Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The Death Benefit Only Program
The Death Benefit Only (DBO) program provides non-qualified deferred compensation, and death benefits. The DBO program can be used by employers without regard to corporate and qualified plan limitations and may be provided by employers on a permissibly discriminatory basis. The DBO program, when structured properly, can accept elective or non-elective contributions on an individual employee basis. The benefits can also be used as Golden Handcuffs to retain valued employees.
Structure of'The DBO Program
The DBO Program' can be applied to an existing deferred compensation plan as well as new wealth accumulation plan. This approach will be flexible to the employer and largely estate and income tax free to the covered employee. The accrued benefit to the employee can be safeguarded from claims of creditors of the employer and employees and upon withdrawal by the employee can be accessed in an economically efficient manner. The death benefit need not be an asset on the books of the practice or subject to the claims of creditors. Additionally, the employer can institute The DBO Program as a new benefit plan and fund “as you go” rather than creating a liability for employer needs. The DBO Program alternatively, may be reflected as an asset on the practice's books for audit accounting purposes and not create a charge to earnings. This tool complies with both GAAP accounting as well as IAS 19.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Stranger to the Deed Rule
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.