Entertaining the Idea of Starting a Loan-Out Corporation
Counseling clients in the entertainment industry, it is clear the road to success is a difficult one for those in the arts. It can take years for actors, musicians and others to reach a point where their efforts begin bringing in a notable return.
November 07, 2019 at 12:05 PM
5 minute read
Counseling clients in the entertainment industry, it is clear the road to success is a difficult one for those in the arts. It can take years for actors, musicians and others to reach a point where their efforts begin bringing in a notable return. If and when these types of clients begin to make a consistently significant income, their hard-earned pay should be properly protected. One method that deserves consideration is organizing a loan-out corporation.
From a legal standpoint, these corporations are essentially identical to single-member limited liability companies or sole-shareholder corporations. The term "loan-out corporation" is generally exclusive to the entertainment industry and reflects that these companies—typically consisting of one owner—allow entertainers to "loan out" their services into independent contract relationships with third parties. Substantial tax benefits and asset protections make these types of enterprises attractive once an entertainer begins taking in a more sizable income and is subjected to higher personal income taxes.
Often, entertainers may not understand why forming a loan-out corporation is in their best interests, or how to set one up that will be acceptable to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). This is where an attorney's knowledge is vital in helping an entertainer determine the best route as they progress in their career.
When to Start a Loan-Out Corporation?
For example, let's say a film and TV actor is beginning to get a steady stream of well-paying work. Once his income begins to increase to around $100,000 per year, the entertainer's counsel should broach the idea of a loan-out corporation. This is a general figure, but it is around that income level that the potential tax savings begin to outweigh the initial costs and annual fees of operating a corporation.
Another set of factors for legal and financial advisers to note before suggesting a loan-out corporation is the state under which the corporation will be created, as certain states have varying fees. Costs of living are also a consideration, as they may affect at what income level it is most beneficial to begin the process.
Once an entertainer reaches the rare heights of fame and starts earning a multimillion-dollar annual income, they might have multiple enterprises and companies, but the loan-out corporation remains their method for contracting themselves to film studios, production companies, record companies and other third parties.
What Are the Main Benefits?
- Tax savings: Clients in the entertainment industry may be used to receiving payment from various production companies as an employee, with all of their wages subject to a self-employment tax that covers Medicare and Social Security. Following 2017's Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, however, self-employed performers are no longer able to deduct business expenses, except in rare occasions. Businesses, however, have few limitations on deductions, so a loan-out corporation employee can deduct expenses on a corporate tax return.
By establishing a loan-out corporation, clients would be eligible to take an S election. This allows them to take a distribution as an owner, rather than collecting a full salary directly from the production company. As such, an entertainer can avoid the payroll tax on a significant portion of their income, and potentially reduce up to half the Social Security portion of their self-employment tax and more. Add it up, and it's a substantial amount of income per year.
- Asset Protection: Since a loan-out corporation is a separate legal entity from the individual, property held in the name of its owner or principal is protected from judgment against the corporation. That means if the company is sued, the owner's personal assets can't be touched to satisfy a judgment—only those held by the company. This becomes especially important as entertainers' personal assets rise in value.
For more protection against personal injury liability, the company can—and oftentimes should—obtain an insurance policy (and almost always its own bank accounts). Additionally, in the event of an audit, questions from a production company or, in the worst-case scenario, a lawsuit, a separate contact should exist between the company and its principal for the latter's personal services.
What's the Catch?
Forming a loan-out corporation is no different than forming a corporation or LLC. While the entertainer is focused on creating their art, touring or shooting a television show, this is the pivotal time when their attorney steps in to form and structure the new business. There are multiple filing requirements, such as obtaining a tax ID number, drafting the operating document or bylaws, and a number of other procedural steps to complete depending on the type of business entity being formed.
These details do not go away after the business is formed. There remain annual operating expenses and often filings to maintain the entity, and if it is not properly documented and consistently used in the proper fashion, it may draw the unwanted attention of the IRS. The IRS recognizes that entertainers are creating these companies to save on taxes, so it will look for any reason to declare one a tax avoidance mechanism.
Trusted legal counsel and tax and financial advisers are an entertainer's best friends in avoiding that outcome. While the performers get down to the business of creating their art, it's the experts behind the scenes who keep the business going.
Maxwell Briskman Stanfield is an attorney at Meyer, Unkovic & Scott. He focuses his practice on corporate, business, financial and commercial real estate law, and he has a wide variety of experience in the entertainment industry. He can be reached at [email protected].
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllFormer Perkins Coie Partner Moves to Stradley Ronon in Chicago
Proskauer Rose Investment Management Trio Jumps to Stradley Ronon
Stradley Ronon Bolsters Investment Management Practice With Vanguard Hire
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Delaware Supreme Court Names Civil Litigator to Serve as New Chief Disciplinary Counsel
- 2Inside Track: Why Relentless Self-Promoters Need Not Apply for GC Posts
- 3Fresh lawsuit hits Oregon city at the heart of Supreme Court ruling on homeless encampments
- 4Ex-Kline & Specter Associate Drops Lawsuit Against the Firm
- 5Am Law 100 Lateral Partner Hiring Rose in 2024: Report
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250