Skip to main content

LUP Student Papers

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Förfoganderättsinskränkningar i aktierelaterade incitamentsprogram – En analys av beskattningsreglerna och deras förhållande till skatterättsliga principer

Jangenfeldt, Tova LU (2025) JURM02 20252
Department of Law
Faculty of Law
Abstract
Stock incentive plans are commonly used by Swedish companies to attract, motivate, and retain employees and executives. Under such plans, participants are granted a conditional right to compensation related to shares, share prices, or other financial instruments issued by the employer company or entities within its group. These plans are generally divided into contractual plans and dilution-based plans. Contractual plans are based on agreements between the company and the employee and typically involve call options or synthetic options. Dilution-based plans, on the other hand, affect existing shareholders’ ownership interests through the issuance of shares, warrants, or convertible instruments in accordance with the Swedish Companies Act.
... (More)
Stock incentive plans are commonly used by Swedish companies to attract, motivate, and retain employees and executives. Under such plans, participants are granted a conditional right to compensation related to shares, share prices, or other financial instruments issued by the employer company or entities within its group. These plans are generally divided into contractual plans and dilution-based plans. Contractual plans are based on agreements between the company and the employee and typically involve call options or synthetic options. Dilution-based plans, on the other hand, affect existing shareholders’ ownership interests through the issuance of shares, warrants, or convertible instruments in accordance with the Swedish Companies Act.

The tax treatment of such plans depends on how the instrument used is classified for tax purposes. If the instrument is regarded as a security, taxation occurs upon acquisition as employment income, while any subsequent increase in value is taxed as capital income. However, if the instrument is classified as an employee stock option, taxation is deferred until disposal and takes place exclusively as employment income. Incentive plans typically include conditions that limit the holder’s right to dispose of the instrument, which affects the tax classification of the instrument and, subsequently, the applicable tax treatment.

The purpose of this thesis is to examine how and to what extent restrictions on rights of disposal affect the taxation of stock incentive plans, and how the regulations relate to key principles of tax law. Using the legal dogmatic method, the thesis examines relevant legal sources. In particular, the thesis examines case law concerning shares, warrants, call options, and synthetic options, as well as their classification as securities and the timing of taxation.

The investigation shows that the significance of restrictions on disposal rights differs considerably between contractual plans and dilution-based plans. In the case of shares and warrants, restrictions on disposal do not, as a general rule, affect their status as securities. This applies provided that fundamental rights under the Swedish Companies Act, such as voting rights or the right to subscribe for new shares, remain intact. By contrast, for call options and synthetic options, whose classification as securities is assessed based on the same fundamental criteria, the legal position is considerably less clear. The securities status may be lost if the terms and conditions restrict the free transferability of the options and the right to compensation, for example by stipulating that the options expire upon termination of employment.

Finally, the taxation rules are analysed in light of the principle of legality, the ability to pay principle, the principle of equality, and the principle of tax neutrality. The analysis demonstrates that the current regulatory framework is, in several respects, difficult to apply and lacks predictability. Economically equivalent arrangements may result in substantially different tax outcomes depending on the private law classification of the instrument. The legal position is also criticised for failing to adequately reflect the requirements of the ability to pay principle. Overall, the thesis concludes that the regulatory framework is in need of reform and that the Supreme Administrative Court of Sweden should, in future judgements, clarify which criteria are decisive for the classification of contract based incentive plans as securities. (Less)
Abstract (Swedish)
Aktierelaterade incitamentsprogram är mycket vanligt förekommande bland svenska bolag och kan användas för att attrahera, motivera och behålla anställda och nyckelpersoner. Programmen innebär att deltagaren tilldelas en villkorad rätt till ersättning som är knuten till aktier, aktiekursen eller andra finansiella instrument utgivna av arbetsgivarbolaget eller dess koncern. Civilrättsligt kan programmen delas in i avtalsprogram och utspädningsprogram. Förstnämnda grundas på avtal mellan bolaget och den anställde och utgörs framför allt av köpoptioner eller syntetiska optioner, medan den senare medför utspädning av befintliga aktieägares innehav genom emission av
aktier, teckningsoptioner eller konvertibler enligt ABL.

Hur programmen... (More)
Aktierelaterade incitamentsprogram är mycket vanligt förekommande bland svenska bolag och kan användas för att attrahera, motivera och behålla anställda och nyckelpersoner. Programmen innebär att deltagaren tilldelas en villkorad rätt till ersättning som är knuten till aktier, aktiekursen eller andra finansiella instrument utgivna av arbetsgivarbolaget eller dess koncern. Civilrättsligt kan programmen delas in i avtalsprogram och utspädningsprogram. Förstnämnda grundas på avtal mellan bolaget och den anställde och utgörs framför allt av köpoptioner eller syntetiska optioner, medan den senare medför utspädning av befintliga aktieägares innehav genom emission av
aktier, teckningsoptioner eller konvertibler enligt ABL.

Hur programmen behandlas skatterättsligt avgörs av hur det använda instrumentet klassificeras. Anses instrumentet utgöra ett värdepapper sker beskattning vid förvärvet i inkomstslaget tjänst, medan senare värdestegring beskatttas i inkomstslaget kapital. Om instrumentet i stället anses vara en personaloption sker beskattning först vid avyttringen och uteslutande i inkomstslaget tjänst. Incitamentsprogram innehåller oftast villkor som inskränker rätten att förfoga över instrumentet, vilket påverkar instrumentets skatterättsliga klassificering och därmed hur beskattning ska ske.

