Tax and financial advice from the Silicon Valley expert.

Who was the main author of the New Deal?

Frances Perkins became the first woman to serve in a U.S. Presidential cabinet (in 1933) and the fourth longest-serving cabinet secretary. She is also recognized as the principal author of Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal.

She was highly educated for that time, with a bachelor’s degree in chemistry and physics earned at Mount Holyoke College in 1902 and a master’s degree in social economics received in 1910 after studies at the Wharton School of Finance and Commerce of the University of Pennsylvania, and Columbia University.

She became concerned about women’s safety in the workplace when she witnessed the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire in 1911. The factory employed hundreds of workers, mostly women, and lacked fire escapes. The owner kept the doors and stairwells locked to keep employees from taking breaks. When the building caught fire, many workers couldn’t use the doors and tried to escape through the windows. 146 workers died.

After Perkins worked as a New York state commissioner overseeing New York’s industrial code and as the inaugural New York state industrial commissioner under then-governor Franklin Roosevelt, Roosevelt asked her to join his presidential cabinet and serve as the Secretary of Labor in 1933.

Perkins agreed to serve, provided Roosevelt would accept her policy priorities: a 40-hour work week; a minimum wage; unemployment compensation; worker’s compensation; abolition of child labor; direct federal aid to the states for unemployment relief; Social Security; a revitalized federal employment service; and universal health insurance.

She was successful in implementing all of those goals, except universal health insurance.

Perkins was also an advocate for massive public works programs, including implementing the Civilian Conservation Corps., to bring the nation’s unemployed back to work during the Great Depression.

Perkins also created the Immigration and Naturalization Service. Her goal was to humanize the treatment of immigrants in the U.S. She opposed restrictive immigration practices, abolishing the Bureau of Immigrations “Section 24” squad, known for illegal apprehension tactics which violated due process. (Sounds like ICE?)

Ironically, President Trump has been “undoing” these reforms and dismantling the Department of Labor.

American workers and retirees should honor Frances Perkins for the workplace protections and retirement security that she was instrumental in creating and that we benefit from, today.

Investors! – You might be losing vital protection

Public Company Accounting Oversight Board Chair Erica Williams has resigned at the request of Securities and Exchange Commission Chair Paul Atkins. Atkins has said he wants to terminate the PCAOB as a separate body and incorporate it into the SEC.

This action reflects the big-business friendly orientation of the Trump administration and the abandonment of regulations created to protect American consumers and investors.

Of course big businesses would prefer to have the freedom of eliminating regulation. It would be great if business leaders behaved like the demigods in Atlas Shrugged but they don’t. They misbehave, resulting in the injury and death of consumers and financial losses to investors.

What was the scandal that inspired Congress to create the PCAOB?

Enron was the darling of Wall Street during the 1990s and early 2000s. It was the largest natural gas provider in North America in 1992. In 1999, the company’s stock increased 56%, and in 2000, it increased an additional 87%.

The CEO of Enron was Kenneth Lay, who was a charismatic leader and close friend of the (Presidents) George Bush family. The “whiz kid” brains of Enron was Jeffrey Skilling, who had previously worked at McKinsey & Company.

Skilling introduced a number of innovations at Enron.

One was adopting mark-to-market accounting. Revenue was recognized for contracts when they were accepted, based on the total management estimate of revenue for the contracts before the services were performed. Skilling was able to get SEC approval for this method, so the auditors accepted it.

Although the company reported substantial profits, it never had positive cash flow.

In order to avoid having debt disclosed on the corporate balance sheet, the debt was incurred by “special purpose vehicle” subsidiaries of Enron, secured by Enron stock and recorded as related party transactions.

The company got control of a trading market for energy. The traders were able to manipulate the energy market in California with the cooperation of the switching stations, dramatically increasing the price paid by California utilities for energy and resulting in brownouts or shortages of energy provided within the state.

In the early stages of the internet, Enron introduced a broadband service that generated significant losses and eventually was closed. The Broadband Services department reported a financial loss of $102 million for the second quarter, 2001.

Kenneth Lay and Jeffrey Skilling continously encouraged employees to invest in Enron stock in their 401(k) accounts, while Lay, Skilling, and other Enron executives were selling their shares.

Enron acquired Portland General Electric (PGE) in a stock-for-stock exchange. PGE stock held in the 401(k) accounts of PGE employees was replaced with Enron stock.

Sherron Watkins, a Vice President for Enron, expressed concerns about Enron’s accounting practices, and wrote an anonymous letter to Kenneth Lay explaining her concerns. She presented a six-page report of her concerns to Lay and to the company’s lawyers and accountants. They didn’t agree with her concerns.

By October, 2001, Enron reported a third quarter loss of $618 million and announced it would restate its financial statements from 1997 to 2000 to correct accounting violations.

