📖 Table of Contents
- Foreword: What This Article Covers & Why It Matters
- 🧾 Section 83(b) in a Nutshell – The Statutory Framework (I.R.C. § 83)
- ⏳ The 30‑Day Rule – Regulatory Backbone (Treas. Reg. § 1.83‑2)
- 🤔 The Second Section 83(b) Election – Myth or Reality?
- 🧱 Re‑Examining the General Rule: No “Do‑Over” for the Same Transfer
- 🔁 When a “Second” Election Is Lawful – Trigger Events
- ⚖️ Case Law & Administrative Guidance (Rev. Proc. 2006‑31)
- 📝 How to Make a Second (or Additional) Section 83(b) Election – A Practical Guide
- ⚠️ Critical Pitfalls & Risks
- 📞 How to Maximize Your Equity Tax Planning – Contact Alan Goldstein
1. Foreword: What This Article Covers & Why It Matters
If you hold equity that is subject to a substantial risk of forfeiture (commonly referred to as “vesting”), you already know that making a timely election under Section 83(b) of the Internal Revenue Code (“I.R.C.”) can produce dramatic tax savings. The classic advice is simple: file the election within 30 days of the transfer of the restricted property, pay tax on the fair market value at that time, and then treat all future appreciation as capital gain.
But what happens when you need a second Section 83(b) election? This can occur when you receive additional restricted property after you have already made an election on an earlier transfer. You might also be in a situation where a modification or exchange of property gives rise to a new transfer for tax purposes, thereby creating a fresh opportunity—and obligation—to file another § 83(b) election.
This article analyzes the federal law, regulations, and case law that govern a second (or multiple) § 83(b) elections. It explains when an additional election is permissible, how it interacts with an existing election, and the procedures mandated by the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”). The discussion is grounded in the statutory language of I.R.C. § 83, the regulations thereunder, revenue procedures, and court decisions.
⚖️ Disclaimer: The information contained herein is for educational and informational purposes only and does not constitute legal or tax advice. Tax laws are complex and subject to change. You should always consult a qualified tax professional regarding your specific situation.
2. 🧾 Section 83(b) in a Nutshell – The Statutory Framework (I.R.C. § 83)
Understanding the first election is essential to understanding the second one.
I.R.C. § 83(a) provides the default rule:
“If, in connection with the performance of services, property is transferred to any person other than the person for whom such services are performed, the excess of— (1) the fair market value of such property (determined without regard to any restriction other than a restriction which by its terms will never lapse) at the time of the first vesting (transferability or no substantial risk of forfeiture) over (2) the amount (if any) paid for such property, shall be included in the gross income of the person who performed such services in the first taxable year in which the rights of the person having the beneficial interest in such property are transferable or are not subject to a substantial risk of forfeiture, whichever is applicable.”
In plain English: if you receive restricted stock (or other property) that vests over time, you generally do not include the value in income at the time of receipt. Instead, you include the fair market value at the time each installment vests as ordinary compensation income.
Section 83(b) offers an alternative:
“Any person who performs services in connection with which property is transferred… may elect to include in gross income the excess of the fair market value of the property at the time of transfer… over the amount (if any) paid for such property.”
Once a valid § 83(b) election is made:
- The substantial vesting rules of § 83(a) do not apply to the property; and
- Any subsequent appreciation is not taxable as compensation to the service provider; rather, it is treated as capital gain upon sale.
In other words, a § 83(b) election locks in the tax basis of the property at its grant‑date value and converts future appreciation from ordinary income into capital gain. For founders of early‑stage companies, this election is often the single most valuable tax‑planning tool available.
3. ⏳ The 30‑Day Rule – Regulatory Backbone (Treas. Reg. § 1.83‑2)
The Treasury Regulations supply the mechanics, and the rule that causes more missed opportunities than any other is the strict 30‑day filing deadline.
Treas. Reg. § 1.83‑2(b) states:
“The election referred to in paragraph (a) of this section shall be filed not later than 30 days after the date the property was transferred… and may be filed prior to the date of transfer.”
There is no provision for an extension. The regulations further require that:
- The election be made by filing a written statement with the IRS office where the taxpayer files his or her return; and
- A copy be furnished to the person for whom the services are performed (generally, the employer or the corporation issuing the stock).
Practical Trap: If you fail to file a timely § 83(b) election for a particular grant of restricted property, the opportunity is lost forever. The IRS has stated unequivocally that late elections are not permitted and that there are “no do‑overs.”
Thus, the “second election” scenario is not a late election. Rather, it arises when a new transfer of property occurs, which creates its own independent 30‑day window.
4. 🤔 The Second Section 83(b) Election – Myth or Reality?
Is it possible to make a second § 83(b) election if you already made one for an earlier share grant? The short answer is yes, but only when a separate and distinct “transfer” of property has taken place.
