| Partnership | Limited Liability Company | S Corporation | C Corporation | Cooperative Corporation | |
| Ownership Issues | The number of owners, their respective and relative contributions, and their personal and collective business goals will determine the signifigance of ownership and start-up issues described below. | ||||
| Term for owner | Partner (general and limited) | Member | Shareholder | Shareholder | Member |
| Limitations | (+/-) New owners must be unanimously approved. | (+/-) Limited to 35 owners. May not own a subsidiary. Corporations and non-resident aliens may not own stock. | (+) Few, if any, limitations. | (+/-) Generally limited to current "users" of the business' goods or services. Ownership often limited to active farmers.1 | |
| Family farm orientation | (+/-) No inherent orientation to favor farmer ownership over non-farmer ownership, although rules could be so instituted. | (+) Often an inherent orientation toward family farm ownership. | |||
| Limited liability | (-) No | (+) Yes | (+) Yes | (+) Yes | (+) Yes |
| Partnership | Limited Liability Company | S Corporation | C Corporation | Cooperative Corporation | |
| Getting Started | Starting a multi-family joint venture will always entail complications. It is very important to get competent outside assistance. | ||||
| Legal and administration costs | (+) Lowest legal and administrative costs.2 | (+) Relatively easy and low cost. | (+/-) More complicated and costly than partnership and LLC. The greater the number of owners, the more the legal and administrative costs can be spread out. | ||
| Familiarity | (+) The partnership is very common. | (-) The LLC is still a relatively new option. Legal and financial consultation may be limited and costly. | (+/-) The S corporation may be less familiar to farmers and their advocates than C corporations and cooperatives. | (+) Very familiar. | (+/-) While the cooperative model is especially common in U.S agriculture, cooperative farm ownership is quite uncommon. |
| Capitalization | (-) Unlimited liability may discourage investment | (+) Limited liability, and the ability to contribute and withdraw appreciable assets without capital gains taxes are distinct advantages. | (+) Limited liability, but (-) capital gains tax penalties may discourage contributions of appreciable assets such as land. | (+/-) Same as S and C corporations. (-) In addition, restrictions on membership and dividends may limit investment.3 |
|
| Partnership | Limited Liability Company | S Corporation | C Corporation | Cooperative Corporation | |
| Decision-Making and Management | Decision-making authority is allocated and structured differently among the business forms. Some involve a more formal process, some distribute power more equally than others, some require anonymity while others require simple majority approval. Which of these alternatives is more advantageous will depend on the situation. | ||||
| Distribution of voting power | (+ / -) Usually, one vote per partner. | (+ / -) Usually in proportion to investment, although each owner enjoys veto power in consensus-based decisions. | (+ / -) One vote per share of stock. While only one class of stock is permitted, differences in voting rights are permissible. | (+ / -) One vote per share of stock. | (+ / -) One vote per member.4 |
| Decision-making body | (+ / -) The partners as a whole. Less formal, more flexible. No board of directors. | (+ / -) Board of Directors, elected by a majority vote of the owners. More formal than partnership or LLC. | |||
| Majority rule or consensus | (+ / -) Unanimous consent. | (+/ -) Majority of ownership interest rules, except for major decisions that specifically require consensus approval. | (+ / -) Majority of ownership interests elects the board of directors, and majority rules on the board. | (+ / -) Majority of members elect board of directors, and majority rules on the board.5 | |
| Management | (+ / -) Owners may manage collectively or appoint and/or hire a manager.6 | (+ / -) Usually, the Board of Directors hire a manager, and management is centralized. In a tightly held corporation or small cooperative, however, owners may effectively manage collectively and/or divvy out management responsibilities. | |||
| Flexibility in Distributions | When the business employs one or more of its owners, a business form (or forms) and associated tax strategy should be instituted that equitably rewards labor and capital, while minimizing the tax burden. It should be noted that all of the business forms have such options as paying rent as distributions to owners that rent land to the entity. | ||||
| Distributions to employee-owners | (+) Distributions can be directed to labor or
capital, in proportions that may
vary from owner to
owner and from year to year (within reason), in order to minimize
tax burden and most
appropriately reward owners.
