the business if the debt is not paid? Is it the value before death burdened by tax debt or is it a value determined well after death, insurance money received and the debt is repaid?
What should be discussed is how the proceeds of life insurance should be applied and whether some, all or none should be applied to the tax debt. If half of the proceeds were applied to the tax debt, there is no automatic release for the estate form the liability for the entire debt unless IRS agrees. When businesses and owners encounter Trust Fund liability, seldom are Agreements revised to address these new problems.
Do you have any questions? Would you like to discuss the matter further? If so, please contact me, James McDonough, or the Scarinci Hollenbeck attorney with whom you work at 201-806-3364.
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Since his inauguration two months ago, Donald Trump’s administration and the Congress it controls have indicated important upcoming policy changes. These changes will impact financial services policies and priorities. The changes will particularly affect cryptocurrency, as well as banking rules and regulations. Key Regulatory Changes in Cryptocurrency For example, in the burgeoning cryptocurrency business environment, […]
Author: Dan Brecher
The retail sector has experienced a wave of bankruptcy filings over the last year. Brick-and-mortar businesses in financial distress include big-name brands like Big Lots, Party City, The Container Store, and Vitamin Shoppe. When large retailers seek bankruptcy protection, they are not the only businesses impacted. Landlords can be particularly hard hit. While commercial landlords […]
Author: Brian D. Spector
The bankruptcy legal landscape presents both challenges and opportunities for businesses navigating financial distress. Understanding current bankruptcy trends can help businesses make more informed and strategic decisions. Corporate Bankruptcy Filings Trending Upwards Bankruptcy filings continued to trend upwards in 2024. According to statistics released by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, personal and business […]
Author: Brian D. Spector
In December, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) announced charges against two privately held companies for failing to file a Form D notice, which is generally utilized for exempt securities offerings. Here, the SEC’s enforcement sends a strong message: compliance with regulatory requirements is not optional and failure to comply can have significant consequences. […]
Author: Kenneth C. Oh
On February 14, 2025, the Office of General Counsel (OGC) of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) under Acting General Counsel William B. Cowen issued Memorandum 25-05, “New Process for More Efficient, Effective, Accessible and Transparent Case handling.” The Memorandum rescinds nearly all of the Memoranda issued by his direct predecessor, Jennifer Abruzzo, setting the […]
Author: Matthew F. Mimnaugh
If you purchase real property from a foreign person or entity, you may be required to withhold taxes from your payment to the seller under the Foreign Investment in Real Property Tax Act (FIRPTA). The federal tax law is designed to ensure that foreign sellers pay any applicable capital gains tax on profits realized from […]
Author: Jesse M. Dimitro
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!