Legal structure options for employment-focused social enterprises: REDF Portfolio Webinar The information contained in this presentation is for informational purposes only. REDF is not providing legal or tax advice to the readers of this presentation. Readers should consult with their own advisors for such advice. Project Overview Project Objectives • To understand which legal structure(s) are most suitable for social enterprises whose Project Goals • Better understanding of legal structures across key criteria and recommendation on trade- mission is to employ people facing barriers to work • • • offs and recommendations Identify relevant case studies and literature Interview industry experts and/or social enterprises operating within each of the identified legal structures Identify additional legal questions/considerations which will need to be answered by lawyers Project Approach • Examine legal structures currently used by social enterprises across the key criteria Output • Recommendations on legal structures best suited for workforce development social (outlined in Slide 4) • enterprises, including tradeoffs Types of social enterprise legal structures to consider (including information about how to qualify or limitations associated with each legal structure) © REDF 2011 – PLEASE DO NOT DISTRIBUTE WITHOUT PRIOR PERMISSION FROM REDF www. REDF.org 2 Which criteria will be used to analyze various legal structure options? Contracting preferences Organizational dynamics - e.g., compensation, talent management Access to capital Tax implications/ tax incentives Liability implications for parent non-profit Cost and timeline for setting up the structure Supports accomplishment of organization’s social mission © REDF 2011 – PLEASE DO NOT DISTRIBUTE WITHOUT PRIOR PERMISSION FROM REDF www. REDF.org 3 Interviews Conducted •Practitioners Shawna Smith – Executive Director, Taller San Jose Lee Zimmerman – CEO, Evergreen Lodge David DeLeonardis – President/CEO, Crossroads Diversified Services, Inc. •Experts in the field Robert Wexler – Principal Attorney, Adler & Colvin Gene Takagi – Attorney, NEO Law Group Marc J. Lane – Attorney, Marc J. Lane Wealth Group Ted Howard – Cleveland Foundation, Evergreen Cooperatives, The Democracy Collaborative •Other REDF Staff © REDF 2011 – PLEASE DO NOT DISTRIBUTE WITHOUT PRIOR PERMISSION FROM REDF www. REDF.org 4 What are the different ways in which a social enterprise, operated by a nonprofit, can be structured? Social Enterprise, operated by nonprofit Separate entity? Yes Ownership Partially Tax owned Exempt2 Wholly owned Wholly or partially owned nonprofit subsidiary Tax Status No Social mission in by-laws? Corporation Corporation • • Worker No owned Yes Program/ division of nonprofit Taxable Structure? Structure? LLC Standard LLC No • • Corporation • • Worker Cooperative Corporation1 Business Corporation LLC Decision Standard LLC Other LLCs (series LLC, etc.) Social mission in by-laws? Yes Legal structure Benefit Corporation1 Social Purpose Corporation1 L3C1 Examples (not limited to nonprofits operating a social enterprise) This chart addresses the business activities of the social enterprise. Support services provided to social enterprise employees is sometimes retained within the parent nonprofit, even if the business activities are legally separated into a subsidiary. Alternatively, some or all employee support services are also outsourced to other organizations. 1Allowed 2The in certain states (details are discussed in presentation) distinction between state and federal nonprofits is discussed in the appendix © REDF 2011 – PLEASE DO NOT DISTRIBUTE WITHOUT PRIOR PERMISSION FROM REDF 5 www. REDF.org Separate entity vs. keeping entity within parent organization Relative importance of criteria – can vary by organization Separate Entity Within parent nonprofit Liability • Asset protection • Risk • Social enterprise is main purpose of organization Tax implications • If paying significant UBIT, better protection for parent tax-exempt status • Activities aligned with mission Cost and timeline to set up • Depends on structure choice and organization • Generally, cheaper and faster Organizational dynamics • Cultural implications • Leveraging existing infrastructure Supports accomplishment of social mission • Capacity • Accomplishment of organization’s mission • Type of operation, type of workforce • Considerations of external stakeholders • Social enterprise integral to mission Other considerations • Effect on nonprofit’s reputation • Revenue diversification © REDF 2011 – PLEASE DO NOT DISTRIBUTE WITHOUT PRIOR PERMISSION FROM REDF 6 www. REDF.org Nonprofit vs. for-profit Relative importance of criteria – can vary by organization For-profit Non-profit Contracting preferences • Certain contracting preferences/ designations only available to for-profits • Some contracts are only awarded to nonprofits Access to capital • • • • • Option to offer equity More sources of capital Funding is generally not restricted Easier to put “creative” capital together Easier to get credit for new entities • • • • Majority of funding comes from donors or grants Fewer sources of capital Certain funds might be “restricted” May receive more favorable loan terms