# ASC 718-50-25: Compensation—Stock Compensation — Employee Share Purchase Plans — 25 Recognition Source: FASB Accounting Standards Codification, Basic View [Read online](https://asc.understandingaccounting.org/asc/718/50/#25-recognition) Study and research edition. Verify current requirements with the official source. Summaries, enrichment, and tags are machine-generated study aids. Paragraph html preserves source markup; snippet is abbreviated. Pending content is not necessarily effective. Tables and mathematical or amendment markup are retained as HTML where Markdown would lose structure. Source downloaded (UTC): 2026-09-10T01:06:08.707Z to 2026-09-10T01:06:08.707Z Record version: sha256:af2ca38653e3ef41229d1259f61a99e3f935d85f790d3095de1d548bee95df86 Snapshot version: sha256:15aea8165dff9f5ae47d9484f8470588b13b307f56e1d50801bf4d85ec190e3f Effective as of: not established by retrieval timestamps. ## ASC 718-50-25: 25 Recognition [Read section](https://asc.understandingaccounting.org/asc/718/50/#25-recognition) SEC content: no ##### [718-50-25-1](https://asc.understandingaccounting.org/asc/718/50/#718-50-25-1) Pending content: no Source downloaded (UTC): 2026-09-10T01:06:08.707Z to 2026-09-10T01:06:08.707Z Record version: sha256:46848e640760cf175b8807536ae1e6a25e35a7cbfc882028dd3e33e54646b29e Snapshot version: sha256:15aea8165dff9f5ae47d9484f8470588b13b307f56e1d50801bf4d85ec190e3f Effective as of: not established by retrieval timestamps. An employee share purchase plan that satisfies all of the following criteria does not give rise to recognizable compensation cost (that is, the plan is noncompensatory): 1. a The plan satisfies either of the following conditions: 1. 1 The terms of the plan are no more favorable than those available to all holders of the same class of shares. Note that a transaction subject to an employee share purchase plan that involves a class of equity shares designed exclusively for and held only by current or former employees or their beneficiaries may be compensatory depending on the terms of the arrangement. 2. 2 Any purchase discount from the market price does not exceed the per-share amount of share issuance costs that would have been incurred to raise a significant amount of capital by a public offering. A purchase discount of 5 percent or less from the market price shall be considered to comply with this condition without further justification. A purchase discount greater than 5 percent that cannot be justified under this condition results in compensation cost for the entire amount of the discount. Note that an entity that justifies a purchase discount in excess of 5 percent shall reassess at least annually, and no later than the first share purchase offer during the fiscal year, whether it can continue to justify that discount pursuant to this paragraph. 2. b Substantially all [employees](https://asc.understandingaccounting.org/glossary/e/#employee "An individual over whom the grantor of a share-based compensation award exercises or has the right to exercise sufficient control to establish an employer-employee relationship based on common law as illustrated in case law and currently under U.S. Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Revenue Ruling 87-41. A reporting entity based in a foreign jurisdiction would determine whether an employee-employer relationship exists based on the pertinent laws of that jurisdiction. Accordingly, a grantee meets the definition of an employee if the grantor consistently represents that individual to be an employee under common law. The definition of an employee for payroll tax purposes under the U.S. Internal Revenue Code includes common law employees. Accordingly, a grantor that classifies a grantee potentially subject to U.S. payroll taxes as an employee also must represent that individual as an employee for payroll tax purposes (unless the grantee is a leased employee as described below). A grantee does not meet the definition of an employee solely because the grantor represents that individual as an employee for some, but not all, purposes. For example, a requirement or decision to classify a grantee as an employee for U.S. payroll tax purposes does not, by itself, indicate that the grantee is an employee because the grantee also must be an employee of the grantor under common law. A leased individual is deemed to be an employee of the lessee if all of the following requirements are met: The leased individual qualifies as a common law employee of the lessee, and the lessor is contractually required to remit payroll taxes on the compensation paid to the leased individual for the services provided to the lessee. The lessor and lessee agree in writing to all of the following conditions related to the leased individual: The lessee has the exclusive right to grant stock compensation to the individual for the employee service to the lessee. The lessee has a right to hire, fire, and control the activities of the individual. (The lessor also may have that right.) The lessee has the exclusive right to determine the economic value of the services performed by the individual (including wages and the number of units and value of stock compensation granted). The individual has the ability to participate in the lessee's employee benefit plans, if any, on the same basis as other comparable employees of the lessee. The lessee agrees to and remits to the lessor funds sufficient to cover the complete compensation, including all payroll taxes, of the individual on or before a contractually agreed upon date or dates. A nonemployee director does not satisfy this definition of employee. Nevertheless, nonemployee directors acting in their role as members of a board of directors are treated as employees if those directors were elected by the employer's shareholders or appointed to a board position that will be filled by shareholder election when the existing term expires. However, that requirement applies only to awards granted to nonemployee directors for their services as directors. Awards granted to those individuals for other services shall be accounted for as awards to nonemployees. (P) December 16, 2026; (N) December 16, 2026220-40-65-1An individual over whom a reporting entity exercises or has the right to exercise sufficient control to establish an employer-employee relationship based on common law as illustrated in case law and currently under U.S. Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Revenue Ruling 87-41. A reporting entity based in a foreign jurisdiction would determine whether an employee-employer relationship exists based on the pertinent laws of that jurisdiction. Accordingly, an individual meets the definition of an employee if the reporting entity consistently represents that individual to be an employee under common law. The definition of an employee for payroll tax purposes under the U.S. Internal Revenue Code includes common law employees. Accordingly, a reporting entity that classifies an individual potentially subject to U.S. payroll taxes as an employee also must represent that individual as an employee for payroll tax purposes (unless the individual is a leased employee as described below). An individual that meets the definition of an employee includes, but is not limited to, a full-time, part-time, temporary, or seasonal employee. An individual does not meet the definition of an employee solely because the reporting entity represents that individual as an employee for some, but not all, purposes. For example, a requirement or decision to classify an individual as an employee for U.S. payroll tax purposes does not, by itself, indicate that the individual is an employee because the individual also must be an employee of the reporting entity under common law. A leased individual is deemed to be an employee of the lessee if all of the following requirements are met: The leased individual qualifies as a common law employee of the lessee, and the lessor is contractually required to remit payroll taxes on the compensation paid to the leased individual for the services provided to the lessee. The lessor and lessee agree in writing to all of the following conditions related to the leased individual: The lessee has the exclusive right to grant compensation to the individual for the employee service to the lessee. The lessee has a right to hire, fire, and control the activities of the individual. (The lessor also may have that right.) The lessee has the exclusive right to determine the economic value of the services performed by the individual (including wages and the number of units and value of stock compensation granted). The individual has the ability to participate in the lessee's employee benefit plans, if any, on the same basis as other comparable employees of the lessee. The lessee agrees to and remits to the lessor funds sufficient to cover the complete compensation, including all payroll taxes, of the individual on or before a contractually agreed upon date or dates. A nonemployee director does not satisfy this definition of employee. Nevertheless, nonemployee directors acting in their role as members of a board of directors are treated as employees if those directors were elected by the employer's shareholders or appointed to a board position that will be filled by shareholder election when the existing term expires. However, that requirement applies only to awards and other compensation granted to nonemployee directors for their services as directors. Awards granted and compensation paid to those individuals for other services shall be accounted for as awards and compensation to nonemployees.") that meet limited employment qualifications may participate on an equitable basis. 3. c The plan incorporates no option features, other than the following: 1. 1 Employees are permitted a short period of time—not exceeding 31 days—after the purchase price has been fixed to enroll in the plan. 2. 2 The purchase price is based solely on the market price of the shares at the date of purchase, and employees are permitted to cancel participation before the purchase date and obtain a refund of amounts previously paid (such as those paid by payroll withholdings). ##### [718-50-25-2](https://asc.understandingaccounting.org/asc/718/50/#718-50-25-2) Pending content: no Source downloaded (UTC): 2026-09-10T01:06:08.707Z to 2026-09-10T01:06:08.707Z Record version: sha256:961554c96ff60d7ba0fe0e8dc75cf1230fb54575477a316bc923045b57e1289f Snapshot version: sha256:15aea8165dff9f5ae47d9484f8470588b13b307f56e1d50801bf4d85ec190e3f Effective as of: not established by retrieval timestamps. A plan provision that establishes the purchase price as an amount based on the lesser of the equity share's market price at date of grant or its market price at date of purchase, commonly called a look-back plan, is an example of an option feature that causes the plan to be compensatory. Similarly, a plan in which the purchase price is based on the share's market price at date of grant and that permits a participating employee to cancel participation before the purchase date and obtain a refund of amounts previously paid contains an option feature that causes the plan to be compensatory. Section 718-50-55 provides guidance on determining whether an employee share purchase plan satisfies the criteria necessary to be considered noncompensatory. ##### [718-50-25-3](https://asc.understandingaccounting.org/asc/718/50/#718-50-25-3) Pending content: no Source downloaded (UTC): 2026-09-10T01:06:08.707Z to 2026-09-10T01:06:08.707Z Record version: sha256:4fca1230b2b514c39a483ee7471342c27a42600a53831cdb6295372e765920ca Snapshot version: sha256:15aea8165dff9f5ae47d9484f8470588b13b307f56e1d50801bf4d85ec190e3f Effective as of: not established by retrieval timestamps. The requisite service period for any compensation cost resulting from an employee share purchase plan is the period over which the employee participates in the plan and pays for the shares.