Rush on Business : Iowa Corporate Lawyer & Attorney : Rush Nigut of Brick Gentry Law Firm : Serving Des Moines, Cedar Rapids, Davenport, & Sioux City

I often review contracts for clients that are doing business with companies from out-of-state. Inevitably these contracts will have a choice of law provision that says the laws of [insert state] apply. Clients usually take it for granted that a court will apply the laws of the state referenced in the contract.

But a recent post from the Austin Technology Law Blog points out that isn't always the case and we should consider those contract provisions we often never think about. The post discusses a contract involving truck drivers and whether the truck drivers were employees or independent contractors. The two state laws involved were Georgia and California. Georgia law had a rebuttable presumption that the drivers were independent contractors while California law would favor them being employees. The contract in question chose Georgia law and that's where the defendant had its principal place of business.

A driver filed a class action claiming violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act and California wage laws. You'd think Georgia law would apply and the drivers would be treated as independent contractors, right? Wrong! The court held that California law ultimately applied. 

An interesting decision to say the least. The case points out it's important to consider provisions such as choice of law that are often not considered by the parties. Consider whether those provisions are written clearly and properly. I wonder whether it would have made a difference if the contract provision would have said the laws of the State of Georgia applied "without giving effect to conflict of laws principles"? The contract provision in question said only that the laws of the State of Georgia applied.

It appears the court in this case was determined to apply California law since Georgia law directly conflicted with a fundamental California policy. Just goes to show you how important some of these contract provisions can be and why it's so important to have agreements reviewed by experienced business counsel.

Click for the court's opinion: Ruiz v. Affinity Logistics Corporation

• Send To A Friend
• Print This Article
• Comments
• Trackbacks

I was quoted in this article from The Street entitled, "When The Parent Company Drags You Down". The article discusses the financial woes of some franchises including Quiznos and the impact on franchisees.

If your a franchisee caught in a system experiencing financial problems, my first piece of advice is to carefully review the terms of your franchise agreement to make sure the franchisor is meeting its obligations to you. Another expert quoted in the article encourages franchisees to organize and band together. Banding together can enable franchisees to gather information and gives leverage and bargaining power with the franchisor, vendors and suppliers and even help with trademark rights, said Brian Miller, CEO of The Entrepreneur's Source. 

If your franchisor is experiencing serious financial issues, it's also prudent to speak with a franchise attorney to get an understanding of your rights.

• Send To A Friend
• Print This Article
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Joe Kristan of the Tax Update Blog has a very interesting post on So What is the Right S Corporation Salary? The blog post discusses a recent 8th Circuit case where a West Des Moines accountant had to pay FICA taxes on about $91,000 of his earnings from his professional S corporation --rather than $24,000-- the figure he had used as his W-2 income.

I've talked on this blog in the past about how S corporation salaries must be reasonable. There is definitely an opportunity for S corporation owners to save on FICA and Medicare taxes but determining what the IRS will consider as a reasonable salary is difficult at best.

The Watson case is instructive though. Watson had set his salary as $24,000 and claimed that was all his accounting firm intended to pay him. The IRS determined that $91,000 was a more reasonable salary in his case and the 8th Circuit agreed. But keep in mind that Watson earned about $200,000 out of S Corporation distributions. So all was not lost as he avoided the 12.4% combined FICA taxes and 2.9% Medicare taxes on the difference. The case demonstrates there is some happy medium for the S corporation owner and proper planning can certainly help in saving on taxes. I've known others who have been challenged by the IRS and faired very well when setting reasonable salaries.

Joe Kristan states, in responding to a comment from me, that every case is different and that the relationship between a reasonable salary and overall compensation is certainly not linear. He says, 

No matter how fabulously successful the company is, the salary should match the job. Heck, if the founding shareholder cuts back his hours and hires professional management, his salary might go down as profits go up. 

It's best in these situations to get good advice from your tax advisor before setting a salary for your S corporation. And as we've said before, "pigs get fat, but hogs get slaughtered." 

For more information see:  8th Circuit Decision and District Court Decision

• Send To A Friend
• Print This Article
• Comments
• Trackbacks

I recently had a meeting with a startup company that has tremendous potential for growth. If the idea for the business is to take off, it's likely they will need some capital injection along the way, especially if the owners want the growth they hope for in a short amount of time.

One question we discussed then was what type of entity should they form? The owners initial preference was an LLC but the question is whether an LLC is really the best entity?

The Startup Law Blog has a great article on 12 Reasons for a Startup Not to Be an LLC. The top two reasons cited in the post potentially apply to my new client:

1 – Many Investors Don’t Like LLCs - Investors frequently don’t want to complicate their personal tax situation by becoming a member in an entity taxed as a partnership and then receiving Forms K-1 and being taxed on the entity’s income even if no cash is distributed to them to pay the taxes.