(-) Lacks deductions for fringe benefits paid to employee-owners (see tax issues below.) |
(-)The temptation to minimize salaries (and associated taxes) of employee-owners and distribute earnings instead to owners as pass-through income is limited by the IRS. (-) Also no deductions for fringe benefits. | (-) Advantages to maximinzing salaries to employee-owners in order to minimize taxable income (taxed at both shareholder and entity level) is offset by increased FICA taxes. (+) Deductions for fringe benefits available. | (+ / -) Coopertive law favors reward to "use" (patronage) over reward to capital. If use is measured in terms of labor, distributions would tend to go to employees as either salaries or "patronage refunds". | |
| Distributions to investors | (+) Special allocations are possible. | (-) Single class of stock limits special allocations to more substantial investors. | (+) Multiple classes of stock makes special allocations to substantial investors possible. | (+ / -) 8% limit on dividends may perhaps be off-set with a base capital plan that rewards early satisfaction of equity requirements with greater patronage refunds. | |
| Partnership | Limited Liability Company | S Corporation | C Corporation | Cooperative Corporation | |
| Taxation | Closely-held joint ventures often involve complex contributions of capital, working and non-working owners, and many other complications. Minimizing the tax burden under these complex circumstances can lead to elaborate and cumbersome models involving numerous business forms. | ||||
| "Pass through" income taxation | (+) Yes | (+/-) Built-in gains and passive net income are taxed at entity level. Otherwise, yes. | (+/-) No. Income is taxed at the corporate and shareholder levels. | (+) Yes, to the extent that the cooperative issues patronage refunds. | |
| Deductions for fringe benefits | These "pass-through" business forms are not considered separate employers from their owners, and the entity cannot therefore deduct fringe benefits paid to employee-owners. | (+) Entity level can deduct fringe benefits, and employees may exclude benefits received when determining their gross income. | |||
| Conversion cost (rank along the tax spectrum)7 | (+) 1st (lowest cost.) Converting from partnership to higher level structures entails no associated capital gains. | (+) 2nd. | (-) 3rd. Preferable to the LLC if converting from a C corporation.8 | (-) 4th (highest cost). Converting from a C corporation or cooperative "downward" may entail substantial capital gains taxes. | |
| Basis adjustment when distributing ownership interests | (+) Enjoys favorable adjustments in the basis in its assets when ownership interests are sold. | (-) No adjustment in the basis of assets when there is a transfer of ownership. | |||
| Capital gains taxes on distribution of appreciated assets9 | (+) Appreciated assets can be distributed back to original contributors without recognizing gains. | (-) Gains penalties may be somewhat less severe than C corporations and coopertives. | (-) Taxable gains may be recognized at both the individual and entity levels. | ||
| Partnership | Limited Liability Company | S Corporation | C Corporation | Cooperative Corporation | |
| Adjusting to Change: | Flexibility to partition and transfer ownership interest, marketability of those interests, and tax penalties and disincentives for disassociation all affect owners ability to adapt their personal business strategies and to plan estates. In general, a balance must be struck between the maintaining flexibility of individual owners while ensuring stability of the joint venture for remaining owners. The best fit, again, will depend on the particular situation. | ||||
| Withdrawal and transfer of ownership interest | (+ / -) Owners may withdraw their assets at will-- often without recognizing gain-- but transfers of ownership interest may require unanimous approval of remaining owners. | (+ / -) Majority of interests may prohibit withdrawl of minority interests' assets. This may promote the stability of the joint venture. It would also be a significant disadvantage for an individual wanting out, and it's one reason there's often a limited market for minority shares in a closely-held corporation. | |||
| Stability of the joint venture for remaining owners | (-) No "continuity of life" may threaten
long-term stability. 10 (-) Unanimity in voting necessitates a consensus among owners that may be difficult to consistently achieve over time. (-) The relative ease of "getting out" may threaten long-term stability for remaining owners. |
(+) Continuity of life may promote long-term stability. (+) Majority rule avoids the consensus among owners that partnerships and LLCs require, and which may be difficult to consistently generate over time. (+) Majority's ability to limit withdrawl and transfer of shares may promote stability. However, there are other ways to discourage and prepare for unexpected early withdrawl of owners in a joint venture.11 | |||
| Partnership | Limited Liability Company | S Corporation | C Corporation | Cooperative Corporation | |
| Summary Conclusions | Unlimited liability may rule the partnership out altogether. | Tax benefits of a partnership with the limited liability of a corporation. Less administrative cost and complexity than a corporation. However, it's so new that there are still some unanswered questions. | An LLC may offer all the advantages of an S corporation, without the limits on ownership (35 stockholders, one class of stock, no corporate or alien stockholders.) Its ability to spread out tax burden on built-in gains may make it a useful "middle step" in converting from C corporate to LLC status. It may be used in conjunction with an LLC in a "multiple entity model". | Income tax and capital gains tax implications may rule out the C corporation as a solution by itself. However, if appreciated assets are already incorporated and capital gains tax penalties prohibit conversion to another form, or if corporate tax advantages regarding fringe benefits for employee-owners are appealing, a "multiple entity model" that combines an LLC with a C corporation may be the best answer. | Rules favoring farmer ownership, equal representation among owners, and reward to "use" versus reward to capital may be excessively formal for a small number of joint venture owners. The goals underlying these rules may be achieved with less administrative cost in a carefully structured LLC. It's not clear whether, under certain circumstancs, a cooperative might be superior to a C corporation in a multiple entity model with an LLC. 12 |
| Final Note | The best choice of business structure will vary from situation to situation. Often, the best choice may be a hybrid of two or more of the forms described separately above. A "multiple entity model" that combines, for instance, the LLC and C corporation, may be most successful at minimizing the tax burden, although the cost of complexity may not be worth the tax savings . This presentation is intended to convey some of the general advantages and disadvantages of each business form, considered separately. It is strongly suggested that consultation with legal and financial professionals be sought to identify the best fit for each situation. | ||||