abanky Posted July 7, 2008 Posted July 7, 2008 A Dr. owns 100% of two unrelated companies, his practice and a hair salon. His children are not employees of his practice. can he transfer ownership of the hair salon to his children? and if so, how much ownership can he keep?
Mike Preston Posted July 7, 2008 Posted July 7, 2008 How old are the kids? Is it a community property state?
abanky Posted July 7, 2008 Author Posted July 7, 2008 older then 21. and what do you mean about community property state?
Mike Preston Posted July 7, 2008 Posted July 7, 2008 Just checking all the bases. One more thing, are the companies an affiliated service group? Well, ok, you said unrelated. Did you mean unrelated in the affiliated service group sense or unrelated just because they seem to do different things? That is, have you had a formal analysis done which confirms they aren't an affiliated service group? I admit to not giving this any thought other than to ask the question, in case somebody else seems to think that the answer is obvious.
abanky Posted July 7, 2008 Author Posted July 7, 2008 the actions of one corp does not affect the actions of the other corp. No money or services are exchanged. This is my first ownership question so I apologize if i don't know what info to give. Thank you for you help.
Mike Preston Posted July 7, 2008 Posted July 7, 2008 Well, since both are service companies, the answer might be different than if one or both weren't. Now that we have all the facts, maybe somebody can give a quick rundown.
QDROphile Posted July 7, 2008 Posted July 7, 2008 We don't have any facts about any retirement plans for any employees of any employer, prospective or otherwise.
abanky Posted July 7, 2008 Author Posted July 7, 2008 The doctor's practice has a PS plan the salon nothing. Basically, he owns 100% of both business. He wants to get rid of the salon so he doesn't have to cover them in the PS plan or increase benefits to those who are currently eligible.
Belgarath Posted July 7, 2008 Posted July 7, 2008 Ignoring the reasons he wants to do this, and in a very general way: If he retains 50% or less ownership in either the voting stock or stock value of the salon, there wouldn't be family attribution from his adult children, and no CG. That's also assuming no additional attribution from options, etc. He can still exclude the salon employees even if a CG as long as he can pass coverage testing. But he probably can't, or this question wouldn't be coming up. Doesn't sound like any ASG here. I can't stress enough that a competent attorney should always be consulted on these issues.
abanky Posted July 7, 2008 Author Posted July 7, 2008 Thank you all very much. That's what I thought about the 50% ownership and Family attribution. I'm going to have him talk to a lawyer instead of giving him my opinion.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now