I'm the guy in the article. So, I got a letter from the Skype HR folks indicating that if I were to persist on the path of exercising my options, then they would:
(1) exercise their right to repurchase the shares at grant-price, leaving me with net zero gain;
(2) demand tax withholding on the shares, valued at fair market value (substantially higher than grant price, given that the MSFT deal had already been announced)
The sum effect of 1 and 2 being net-zero gain on the shares, minus a large chunk of cash out of pocket tied up in a tax withholding account.
My sympathy. I am thinking the tax, as described by them, is not how the IRS would view it. I would imagine that you probably want all this behind you, but I would think a lawyer mightbhave a different interpretation. You would still net zero, but the tax things seems way out of left field.
>... demand tax withholding on the shares, valued at fair market value ...
Income tax is only due on the portion of the asset that is not subject to a "substantial risk of forfeiture". Thus a letter claiming certainty of instant forfeiture cannot also claim income tax. (FYI, other limits to property rights, such as a lock-up agreement after an IPO, are not considered a forfeiture.)
So why did they lie to scare you out of doing something that would have been pointless? Because if they had been forced to buy back the stock at the exercise price, they would have had to pay income tax on the difference from the fair market value.
The sum effect of 1 and 2 being net-zero gain on the shares, minus a large chunk of cash out of pocket tied up in a tax withholding account.
Terrible.