from certain entities Tax implications • Tax credits (WOTC, Enterprise zones, etc.) • If social enterprise activities are related to organization’s mission, income is tax-exempt Can possibly be exempt from sales and property tax • Other considerations • Potential stakeholders prefer or required to work with exempt entities Target population • Cost and timeline to set up • • Depends on whether corporation or LLC Generally for-profit entities are faster to set up (unless bringing in multiple investors) • IRS approval takes between 2 to 12 months Supports accomplishment of social mission • Social enterprise does not qualify for an exempt purpose Profit is a primary goal of the enterprise • • Mission of enterprise is primarily “social” Mission of social enterprise aligns with parent nonprofit’s mission or social enterprise qualifies for an exempt purpose Organizational dynamics • • Ability to attract talent with higher compensation levels © REDF 2011 – PLEASE DO NOT DISTRIBUTE WITHOUT PRIOR PERMISSION FROM REDF 7 www. REDF.org LLC vs. corporation Relative importance of criteria – can vary by organization LLC Corporation Other considerations • Less consistent treatment if operating in multiple states • Can elect to become L3C (if allowed in state) • Can elect to become a benefit corporation or flexible purpose corporation (if allowed in state) Access to capital • In some cases, members of the LLC have to provide personal guarantees of loans • Banks or vendors may more readily extend credit to corporations Cost and timeline to set up • Generally simple, but depends on how complicated Operating Agreement between owners is • Fewer corporate formalities than a corporation • Generally simple to set up unless bringing in many outside investors Tax implications • Tax flexibility • Implications for self-employment taxes • Difficult to receive tax-exempt status for an LLC with few exceptions • Pay employment taxes on salaries, not profits • Income is taxed at corporate and shareholder level Liability • Both structures provide business owners with liability protection © REDF 2011 – PLEASE DO NOT DISTRIBUTE WITHOUT PRIOR PERMISSION FROM REDF 8 www. REDF.org L3Cs, Benefit Corporations, and Social Purpose Corporations are all new “hybrid” structures that share similarities Currently, which states allow for which hybrid structures? • Overall benefits of hybrid corps for social enterprises: • Broader access to different sources of capital • Allows higher compensation levels • Locks-in social mission in organization documents • Provides potential exit strategies • Biggest risks: • No national standard or reciprocity across states • Very new structures with unknown risks Tax Implications: • For now, these structures will be taxed the same as for-profit corporations, though advocates plan to ask the Internal Revenue Service to consider tax breaks for the hybrids in the future • Liability - protects directors from liability for considering a social purpose WA OR MN ID MI WY NV CA UT NE IL CO AZ AR ME VT NH NY MA RI CT PA NJ DE WVVA MD DC SC LA FL HI Social purpose corporation A hybrid legal entity that blends elements of non-profit and forprofit corporations. It is a corporation that must state a specific social purpose for which it is formed. It is taxed like a corporation. It protects directors from liability for any decisions that involve balancing the corporation’s special purpose against its financial condition. Social Purpose Corporations are also subject to additional reporting requirements assessing its performance in achieving its special purpose. Benefit Corporation A hybrid legal entity that blends elements of non-profit and for-profit corporations. Essentially a corporation that must be organized and operated for the purpose of “creating a general public benefit.” It is taxed like a corporation. It protects directors from liability for pursuing a social objective instead of simply profit. Benefit Corporations are also subject to additional reporting requirements relating to its performance in creating a general public benefit and its performance against a third-party standard. © REDF 2011 – PLEASE DO NOT DISTRIBUTE WITHOUT PRIOR PERMISSION FROM REDF L3C A hybrid legal entity that blends elements of non-profit and for-profit entities. It is essentially an LLC that must be organized and operated for a social purpose and profit must not be a significant purpose • www. REDF.org 9 Why choose a hybrid form of entity? Relative importance of criteria – can vary by organization Hybrid entity Supports accomplishment of social mission • Allows directors and officers to consider social mission in making decisions Liability • Liability protection to its directors and officers to consider interests other than profits Traditional entity • Social mission is only a minor part of the organization’s purpose/ culture Organizational Dynamics • Stakeholders are fully aware of mission and its impact on the business • Ties future “owners” to the same mission Contracting Preferences • Potential preference in contracting, especially as these structures become more common Access to capital • Unclear how lenders and investors may view these entities • L3C may make it slightly easier to access