
Foreign Stock Options: 6 Things American Expats Should Know
As more Americans take on international roles, stock options have become a key part of the expatriate executive's compensation package, especially when working for foreign employers. These options offer exciting opportunities to benefit from a company's growth, but they also come with complex U.S. tax implications that can catch the unwary off guard.
Imagine you're an American executive at a tech startup in London, and your employer offers you stock options as a perk. It's a chance to share in the company's success, but what does it mean for your U.S. taxes? The rules differ from those for traditional wages, and missteps can lead to unexpected tax bills.
This article breaks down the U.S. tax treatment of non-statutory stock options. These are the most common type received from foreign employers as they are not granted under either an employee stock purchase plan or an incentive stock option plan.
Each stage of stock options given in connection with employment from grant, to exercise, and a later sale of purchased shares has tax implications. This article highlights the key U.S. tax considerations at every step and reviews a tax planning strategy that could save money.
When a foreign employer grants an individual non-statutory stock options, the individual typically does not owe U.S. tax because of the option grant. This assumes the options lack what is called a 'readily ascertainable fair market value', which is common with private companies since options on such stock are not publicly traded.
A potential pitfall lies in Section 409A of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code, which governs deferred compensation. If the options defer compensation in a way that triggers Section 409A, the individual could face taxes and penalties because of the option grant. Section 409A commonly applies when stock options have an exercise price below the stock's fair market value at the time of grant or if they include features that allow deferral of income beyond standard vesting and exercise terms.
The significant tax event typically occurs when the individual exercises the options by purchasing the stock. The difference between the stock's fair market value at exercise and the price the individual pays is treated as ordinary income. For example, if the individual pays $30 per share and the stock's FMV is $100, the individual reports $70 per share as income.
For Americans living and working overseas, this income might qualify for the foreign earned income exclusion (up to $130,000 in 2025) if the work tied to the options was performed abroad. Determining how much of this income is foreign versus U.S-source, can become complex and depends on the individual's specific circumstances. An examination of the individual's services, and where and when they were carried out in relation to the options being granted is needed. This complexity makes expert advice essential.
If the stock purchased by the employee upon exercise of the option is considered 'substantially nonvested' then the employee will not be taxed at the time he exercises the option. In order for the stock to be considered 'substantially nonvested' there are two requirements. The stock must be: (i) nontransferable and (ii) 'restricted' so as to be 'subject to a substantial risk of forfeiture' (e.g., the individual loses the stock if he leaves the company within a certain time period).
If both of these restrictions are met, the employee will not be taxed at the time he exercises the option. Taxation will occur at a later time when either one of the restrictions lapse. At that time, the individual is taxed on the difference between the FMV of the stock at time of lapse minus the option price he paid. Assuming the value of the stock has risen in the meantime, the employee will pay higher tax. This is so because he will have more compensation income and compensation income is treated and taxed as 'ordinary income' with a current maximum rate of 37%.
In contrast, when the employee reports income at the time he exercises the option (for example, because the stock he acquired by exercising the option was not 'substantially nonvested'), he would acquire a basis in the stock equal to the FMV of the stock at that time. When the stock is later sold, any future appreciation after the option was exercised would generally be taxed as capital gain. If the gain is taxed as 'long term' capital gain, it is taxed much more favorably (generally at top rates of 15% or 20%) in comparison to 'ordinary income' rates.
Here is an example: Assume the individual exercises options when the stock is worth $100, paying $20, but restrictions prevent selling for two years, and the stock rises to $150 when the restrictions lift. The individual is taxed on $150 - $20 = $130 as ordinary income (with a top rate of 37%). If taxation had occurred at exercise, the individual would owe tax on $100 - $20 = $80 of ordinary income. Any later gain would be capital gain. The delay can result in a higher tax bill if the stock rises, so timing is significant.
If the stock is substantially nonvested, the individual can make an election under Code Section 83(b) to pay tax at exercise of the option instead of waiting for the restrictions to lapse. The individual would report the FMV at exercise minus the option price as ordinary income at that time. Future appreciation would be treated as capital gain. Using the earlier example, electing at exercise taxes the individual on $80 ($100 - $20) upfront. If the stock rises to $150 by the time restrictions lapse and the individual sells at $200, the $100 gain ($200 - $100) is capital gain.