The IRS has provided guidance through Revenue Procedure 2006‑31, which underscores the limited circumstances under which a § 83(b) election can be revoked. That revenue procedure is often mistakenly cited as authority for the proposition that you cannot make a second election. However, the revocation rules do not limit the number of elections you may file; they merely restrict your ability to undo an election that you already filed.
As stated in Rev. Proc. 2006‑31:
“Section 83(b)(2) and § 1.83‑2(f) provide that an election under § 83(b) may not be revoked without the consent of the Commissioner. The regulations also provide that such consent will only be granted where the person filing the election is under a mistake of fact as to the underlying transaction and must be requested within 60 days of the date on which the mistake of fact first became known.”
Moreover, the mistake‑of‑fact exception is very narrow. A mistake as to the value (or a decline in value) of the property does not constitute a mistake of fact. Neither does the failure to understand the tax consequences of the election.
Thus, Rev. Proc. 2006‑31 focuses on revoking an election, not on the permissibility of filing additional elections for different property transfers. Nothing in the statute or regulations limits a taxpayer to a single § 83(b) election in a lifetime. Each separate transfer of restricted property (in connection with the performance of services) opens a new 30‑day election window.
5. 🧱 Re‑Examining the General Rule: No “Do‑Over” for the Same Transfer
Before exploring the circumstances that permit a second election, it is critical to reinforce the rule that a second election cannot relate back to an earlier transfer. In other words, if you missed the 30‑day deadline for a particular share grant, you cannot correct that failure by filing a “second” election with respect to the same property.
The regulations are clear on this point: the election must be filed within 30 days after the date the property was transferred. That deadline is absolute.In fact, the IRS has recently moved to streamline the filing process (including the introduction of Form 15620 and an online filing option) precisely because the deadline is so strict and the penalty for missing it is permanent.
Key takeaway: A “second” § 83(b) election is not a substitute for a missed first election on the same property. It is a separate filing that applies to different property or to a modified property interest that is deemed a new transfer for tax purposes.
6. 🔁 When a “Second” Election Is Lawful – Trigger Events
A valid second § 83(b) election can be filed in the following circumstances:
A. Second (or Additional) Grant of Restricted Stock
The most straightforward scenario is when you receive a second grant of restricted stock. For example, a founder might receive an initial equity grant at incorporation and later receive an additional grant when the company raises a Series A financing. The additional grant is a new transfer of property subject to its own vesting schedule. Accordingly, the recipient has 30 days from the date of that new grant to file a § 83(b) election specific to those shares.
B. Early Exercise of Incentive Stock Options (ISOs) or Nonqualified Stock Options (NSOs)
Many startup equity plans permit early exercise of stock options. When you early‑exercise an option (i.e., exercise before the shares have vested), you are acquiring restricted property. The exercise date constitutes the “transfer date” for § 83(b) purposes.
If you previously made an § 83(b) election on a different set of shares, an early exercise of a new or different option creates a separate transfer and a separate 30‑day window. You should file a new § 83(b) election for each such early exercise.
⚠️ ISO Warning: For incentive stock options, an § 83(b) election applies only for alternative minimum tax (AMT) purposes; it does not convert the ordinary compensation element into capital gain for regular tax purposes. Nevertheless, the election still starts the AMT holding period, which can be valuable.
C. Exchange or Modification of Property Deemed a New Transfer
The trickiest situation arises when an existing property interest is exchanged or modified and the IRS treats the exchange as a new transfer of property. In such cases, a second election may be required.
Potential triggering events include:
- An exchange of unvested stock for different property (e.g., a merger or recapitalization that changes the character of the equity);
- A material modification of the vesting terms that is deemed a new grant;
- The conversion of a partnership interest into a different class of interest while still subject to forfeiture.
In each of these cases, a fresh 30‑day window opens for the new property. If you fail to file on time, you lose the opportunity to lock in the then‑current value.
7. ⚖️ Case Law & Administrative Guidance (Rev. Proc. 2006‑31)
While the case law directly addressing “second” § 83(b) elections is sparse, the administrative guidance provides clear support for the proposition that each transfer stands on its own.
Revenue Procedure 2006‑31 (2006‑1 C.B. 895) is the definitive IRS pronouncement on revocation of § 83(b) elections. It establishes that:
“An election under § 83(b) may not be revoked without the consent of the Commissioner.… Consent will be granted only where the person filing the election is under a mistake of fact as to the underlying transaction and must be requested within 60 days of the date on which the mistake of fact first became known.”
The revenue procedure goes on to provide examples of what does not constitute a mistake of fact:
- A mistake as to the value (or decline in value) of the property; and
- The failure of anyone to perform an act that was contemplated at the time of transfer.
Crucially, Rev. Proc. 2006‑31 does not state that a taxpayer may make only one election. Instead, it provides the exclusive means to revoke an election. The absence of any language limiting the number of elections a taxpayer may file is itself significant.