PRIs Tax implications • No tax benefits to organizations with social mission in articles/ operating document Cost and timeline to set up • L3Cs, Benefit Corps and Social Purpose Corps are only allowed in certain states • New legal forms © REDF 2011 – PLEASE DO NOT DISTRIBUTE WITHOUT PRIOR PERMISSION FROM REDF • Established entity form – will likely mean more consistent treatment from lenders and investors • Established legal form – relatively easy to set up 10 www. REDF.org Overview of legal entity options for Social Enterprise1 Corporation Business Corporation Social Purpose/ Benefit Corporation LLC Nonprofit Corporation 501(c)(3) LLC L3C Availability All 50 states Social Purpose: 3 states / Benefit Corp: 27 states + DC All 50 states All 50 states 8 states2, 2 tribes Purposes For-profit only (may consider parties other than shareholders in some states) Dual purpose (profit/ social) Charitable purposes only (profit on exempt activities or unrelated business activities is allowed but may be required to pay UBIT) For profit, defined by Operating Agreement No significant purpose for profit or production of income Equity Shares Shares None Member interests Member interests Tax on Profit Yes, at corporate level Yes, at corporate and shareholder levels Tax exempt, except on unrelated business Yes, at member level Yes, at member level Management and control Board elected by shareholders Board elected by shareholders Board of directors, chosen by members, designators or selfelected Per Operating Agreement Per Operating Agreement Profit Distribution Share repurchases, dividends Share repurchases, dividends None. All profit must be reinvested to fulfilling the mission As defined by agreement of investors; most operating agreements provide that a member’s distributive share is in proportion to his percentage interest in the business As defined by agreement of investors Capital Sources Sell shares, debt Sell shares, debt -> potentially more attractive to impact investors Grants, donations, loans, tax-exempt bond financing, earned income Sell membership interests, debt Sell membership shares, debt © REDF 2011 – PLEASE DO NOT DISTRIBUTE WITHOUT PRIOR PERMISSION FROM REDF 1Source: 2NC http://www.adlercolvin.com/pdf/tax_treatment/Beyond_Taxation_A_Guide_to_Social_Enterprise_Vehicles_(00302967).pdf, irs.gov, benefitcorp.net repealed L3C statue effective 1/1/14 www. REDF.org 11 Sources of capital/ funding Corporation LLC Business Corporation Social Purpose/ Benefit Corporation Nonprofit Corporation (501(c)3) LLC L3C Shares/ Equity Yes Yes No Membership contributions Membership contributions Government Grants Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Other grants (foundations) Not common (often done through PRI) Not common (often done through PRI) Yes Not common (often done through PRI) Not common (often done through PRI) PRI Yes, but more difficult than other entities1 Yes Yes Yes Yes1 Bank loans Yes Yes Yes (might be harder to get loans when starting up vs. a “forprofit” business) Yes (might be harder than for a corporation and owners may have to provide personal guarantees) Yes (same as LLC) SBA Guaranteed Loans and Grants Yes (small businesses as determined by criteria) Yes (same as business corporation) No Yes (same as bank loans) Yes (same as LLC) 1IRS policy on program-related investments - it is more difficult for a for-profit entity to qualify because production of income cannot be a significant purpose and has to further a charitable purpose. See http://www.irs.gov/charities/foundations/article/0,,id=137793,00.html. See also http://www.irs.gov/charities/article/0,,id=256679,00.html. © REDF 2011 – PLEASE DO NOT DISTRIBUTE WITHOUT PRIOR PERMISSION FROM REDF www. REDF.org 12 Reasons to consider a social enterprise that is a program/ division of nonprofit If the majority of the following is true: Social enterprise is critical to fulfilling organization’s mission Social enterprise activity is the majority of what the organization does Mission of social enterprise is primarily “social” Majority of organization’s assets and liabilities are related to the social enterprise Social enterprise activities are tax-exempt Grant funding is and will remain an important revenue source for the enterprise Potential downsides • • Lose access to certain contracting preferences only available to for-profits (SBA loans, minority or women owned certification, local small business certification) Customers may view social enterprise as a nonprofit rather than a business which could lead to certain perceptions such an an expectation for lower pricing © REDF 2011 – PLEASE DO NOT DISTRIBUTE WITHOUT PRIOR PERMISSION FROM REDF www. REDF.org 13 Reasons to consider a social enterprise that is a wholly-owned nonprofit subsidiary If the majority of the following is true: Social enterprise is only part of organization’s activities Social enterprise activities could pose liability issues for parent nonprofit Social enterprise activities are tax-exempt Grant funding is and will remain an important revenue source for the enterprise Potential downsides • • • Costs for setting up a new entity can be expensive Ongoing costs for a new entity can also be very expensive i.e., (sustaining infrastructure) Need