The Entertainment Industry and § 409A: That’s Hollywood!

The Entertainment Industry and § 409A: That’s Hollywood!

By now, everyone has heard of Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), which has turned traditional deferred compensation on its head by including deferrals in gross income unless they meet strict requirements.  While Hollywood may have been the furthest thing from Congress’s collective mind when Code Section 409A was enacted, its provisions are broad enough to reach common entertainment industry agreements. The basic problem is that many service providers in the entertainment industry will not qualify under Section 409A’s exclusion for “independent contractors.”

In the entertainment industry, agreements often require the talent to provide services in one year in exchange for compensation in a later year based on box office receipts. Absent compliance with the strict requirements of Section 409A, the talent might be required to include income in the year he acted rather than the year he was paid (assuming the payment is not subject to a “substantial risk of forfeiture”). To go one step further, suppose the motion picture is widely successful, leaving the audiences clamoring for a sequel. The actor might then renegotiate his agreement with the production company for a bonus against the contingent payments to be paid under the original agreement. In essence, the movie star has renegotiated his rights to future earnings and accelerated his receipt of amounts previously earned and deferred. Section 409A punishes this type of renegotiation.

Section 409A generally does not apply to an independent contractors that meet certain requirements. However, because motion picture projects may require the exclusive attention of the talent for more than one year, the independent contractor exception may not be available.

Section 409A would more fairly apply in the context of entertainment industry agreements if contingent participation compensation were excluded from the definition of “deferred compensation.” However, under its current provisions, Section 409A is a real “gotcha” for Hollywood.

Disclaimer: This blog and website are public sources of general information concerning our firm and its lawyers, as well as the information presented. They are intended, but not promised or guaranteed, to be correct, complete, and up-to-date as of the date posted. This blog and website are not intended to be, and are not, sources of legal opinion or advice. The materials, information, and communications on this blog and website do not apply to any particular person, entity, or situation, and do not apply to you or to your specific situation. You will need to consult with an attorney and/or other appropriate professional about your specific situation. Thank you.
Roger Royse

Roger Royse, the founder of the Royse Law Firm, works with companies ranging from newly formed tech startups to publicly traded multinationals in a variety of industries. Roger regularly advises on complex tax structuring, high stakes business negotiations and large international financial transactions. Practicing business and tax law since 1984, Roger’s background includes work with prominent San Francisco Bay area law firms, as well as Milbank, Tweed, Hadley and McCloy in New York City.
Read My Full Bio | Contact Me