Moreover, the IRS has not issued any ruling that a second election for a separate transfer is invalid. Indeed, the logical implication of the 30‑day rule is that each qualifying transfer gives rise to its own election.
Caution: No Tax Court case has directly addressed whether a second § 83(b) election on a subsequent transfer of restricted property is permissible. However, the statutory and regulatory text strongly support that position. As with any aggressive tax position, competent professional advice is essential.
8. 📝 How to Make a Second (or Additional) Section 83(b) Election – A Practical Guide
Once you determine that a new transfer of restricted property has occurred (and that you are within the 30‑day window), filing a second § 83(b) election follows the same procedure as the first election. The IRS has made the process simpler in recent years.
Step 1 – Determine the Transfer Date
Identify the exact date on which the property was transferred to you:
- For a restricted stock grant, the transfer date is generally the grant date (often the date of board approval);
- For an early exercise of stock options, the transfer date is the date of exercise;
- For an exchange or modification deemed a new transfer, determine the date the new property interest is received.
Step 2 – Use IRS Form 15620 (Recommended)
In November 2024, the IRS released Form 15620, Section 83(b) Election, a standardized form that replaces the model letter taxpayers previously drafted.You may still use a free‑form written statement that satisfies the regulatory requirements, but Form 15620 is strongly recommended to avoid omissions.
Step 3 – File Electronically or by Certified Mail
The IRS now permits electronic filing of Form 15620 via their website using ID.me authentication. Electronic filing provides immediate confirmation of receipt.Alternatively, you may file by mail, but you must use USPS Certified Mail (or an IRS‑designated private delivery service) to obtain prima facie evidence of timely filing.
Step 4 – Provide Copies to the Service Recipient
Treas. Reg. § 1.83‑2(d) requires that you submit a copy of the election to the person for whom the services are performed (i.e., your employer or the corporation). Failure to comply with this requirement may affect the validity of the election.
Step 5 – Retain Proof of Filing
Keep all records:
- The filed Form 15620 (or written statement) with the date stamp (if mailed);
- The certified mail receipt (or electronic confirmation);
- Proof of delivery to the service recipient.
If the IRS ever questions the election, the burden of proof is on you to demonstrate timely filing. Certified mail receipts constitute prima facie evidence of delivery.
9. ⚠️ Critical Pitfalls & Risks
Even when a second § 83(b) election is permissible, you should be aware of the risks:
A. The Election Is Irrevocable (Absent IRS Consent)
Once you file a § 83(b) election, you cannot undo it. If you later forfeit the shares (e.g., because you leave the company before they vest), any tax you paid upfront is not refunded. You may claim a capital loss, but the utility of that loss is often limited.
B. State Tax Consequences
Even if the federal election is valid, states differ in how they treat § 83(b) elections. For example, California conforms to the federal election for Personal Income Tax (PIT) purposes, but residents must pay careful attention to how the income is sourced. A second election does not change the state‑sourcing rules. California’s Franchise Tax Board (FTB) closely reviews equity transactions.
C. Qualified Small Business Stock (QSBS)
One of the most powerful benefits of an § 83(b) election is that it starts the 5‑year holding period for QSBS (I.R.C. § 1202) on the grant date, rather than on each vesting date.If you file a second election for an additional grant, the holding period for that specific grant begins on the date of that grant. The holding periods do not merge; each block of shares has its own holding period.
D. Potential Audit Scrutiny
Filing an § 83(b) election for a second or additional grant is not common practice. As a result, such filings may draw slightly higher audit scrutiny. You should ensure that your valuation of the property on the transfer date is defensible and that you have documentation supporting the new transfer.
E. The “Mistake of Fact” Doctrine
If you attempt to revoke an earlier election (as opposed to filing a new one), the mistake‑of‑fact standard is extremely difficult to meet. Rev. Proc. 2006‑31 explicitly states that misunderstanding the tax consequences or the nature of the forfeiture does not constitute a mistake of fact.
10. 📞 How to Maximize Your Equity Tax Planning – Contact Alan Goldstein
The rules governing § 83(b) elections are both powerful and perilous. The interplay between federal law, state conformity (especially in high‑tax states like California), and the QSBS exclusion (I.R.C. § 1202) requires careful strategic planning.
Whether you need to file a first election, a second election, or are simply trying to understand how a modification of your equity holdings may affect your tax liability, Alan Goldstein has the experience and knowledge to guide you.
⚖️ Important Disclosure: This article is based on the Internal Revenue Code, Treasury Regulations, Revenue Procedures, and case law as of the date of publication. Tax laws and their interpretations change frequently. New legislation, administrative rulings, and court decisions may materially affect the analysis set forth above. Do not rely on this article as legal or tax advice for your specific situation. Always consult a qualified tax professional. Contact Alan Goldstein for a confidential consultation.
Was this helpful?
0 / 0