to ensure proper separation of two entities to truly protect assets of parent nonprofit – otherwise, the parents assets will be more vulnerable to debts and liabilities of the subsidiary, also known as “piercing the corporate veil” © REDF 2011 – PLEASE DO NOT DISTRIBUTE WITHOUT PRIOR PERMISSION FROM REDF www. REDF.org 14 Reasons to consider a social enterprise that is a wholly owned for-profit subsidiary/ benefit or social purpose corporation If the majority of the following is true: Social enterprise activities could pose liability issues for parent nonprofit Social enterprise activities are not tax-exempt Social enterprise requires outside capital Social enterprise operates in an industry that is difficult for a nonprofit to operate in – e.g., construction Primary motivation of social enterprise is profit Social enterprise can benefit from licenses, certifications and tax credits that are only applicable to for-profit structure Social enterprise can benefit from contracting preferences only available to for-profits Potential downsides • Might be harder to access grant funding • Potential reputation impact on parent nonprofit from stakeholders and community if they are seen as too “business-like” or “profit motivated” • New hybrid entities have not been tested • Additional reporting requirements © REDF 2011 – PLEASE DO NOT DISTRIBUTE WITHOUT PRIOR PERMISSION FROM REDF www. REDF.org 15 Reasons to consider a social enterprise that is a partially owned for-profit subsidiary/ benefit or social purpose corporation If the majority of the following is true: Social enterprise activities could pose liability issues for parent nonprofit Social enterprise activities are not tax-exempt Social enterprise operates in an industry that is difficult for a nonprofit to operate in Social enterprise can benefit from licenses, certifications and tax credits that are only applicable to for-profit structure Social enterprise can benefit from contracting preferences only available to for-profits Social enterprise wants to bring in additional sources of funding, especially in the form of equity Potential downsides • Partially owned subsidiaries can be complicated and expensive to set up, especially when bringing in equity investors • Having multiple stakeholders/ shareholders making decisions for the organization may potentially lead to straying from organization’s initial mission or purpose of the social enterprise © REDF 2011 – PLEASE DO NOT DISTRIBUTE WITHOUT PRIOR PERMISSION FROM REDF www. REDF.org 16 APPENDIX © REDF 2011 – PLEASE DO NOT DISTRIBUTE WITHOUT PRIOR PERMISSION FROM REDF www. REDF.org 17 Tradeoffs between different ownership structures Relative importance of criteria – can vary by organization Wholly owned Partially owned Worker owned Cost and timelines to set up • Varies based on legal form • Can be expensive and complicated to set up depending on ownership structure • Can be expensive to set up effectively Organizational dynamics • Parent nonprofit selects board and has control via this process • Decision making can be complex • Worker-owned aspect key to mission • Decision making structure varies Access to capital • Capitalized by parent nonprofit • Attract equity • Potential for innovation • Depends on legal structure of the cooperative Other considerations • Make decisions on how to represent relationship (i.e., consolidated financial statements) • Generally, cheaper and faster • Ongoing investment and training to maintain culture • Might be suitable only for certain target populations Tax implications • Depends on the legal form of the subsidiary • Depends on the legal form of the subsidiary • Worker owned cooperatives are not tax exempt • Supporting mission can get complicated if multiple parties are involved • Worker ownership critical to mission and/or theory of change Supports accomplishment of social mission © REDF 2011 – PLEASE DO NOT DISTRIBUTE WITHOUT PRIOR PERMISSION FROM REDF 18 www. REDF.org L3C: Low-Profit Limited Liability Company What is an L3C? ➨ An L3C is a hybrid legal entity that blends elements of non-profit and for-profit entities. It is essentially an LLC that must be organized and operated for a social purpose and profit must not be a significant purpose What makes an • Unlike an LLC, the L3C has an explicit primary charitable mission and only a secondary profit concern L3C different than • Unlike a charity, the L3C is free to distribute the profits, after taxes, to owners or investors standard LLC? • Makes it simpler to qualify for PRIs Level of support Other considerations • Relatively new legal form, only allowed in certain states • Many practitioners and experts in the field are not a fan of this structure for the following reasons: • In general, the L3C has more restrictions without clear benefits (for example, no tax breaks -> structure might make more sense if there are tax breaks) • Untested new form with not much information currently available Sources: Interviews 1http://www.sec.state.vt.us/corps/dobiz/llc/llc_l3c.htm © REDF 2011 – PLEASE DO NOT DISTRIBUTE WITHOUT PRIOR PERMISSION FROM REDF www. REDF.org 19 Benefit Corporation What is a Benefit Corporation? ➨ A Benefit Corporation is a hybrid legal entity that blends