On November 28, 2001, credit rating agencies reduced Enron’s credit rating to junk status, leading to its $63.4 billion bankruptcy, the biggest on record at the time.

Arthur Andersen, the company’s auditor, was fired. The auditors shredded evidence in their possession. The scandal led to Arthur Andersen losing its license to practice public accounting, destroying the fifth largest CPA firm in the United States. (In addition to its audit work, Arthur Andersen had several consulting assignments with Enron.) (The surviving piece of Arthur Andersen is Accenture, renamed from Andersen Consulting.)

Kenneth Lay was convicted of six counts of securities and wire fraud, subject to a maximum sentence of 45 years in prison. He died before being sentenced.

Jeff Skilling was convicted of 19 counts of securities fraud and additional charges of insider trading. He was sentenced to 24 years and four months in prison, later reduced by 10 years in a deal with Department of Justice.

You can watch a documentary of the Enron story, Enron: The Smartest Guys In The Room, for free on YouTube here. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tx9B53s5XU

In Congressional hearings, it was revealed that the bankers, securities brokerages, utilities regulators, auditors, and the SEC were all complicit in the Enron scandal. Nobody wanted to question the honesty of the corporate officers.

As a result of the Enron scandal and other scandals, like Worldcom and Tyco, Congress passed the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, including the creation of the PCAOB for the oversight of the public accounting profession. The Financial Accounting Standards Board also adopted rules to curtail the use of questionable accounting practices.

The PCAOB had it most effective enforcement year to date in 2024. The agency made public 51 settled orders, compared to 40 settled orders each year for 2022 and 2023. KPMG Netherlands was fined $25 million, the highest civil money penalty in PCAOB history. Most of the PCAOB’s audit activity and penalties relate to international operations.

Without the continued oversight of the PCAOB, it seems likely that investor risk of fraud will increase and we will see more of the scandals experienced during the 1990s and 2000s.

Small business stock gain exclusion planning

Entrepreneurs creating new businesses have had an important benefit enhanced by the One Big Beautiful Bill Act of 2025 (OBBBA, H.R. 1, P.L. 119-21) – the Section 1202 Small Business Stock capital gain exclusion.  There are many tax planning considerations, including the choice of form of entity for the business, and employee stock option considerations.

Qualified Small Business Stock gain exclusion. 

Before the adoption of OBBBA, noncorporate taxpayers could exclude from taxable income capital gains from the sale or exchange of qualified small business stock held for more than five years.

Before the change, the exclusion was (still applies for qualified stock acquired before July 5, 2025):

  • 100% of the gain for qualified stock acquired after September 27, 2010;
  • 75% of the gain for qualified stock acquired after February 17, 2009 and before September 28, 2010; and
  • 50% of the gain for qualified stock acquired before February 18, 2009 (increased to 60% of the gain attributable to periods before 2019 if the stock was issued by a corporation in an empowerment zone and acquired after December 21, 2000.)

For stock acquired before September 28, 2010, 7% of the excluded gain is a tax preference item for alternative minimum tax reporting.

Excludable gain on dispositions of qualified stock from any single issuer for a tax year is limited to the greater of (1) $10 million, reduced by the aggregate amount excluded for the issuer’s stock in prior years ($5 million for married, filing separately); or (2) 10 times the taxpayer’s adjusted basis in all of the issuer’s stock disposed of during the tax years.

Gains on dispositions of qualified stock held by a pass-through entity for more than five years is passed through to partners, shareholders and participants who held interests in the entity when it acquired the stock and at all times thereafter.  The exclusion can’t reflect any increase in the person’s share of the entity after the entity acquired the stock.

In addition to the exclusion, taxable gains from sales of qualified stock may be deferred under Internal Revenue Codes Section 1045 by reinvesting the sale proceeds in stock of another qualified small business within 60 days after the sale.

Qualified small business stock is stock issued after August 10, 1993, and acquired by the taxpayer at the original issue, directly or through an underwriter, in exchange for money or property, or as compensation for services provided to the corporation.  The issuing corporation must be a domestic C corporation other than a regulated investment company, cooperative, or other pass-through corporation.

Both before and immediately after the qualified stock is issued, the corporation’s aggregate gross assets must not exceed $50 million, with parent-subsidiary controlled groups treated as one corporation.  During substantially all of the taxpayer’s holding period, at least 80% of the value of the corporation’s assets must be used in the active conduct of qualified trades or businesses.

A qualified business does not include the performance of services in the fields of health, law, engineering, architecture, accounting, actuarial science, performing arts, consulting, athletics, financial services, brokerage services, or any trade or business if its principal asset is the reputation or skill of employees.  Hospitality, farming, insurance, finance and mineral extraction also are not qualified businesses.

Note that retail, manufacturing, and research to develop a product are qualifying businesses.

