Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Windsock who wrote (165360)	5/23/2002 5:34:29 PM
From: GVTucker	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Windsock, RE: Another possibility is that the option "expense" would become income to the employee requiring the payment of tax. If the option "expense" is considered a labor expense it is hard to find that the option grant is not a payment to an employee. The next question is what happens if the option never vests or expires because it is under water. The almost certain result of expensing options is that employees will get screwed and executives will get covered. Option income is already taxed at the employee level. When the employee exercises the option, the difference between the market value of the stock and the option strike price is income to the individual. There's no reason to change that item. As is usually the case in our country, individuals don't have much lobbying leverage to enforce silly tax laws. Corporations do.