elements of non-profit and for-profit corporations. It is essentially a corporation that must be organized and operated for the purpose of “creating a general public benefit.” It is taxed like a corporation. It protects directors from liability for pursuing a social objective instead of simply profit. Benefit Corporations are also subject to additional reporting requirements relating to its performance in creating a general public benefit and its performance against a third-party standard. Characteristics of a Benefit Corp/ Social Mission What is a Benefit Report? Level of support What are the advantages of this structure? • Mandates that, in addition to shareholders, the board of directors take the environment, community, employees and suppliers into account when they make decisions; Requires environmental and social benefit (i.e. triple bottom line) • Mandates a high level of transparency and accountability - within 120 days after the end of each fiscal year, a Benefit Corporation is required to publish a Benefit Report, which states how the Benefit Corporation performed that year on a social and environmental axis • Mandates that directors assess the performance of the corporation in achieving its general public benefit purpose against a third-party standard (such as B Corp)“ • Third party independent assessment that measures social and environmental impact; most prominent is currently B Labs’ Assessment. The Benefit Corporation has to then share this assessment of its performance publicly • Both GRI and B Lab offer companies the use of their reporting (GRI) and assessment (B Lab) tools for free • • Environmental benefit can be minor (i.e. recycled paper, no water bottles, etc.) but social benefits are not enough Relatively new legal form, only allowed in certain states • Provides clarity to directors and officers that duty includes pursuing the creation of material positive impact on society and the environment, even in liquidity scenarios • Offers liability protection to its directors and officers to consider interests of its workforce, community, and the environment when making decisions • Offers a distinct point of differentiation in environmental where many organizations may claim to be socially minded • Some municipalities (e.g. San Francisco BoS 120082) offer adjustments or preference for “competitively-solicited City contract(s)” to stateincorporated Benefit Corporations”1 Sources: Interviews 1http://www.sfbos.org/ftp/uploadedfiles/bdsupvrs/committees/materials/bfs040412_120082.pdf © REDF 2011 – PLEASE DO NOT DISTRIBUTE WITHOUT PRIOR PERMISSION FROM REDF www. REDF.org 20 Social Purpose Organization What is a Social Purpose Organization1? ➨ A Social Purpose Corporation is a hybrid legal entity that blends elements of non-profit and for-profit corporations. It is a corporation that must state a specific social purpose for which it is formed. It is taxed like a corporation. It protects directors from liability for any decisions that involve balancing the corporation’s special purpose against its financial condition. Social Purpose Corporations are also subject to additional reporting requirements assessing its performance in achieving its special purpose. Characteristics of a Social Purpose Organization • Unlike a Benefit Corporation, a Social Purpose Corporation is not required to pursue a generalized public benefit or measure its performance against a third-party standard. Social Purpose Corporation directors may give weight to a variety of factors, including the prospects of the corporation, the interests of the corporation and its shareholders, and its “special purpose”, as they see fit in their decision-making. • Social Purpose Corporations are allowed to choose their own “special purpose,” as long as it fits the general description set forth below. The SPC must clearly state its specific purpose, outline goals to achieve that purpose, and publish an annual report disclosing how well it has achieved that purpose (no third-party standard required for this report yet) • The special purpose chosen by a SPC can be anything that generally benefits society, but can include the following: What is Considered a “special purpose”? What are the advantages of this structure? • • One or more charitable or public purpose activities that could be carried out by a nonprofit public benefit corporation • The purpose of promoting positive short-term or long-term effects of the Social Purpose Corporation’s activities upon stakeholders, the community and society, or the environment • The purpose of minimizing adverse short-term or long-term effects of the corporation’s activities upon stakeholders, the community and society, or the environment Similar to Benefit Corporation (previous slide) but with even less liabilities for directors, as well as less accountability from third-party standards Sources: Interviews 1Update 4/2015 to reflect CA change from “Flexible Purpose Corporation to “Social Purpose Corporation” http://www.nonprofitlawmatters.com/2014/10/06/goodbye-flexible-purpose-corporation-hello-social-purpose-corporation-governor-brown-signs-s-b-1301/ © REDF 2011 – PLEASE DO NOT DISTRIBUTE WITHOUT PRIOR PERMISSION FROM REDF www. REDF.org 21
© Copyright 2024