2 – Many Investors Can’t Invest in LLCs - Some investors (such as venture funds), can’t invest in pass-through companies because they have tax-exempt partners which do not want to receive active trade or business income because of their tax-exempt status.

There are 10 other reasons listed in the post but the reasons listed above are the big ones that come up for many emerging companies.  Most of what you read out there on the Internet would tell you to go with an LLC, so it's refreshing to see a post that looks at the different angles. The threat of double taxation scares many away from C corporations but it can be a great entity choice for those looking to raise and reinvest capital.

A key is to consider the end goals for your business. It's best to get advice from an accountant and business attorney before forming your entity to determine which entity is best for you.

• Send To A Friend
• Print This Article
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Lawyers are not immediately recognized as the most creative souls on the planet but some of the best lawyers I know definitely have the the creative spark. I have seen many who were classic doodlers, photographers and painters. Some of them were also the most creative in the courtroom and ultimately very successful in winning cases. That's why I am intrigued by the Iowa Creativity Summit that is scheduled for March 1st at Drake University (Olmstead Center). Your registration includes dinner and two workshops led by best selling author Matthew E. May. The evening program begins at 5:15 p.m. and ends at 9:45 p.m.

This is a great opportunity for business leaders and employees to familiarize themselves with the creative process. As the program says, creativity isn't just for marketers or designers, it's for everybody. Even lawyers and entrepreneurs!

For more information on the program click:  Iowa Creativity Summit

For more information on Matthew E. May click: The Laws of Subtraction

• Send To A Friend
• Print This Article
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Jason Shinn of the Michigan Employment Law Advisor had a great post entitled "Is your company making this mistake when it comes to employees and intellectual property?" The post centers on a lawsuit filed by an employee of Marvel Entertainment who claimed he created the Ghost Rider character back in the 1970s. With the recent success of the movies, video games and promotional products, the value of the character has increased substantially and the employee wanted his share.

Shinn's post discusses how Marvel eventually won the lawsuit filed by the employee, but it wasn't easy, and the case took four years to litigate.

The importance of written agreements with employees and contractors that create intellectual property cannot be understated. A case I will never forget involved the sale of a business. At the 11th hour a contractor claimed to own all the intellectual property a business owner was trying to sell. No agreements existed between the business owner and the contractor. Fortunately, we were able to negotiate a reasonable figure that the contractor would accept to allow the sale to go through but the lack of an agreement did cost the business owner money and almost cost them the sale.

So I wholeheartedly agree with Shinn's advice:

In this regard, for companies that want to make certain they are the owner of a work - whether the work is created by an employee or independent contractor - the best advice is to require employees and independent contractors to execute an assignment and work-made-for-hire agreement at the outset of the relationship so that copyright ownership vest in the company.

Don't wait until it's too late. That's a mistake you don't want to make.

• Send To A Friend
• Print This Article
• Comments
• Trackbacks

In this video I discuss the importance of social media policies and training for employees on social media issues. While researching a presentation on social media legal issues I was surprised to learn that only 40% of businesses have a social media policy. Even less conduct employee training on social media issues. To serve this need we are now offering Social Media Policies and Training Workshops.

• Send To A Friend
• Print This Article
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

Join me for a webinar this coming Wednesday, February 15, 2012 through MyEntreNet entitled Social Media: From Hiring to Firing. We will discuss strategies to manage social media in the workplace including discussion of recent cases, the NLRB report on social media and discussion of social media policies.

Here's some interesting stats on social media and why it's so important to your business. Did you know that more iPhones sold in a given day than the number of people born in the world? 

• Send To A Friend
• Print This Article
• Comments
• Trackbacks

In this video I discuss a red flag I've seen come up in franchise agreement negotiation. Sometimes a franchisor will tell a prospective franchisee that they can't (or won't) change the franchise agreement. That's just fine but my problem comes when they say, "Don't worry though, we won't hold you to that provision." That is definitely a red flag!

• Send To A Friend
• Print This Article
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

Maryland franchise lawyer Jeff Fabian has an excellent blog post on the issues to consider when the franchise agreement terminates on the Franchise Help blog.

In my experience many franchisees are under the misconception that they can simply change the name of their business and then begin serving the same customers the next day under the new business name. Wrong!

Most franchise agreements will contain a non-compete clause. And franchisees are surprised to learn that the customers may not belong to them at all.

Jeff's post covers these issues and more. Keep these factors in mind when you are initially reviewing the franchise agreement and considering whether to purchase the franchise. If a franchise term is 5 years, that can go very fast and you might find your bucket is empty at the end of the term.  