Syftet med uppsatsen är att undersöka hur och i vilken utsträckning förfoganderättsinskränkningar påverkar beskattningen av olika aktierelaterade incitamentsprogram samt hur regleringen förhåller sig till centrala skatterättsliga principer. Framställningen utgår från den rättsdogmatiska metoden där rättskällorna bearbetats utifrån rättskällehierarkin. Tonvikten läggs vid rättspraxis som rör aktier, teckningsoptioner, köpoptioner och syntetiska optioner, med särskilt fokus på deras värdepappersklassificering och beskattningstidpunkt.

Undersökningen visar att förfoganderättsinskränkningarnas betydelse skiljer sig markant mellan avtalsprogram och utspädningsprogram. För aktier och teckningsoptioner påverkas värdepappersstatusen som utgångspunkt inte av förfoganderättsinskränkningar. Detta gäller under förutsättning att grundläggande rättigheter enligt ABL, såsom rösträtt, rätt till utdelning eller rätt att teckna nya aktier, består. För köpoptioner och syntetiska optioner, vars värdepappersbedömning sker utifrån samma grundläggande kriterier, är rättsläget däremot betydligt mer oklart. Värdepappersstatusen kan gå förlorad om villkoren begränsar optionernas fria överlåtbarhet och rätt till ersättning, exempelvis genom att optionerna förfaller vid anställningens upphörande.

Slutligen analyseras beskattningsreglerna i ljuset av legalitetsprincipen, skatteförmågeprincipen, likformighetsprincipen och neutralitetsprincipen. Framställningen visar att den nuvarande regleringen i flera avseenden är svårtilllämplig och brister i förutsebarhet för den skattskyldige och tillämpande myndigheter. Ekonomiskt likvärdiga upplägg riskerar även att leda till väsentligt olika beskattningsutfall beroende på instrumentets civilrättsliga klassificering. Rättsläget kritiseras även för att inte beakta skatteförmågeprincipens krav. Sammantaget kommer uppsatsen fram till att regleringen är i behov av reform och att HFD framledes klargör vilka kriterier som är avgörande för värdepappersbedömningen i avtalsbaserade incitamentsprogram. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Jangenfeldt, Tova LU
supervisor
organization
alternative title
Restrictions on Disposal Rights in Stock Incentive Plans – An Analysis of Tax Rules and Their Alignment with Tax Law Principles
course
JURM02 20252
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
skatterätt, incitamentsprogram, värdepappersregeln, personaloptionsregeln, inkomstskatt, inkomstskattelagen
language
Swedish
id
9217465
date added to LUP
2026-02-01 11:04:37
date last changed
2026-02-01 11:04:37
@misc{9217465,
  abstract     = {{Stock incentive plans are commonly used by Swedish companies to attract, motivate, and retain employees and executives. Under such plans, participants are granted a conditional right to compensation related to shares, share prices, or other financial instruments issued by the employer company or entities within its group. These plans are generally divided into contractual plans and dilution-based plans. Contractual plans are based on agreements between the company and the employee and typically involve call options or synthetic options. Dilution-based plans, on the other hand, affect existing shareholders’ ownership interests through the issuance of shares, warrants, or convertible instruments in accordance with the Swedish Companies Act.

The tax treatment of such plans depends on how the instrument used is classified for tax purposes. If the instrument is regarded as a security, taxation occurs upon acquisition as employment income, while any subsequent increase in value is taxed as capital income. However, if the instrument is classified as an employee stock option, taxation is deferred until disposal and takes place exclusively as employment income. Incentive plans typically include conditions that limit the holder’s right to dispose of the instrument, which affects the tax classification of the instrument and, subsequently, the applicable tax treatment.

The purpose of this thesis is to examine how and to what extent restrictions on rights of disposal affect the taxation of stock incentive plans, and how the regulations relate to key principles of tax law. Using the legal dogmatic method, the thesis examines relevant legal sources. In particular, the thesis examines case law concerning shares, warrants, call options, and synthetic options, as well as their classification as securities and the timing of taxation.

The investigation shows that the significance of restrictions on disposal rights differs considerably between contractual plans and dilution-based plans. In the case of shares and warrants, restrictions on disposal do not, as a general rule, affect their status as securities. This applies provided that fundamental rights under the Swedish Companies Act, such as voting rights or the right to subscribe for new shares, remain intact. By contrast, for call options and synthetic options, whose classification as securities is assessed based on the same fundamental criteria, the legal position is considerably less clear. The securities status may be lost if the terms and conditions restrict the free transferability of the options and the right to compensation, for example by stipulating that the options expire upon termination of employment.

Finally, the taxation rules are analysed in light of the principle of legality, the ability to pay principle, the principle of equality, and the principle of tax neutrality. The analysis demonstrates that the current regulatory framework is, in several respects, difficult to apply and lacks predictability. Economically equivalent arrangements may result in substantially different tax outcomes depending on the private law classification of the instrument. The legal position is also criticised for failing to adequately reflect the requirements of the ability to pay principle. Overall, the thesis concludes that the regulatory framework is in need of reform and that the Supreme Administrative Court of Sweden should, in future judgements, clarify which criteria are decisive for the classification of contract based incentive plans as securities.}},
  author       = {{Jangenfeldt, Tova}},
  language     = {{swe}},
  note         = {{Student Paper}},
  title        = {{Förfoganderättsinskränkningar i aktierelaterade incitamentsprogram – En analys av beskattningsreglerna och deras förhållande till skatterättsliga principer}},
  year         = {{2025}},
}