Employee share ownership: Opportunities and pitfalls - A corporate law perspective
publicationsAlthough employee share ownership (“Actionnariat salarié”/”Medewerker-aandeelhouderschap”) remains rarely used amongst Belgian companies compared with other European jurisdictions, it has become increasingly popular over the last years including amongst small and medium sized companies (SMEs). This trend could be further enhanced in the near future as a reform of the Act of 22 May 2001 on employees’ participation (hereafter the Employees Participation Act) is on the agenda of the newly established Arizona Government.
The current legislative framework offers limited tools to companies willing to implement an employee share ownership scheme and contains several pitfalls, but some corporate law tools can be used to create sui generis employee share ownership schemes.
What stands for “Employee share ownership”?
Employee share ownership is a broad concept which spans all legal, tax and HR mechanisms aiming at allowing a company’s workers to have a direct or indirect participation in its shareholding structure.
For which purpose and context?
Employee share ownership can serve many different purposes, but the establishment of an employee share ownership is often driven by one of the following major goals.
First of all, the allocation of shares to employees may help to motivate and inspire loyalty amongst a company’s workforce. As a reward of their contribution to the development of the company’s activities and growth, employees are offered the possibility to participate to the company’s profits and eventually make a capital gain. This will not only boost loyalty amongst existing workforce, but it may also help the company to attract new talents.
In SMEs, the establishment of an employee share ownership scheme may serve as a transmission plan by allowing the (progressive) transfer of shares to (a group of) workers or the management.
On top of that, an employee share ownership scheme is a good way for companies to increase their ESG performance score.
How to implement? Which corporate law tools are available?
The Belgian Code for Companies and Associations (BCCA) contains mainly one tool dedicated to employee share ownership through the issuance of discounted shares as organized by Article 7:204. The Employees Participation Act on the other hand organizes a specific participation regime allowing the issuance of free shares to employees under strict conditions. In practice, companies often opt for sui generis employee share ownership schemes.
1. Issuance of discounted shares
A société anonyme/naamloze vennootschap (SA/NV) may opt in for the specific regime organized under Article 7:204 BCCA and hence proceed to a capital increase through the issuance of new voting shares to all or part of its employees.
This regime is available only to SA/NV and is subject to strict conditions, including the followings:
The capital increase requires an extraordinary shareholders’ meeting resolution adopted with a special majority or, as the case may be in the context of the authorized capital, a board of directors’ resolution.
The regime organized by Article 7:204 BCCA is optional. A company could therefore decide to issue shares to its employees outside the conditions provided therein. The advantage of complying with this provision mainly lies in its tax consequences, as discounted shares issued in this context benefit from special tax treatment.
2. Issuance of free shares
The Employees Participation Act allows companies to implement a participation scheme pursuant to which the employees can participate in the share capital of the company through the allocation of shares free of charge, while benefiting from a special tax regime.
The act requires compliance with a number of strict conditions, including the followings:
From a corporate law perspective, the scheme shall be implemented through a capital increase in cash by capitalisation of reserves and the allocation of free shares with voting rights to the relevant employees. The capital increase in cash shall be completed in accordance with the provisions of Article 7:177 and subs. of the BCCA. The provisions of the Employees Participation Act can also be combined with the legal regime provided for by Article 7:204 BCCA, although there is no obligation to do so.
Although the regime offered by the Employees Participation Act may seem prima facie attractive, the strict conditions required for its implementation as well as the pitfalls that the act fails to address result in this regime being rarely used in practice.
3. Sui generis employee share ownership scheme
Due to the restrictive current legislative framework specifically dedicated to employee share ownership, a series of legal constructions, whose form and content greatly vary depending on the circumstances and set goals, have developed in practice.
One possible structuration consists for the existing (historic) shareholders of a company to incorporate a newco by contributing a certain percentage of the company’s shares to newco. The shares in newco are subsequently (and progressively) sold to employees. Newco hence serves as a special purpose vehicle in which the participating employees are pooled and acquire an indirect participation in the company.
When implementing such sui generis scheme, several strategic corporate law features must be considered:
The abovementioned features are not exhaustive. Corporate law offers various opportunities for creative sui generis schemes.
Nous utilisons des cookies pour améliorer votre expérience de navigation et analyser l'utilisation de notre site. Les cookies nécessaires sont indispensables au fonctionnement du site. Vous pouvez accepter ou refuser les cookies optionnels.