The election is not free of risk. The individual pays tax upfront, even if the stock value declines or if the stock is forfeited later. If the value of the stock drops to $50, the individual would have paid tax on $80 that was never realized. It is a calculated risk and one that must be carefully evaluated.
When a U.S. person owns shares in foreign entities, special tax considerations come into play. These include foreign information return reporting, for example, on Form 8938. Such reporting gets confusing with the grant to an employee of options on foreign stock or restricted foreign stock itself. Reporting on Form 8938 may be required if the option or shares are treated as a 'specified foreign financial asset.' Unvested shares and options generally may be disregarded for purposes of Form 8938 until the time of vesting, unless the individual makes a valid election to include the assets in income under Code Section 83(b).
The foreign country where the taxpayer is living and working may also tax the stock option at grant, exercise, or sale, depending on local tax laws. Some countries tax options as employment income upon vesting or exercise, while others treat gains as capital gains upon sale. This can lead to double taxation if both the U.S. and the foreign country tax the same income.
To mitigate this, proper tax planning is essential to maximize the use of foreign tax credits, avoid timing mismatches, and ensure compliance with both U.S. and foreign tax rules. A tax professional familiar with cross-border taxation can help structure the reporting to minimize overall tax liability and take advantage of tax treaties where applicable.
Stock options can enhance an expatriate's wealth, but the tax rules are intricate. From the timing of taxation to the interplay of U.S. and foreign tax laws—including the risk of double taxation mitigated by tax treaties—the stakes are high. Understanding the basics is a starting point, but personalized advice from a tax professional familiar with international rules is essential to maximize benefits and ensure compliance. The complexity should not overshadow the value of stock options.
Stay on top of tax matters around the globe.
Reach me at vljeker@us-taxes.org
Visit my US tax blog www.us-tax.org It is an invaluable guide in all areas of U.S. international tax. Stay on top of legislative developments and tax reform, (including impact on foreign stock options) and keep ahead of U.S. tax changes impacting your life, family or business.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Hill
17 minutes ago
- The Hill
Here's how Iran could retaliate after US strikes on its nuclear program
Iran has spent decades building multi-tiered military capabilities at home and across the region that were at least partly aimed at deterring the United States from attacking it. By entering Israel's war, the U.S. may have removed the last rationale for holding them in reserve. Thet could mean a wave of attacks on U.S. forces in the Middle East, an attempt to close a key bottleneck for global oil supplies or a dash to develop a nuclear weapon with what remains of Iran's disputed program after American strikes on three key sites. A decision to retaliate against the U.S. and its regional allies would give Iran a far larger target bank and one that is much closer than Israel, allowing it to potentially use its missiles and drones to greater effect. The U.S. and Israel have far superior capabilities, but those haven't always proven decisive in America's recent history of military interventions in the region. Ever since Israel started the war with a suprise bombardment of Iran's military and nuclear sites on June 13, Iranian officials from the supreme leader on down have warned the U.S. to stay out, saying it would have dire consequences for the entire region. It should soon be clear whether those were empty threats or a grim forecast. Here's a look at what Iran's next move might be. The Strait of Hormuz is the narrow mouth of the Persian Gulf, through which some 20% of all oil traded globally passes, and at its narrowest point it is just 33 kilometers (21 miles) wide. Any disruption there could send oil prices soaring worldwide and hit American pocketbooks. Iran boasts a fleet of fast-attack boats and thousands of naval mines that could potentially make the strait impassable, at least for a time. It could also fire missiles from its long Persian Gulf shore, as its allies, Yemen's Houthi rebels, have done in the Red Sea. The U.S., with its 5th Fleet stationed in nearby Bahrain, has long pledged to uphold freedom of navigation in the strait and would respond with far superior forces. But even a relatively brief firefight could paralyze shipping traffic and spook investors, causing oil prices to spike and generating international pressure for a ceasefire. The U.S. has tens of thousands of troops stationed in the region, including at permanent bases in Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, Arab