• Send To A Friend
• Print This Article
• Comments
• Trackbacks

A false advertising lawsuit has been filed against Brett Bros. Sports International, Inc. by an Iowa man. The President of the company is none other than Hall of Famer and legendary baseball player, George Brett. The lawsuit, filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa seeks class action status and more than $5 million in damages according to the Complaint filed on February 6, 2012.

The allegations center on the alleged health and/or performance benefits of the necklaces that many young athletes seem to wear these days. The lawsuit alleges that Brett Bros. falsely claims its necklaces "help relieve stiffness in the shoulders and neck, eventually stabilizing your whole body, as well as help recovery from sports fatigue, restore important ion balance, and improve concentration and focus."

The Plaintiff, who purchased his necklace at the 2011 College World Series, says he didn't receive any of these benefits after relying upon the endorsement of George Brett.

This isn't the first time the sports performance necklace and bracelet industry has come under attack. Last year, it was reported that Power Balance entered into a $57 million settlement and declared bankruptcy.

The lawsuit against Brett's company specifically alleges that the company violated the Iowa "Private Right of Action for Consumer Frauds Act" (Iowa Code section 714H).  Filing a class action pursuant to the statute requires approval from the Iowa attorney general's office. The Complaint indicates that such approval has been obtained. A successful lawsuit under the statute would entitle the named Plantiff and the class members to damages, costs and reasonable attorney's fees.

• Send To A Friend
• Print This Article
• Comments
• Trackbacks

One of the nice benefits of filing an LLC in Iowa is that the owners are not required to disclose the members in filings with the Iowa Secretary of State. In many instances when filing a Certificate of Organization, I won't list the member(s) to provide anonymity to the member(s) on the public search site. Instead, I'll sign as the organizer and use our law office address as the registered office for the company. In biennial report filings, I'll sign as the registered agent or authorized representative.

This strategy is helpful when business owners don't want others to know what their doing through public searches on the Secretary of State's site. Today's Des Moines Register BIZ BUZZ column had a report about a buyer that purchased a home in our area for $2.5 million. The owner obviously did not want others to know who purchased the home so they set up an LLC with only the lawyer disclosed as the organizer. This kept the information confidential - for now. Someone will likely found out when they move in since it's a residential property. But I've represented several people who use this strategy to keep their identities protected from public searches. The member is disclosed in the operating agreement, meeting minutes and other documents but those documents are not filed or shared on the Iowa Secretary of State site.

Just another reason why forming an LLC in Iowa is beneficial for Iowa residents.

• Send To A Friend
• Print This Article
• Comments
• Trackbacks

I am often asked whether a business person should include their spouse when forming an Iowa small business LLC. Circumstances may vary but there are usually some benefits to filing an LLC as a single-member rather than having two or more members. First, single-member LLC owners are not required to file a separate tax return for their business. Additionally, it may help your family from an asset protection standpoint. I discuss these issues in the video below.

• Send To A Friend
• Print This Article
• Comments
• Trackbacks

I've addressed the issue of where to incorporate or form an LLC for your Iowa small business a few times on the blog. In general, Iowa small businesses would do well to incorporate or form their LLCs right here in Iowa.  But I am asked often enough that I thought it might be helpful to prepare a video on the topic.

• Send To A Friend
• Print This Article
• Comments
• Trackbacks

I recently received an inquiry on the blog asking whether or not a spouse should sign a franchise agreement. Circumstances may vary, but in general, I usually recommend that spouses don't sign the franchise agreement if they aren't going to be involved in the franchise business. It's my view there is no reason your family should throw all your eggs in one basket by having both spouses sign a personal guarantee.

If a franchisor tells you it's required for the spouse to sign, push back. There is no such legal requirement. Plus, most franchise agreements have transfer provisions that allow the franchise to be transferred to the spouse in the event of death or other circumstances.

Other reading:  11 Things Every Franchisee Should Know.

Be sure to consult a franchise and/or business attorney for your specific circumstances.

• Send To A Friend
• Print This Article
• Comments
• Trackbacks

I am pleased to announce that I now have a Rush on Business You Tube Channel where I'll post short videos on various aspects of business and franchise law. I have a few videos posted so far and I'll add content weekly.

New videos include:

Should You Include Your Spouse When Forming a Small Business LLC?

Where Should Iowa Residents Incorporate or Form an LLC for their Small Business?

If there is a topic you think would be interesting, please let me know!

• Send To A Friend
• Print This Article
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Unfortunately I must postpone the MyEntre.Net seminar set for tomorrow at Noon CT on business entity formation issues. We will reschedule as soon as possible. Unfortunately a conflict has come up that cannot be avoided.

I look forward to giving the presentation soon!

• Send To A Friend
• Print This Article
• Comments
• Trackbacks