How OBBBA changes the thresholds.

OBBBA changes the gain exclusion by creating tiers, effective for stock issued or acquired and to tax years commencing after July 4, 2025.  The exclusion ratios are 50% after three years, 75% after four years, and 100% after five years.  The per-issue dollar cap for post-enactment shares is increased from $10 million to $15 million reduced by the aggregate amount excluded for the issuer’s stock in prior years ($7.5 million for married persons filing separately), indexed for inflation after 2026.  The post-enactment aggregate-asset ceiling is increased from $50 million to $75 million, indexed for inflation after 2026. 

There is no alternative minimum tax preference for the excluded gains for these shares. 

The higher asset ceiling means the stock of more corporations will qualify for the exclusion. 

Shareholders who have capital gains from sales of qualified small business stock will be eligible to exclude more of their gains from taxable income.

The holding period requirement to qualify for a partial exclusion has been relaxed, so more sales of qualified small business stock will qualify for some exclusion from taxable income.

In the past, the thresholds haven’t been indexed for inflation.  Under OBBA, the thresholds will be automatically increased for inflation after 2026.

Family tax planning tip.

Giving family members cash to purchase qualified small business stock can increase the exclusion threshold for the family.  (Up to $15 million per family member.)

Choice of entity considerations.

Making a decision about what form a business should be requires having a long-term horizon and a crystal ball.

According to a Bureau of Labor Statistics report in 2024, about 20% of startups that opened for business in 2013 failed during the first year.  About 39% of startups failed within the first three years.  About 50% of startups failed within the first five years.  About 65% failed within the first ten years.  It seems the odds are against realizing a gain from the sale of startup stock.  Only a handful of shareholders do.

To qualify for small business stock to qualify for the exclusion, it must be issued by a corporation that qualifies when the stock is issued.  The corporation that issues the stock must be a regular “C” corporation (including an LLC that elects to be taxed as a C corporation – most don’t.)  Stock issued by an “S” (passthrough entity) corporation doesn’t qualify, but stock issued by a former S corporation after terminating its S election and becoming a C corporation can qualify.

Why is this important?

Business startups typically generate losses during their first few years.  Losses of a C corporation are “locked” in the business and aren’t deductible for its owners.  Losses of passthrough entities are eligible to be deducted on the income tax returns of their owners, subject to limitations like basis limitations, passive activity loss limitations, and at risk limitations.

Owners of general partnerships and sole proprietorships include their shares of “at risk” debt in their investment for the limitation for deducting business losses.  (If the business fails, they are liable for the debt.)

Passthrough entities aren’t subject to double taxation, like C corporations.  The owners pay income taxes on the entity’s taxable income and add that income to their tax basis (cost for computing taxable gain) for the sale of their ownership interest.

Partnerships and sole proprietorships have an advantage of being able to possibly liquidate by distributing their assets tax-free.

For businesses whose business plans don’t include having a public offering of their shares or selling the business at a multiple asset value for the foreseeable future, these are good reasons to choose passthrough structures, not C corporations.

For businesses that are adequately capitalized and are developing significant intellectual property or significant net income for a high multiple valuation that is expected to be sold soon after five years, or that plan to make a public offering of their shares, C corporations look more attractive.

Employee Stock Options and the Qualified Small Business Stock Capital Gain Exclusion.

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has confirmed the Tax Court in holding employee stock options don’t qualify as stock for the Small Business Stock Capital Gain Exclusion.  The court also ruled the holding period of employee stock options before exercising them isn’t included for the 5-year holding period requirement.  The shares must be owned to start the clock.[1]

Any ordinary income for stock acquired by exercising an employee stock option isn’t eligible for the Small Business Stock Capital Gain Exclusion.

As explained below, determining when the holding period begins becomes complicated when employee stock options have a vesting schedule and the employer or other option granter permits an early exercise of employee stock options.  For nonqualified stock options, the employee may elect under Section 83(b) to treat the early exercise as taxable for regular tax and alternative minimum tax reporting.  When that election is made, the holding period starts on the date of exercise.  When that election isn’t made, the holding period starts on the later of the vesting date or the date of exercise.

For incentive stock options, the regular tax holding period starts on the date of exercise, regardless of vesting.  The Section 83(b) election to treat the early exercise as taxable only applies for the alternative minimum tax and the option is treated as a nonqualified option for alternative minimum tax reporting.  (The holding period might start on different dates for regular tax and AMT reporting.  Note there is no AMT adjustment relating to most Small Business Stock Capital Gain Exclusions.  For stock acquired before September 28, 2010, 7% of the excluded gain is a tax preference item for alternative minimum tax reporting.)


[1]Natkunanathan v. Commissioner, 110 AFTR 2d 2012-5193, July 12, 2012.

Tax and financial advice from the Silicon Valley expert.