Gulf countries just across the Persian Gulf from Iran — and much closer than Israel. Those bases boast the same kinds of sophisticated air defenses as Israel, but would have much less warning time before waves of missiles or swarms of armed drones. And even Israel, which is several hundred kilometers (miles) further away, has been unable to stop all of the incoming fire. Iran could also choose to attack key oil and gas facilities in those countries with the goal of exacting a higher price for U.S. involvement in the war. A drone attack on two major oil sites in Saudi Arabia in 2019 — claimed by the Houthis but widely blamed on Iran — briefly cut the kingdom's oil production in half. Iran's so-called Axis of Resistance — a network of militant groups across the Middle East, is a shadow of what it was before the war ignited by Hamas' Oct. 7, 2023, attack on Israel out of the Gaza Strip — but it still has some formidable capabilities. Israel's 20-month war in Gaza has severely diminished the Palestinian Hamas and Islamic Jihad groups, and Israel mauled Lebanon's Hezbollah last fall, killing most of its top leadership and devastating much of southern Lebanon, making its involvement unlikely. But Iran could still call on the Houthis, who had threatened to resume their attacks in the Red Sea if the U.S. entered the war, and allied militias in Iraq. Both have drone and missile capabilities that would allow them to target the United States and its allies. Iran could also seek to respond through militant attacks further afield, as it is widely accused of doing in the 1990s with an attack on a Jewish community center in Argentina that was blamed on Iran and Hezbollah. It could be days or weeks before the full impact of the U.S. strikes on Iran's nuclear sites is known. But experts have long warned that even joint U.S. and Israeli strikes would only delay Iran's ability to develop a weapon, not eliminate it. That's because Iran has dispersed its program across the country to several sites, including hardened, underground facilities. Iran would likely struggle to repair or reconstitute its nuclear program while Israeli and U.S. warplanes are circling overhead. But it could still decide to fully end its cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency and abandon the the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. North Korea announced its withdrawal from the treaty in 2003 and tested a nuclear weapon three years later, but it had the freedom to develop its program without punishing airstrikes. Iran insists its program is peaceful, though it is the only non-nuclear-armed state to enrich uranium up to 60%, a short, technical step away from weapons-grade levels of 90%. U.S. intelligence agencies and the IAEA assess Iran hasn't had an organized military nuclear program since 2003. Israel is widely believed to be the only nuclear-armed state in the Middle East but does not acknowledge having such weapons. ___ Gambrell reported from Dubai, United Arab Emirates.

Business Insider
2 hours ago
- Business Insider
Business leaders from Bill Ackman to Jason Calacanis react to the US strike on Iran's nuclear sites
President Donald Trump on Saturday confirmed that US warplanes had executed "massive precision" airstrikes on three Iranian nuclear sites, in what he described in a press conference as a "spectacular military success." The military operation marks a significant escalation in the tensions between Iran and Israel and represents a new level of US involvement in the international conflict. Business leaders from Bill Ackman to Jason Calacanis reacted to the news. Bill Ackman Billionaire hedge fund manager Ackman, a longtime ally of the president's, was among the first to publicly react to the news with a post on X. "Thank you to our great military for its superb execution on ridding Iran of its nuclear threat," Ackman wrote shortly after the news broke. "All Americans are eternally grateful for you." Thank you to our great military for its superb execution on ridding Iran of its nuclear threat. All Americans are eternally grateful for you. — Bill Ackman (@BillAckman) June 22, 2025 He continued later, writing in a separate post: "To state the obvious, @realDonaldTrump's actions tonight are a lot better than relying on the IRGC's 'commitment' to not develop nuclear weapons." Jason Calacanis Serial entrepreneur Calacanis posted on X, "Five months into Trump's term, we're at war." In a subsequent post, he elaborated, saying that his initial statement was "just an observation, published without judgement." "We don't have the intelligence that our leaders have, so I will reserve judgement until we know more," Calacanis wrote. "It should be obvious to everyone, however, that no president can just stop conflicts on day one. We now have three conflicts were involved in." It's just an observation, published without judgement We don't have the intelligence that our leaders have, so I will reserve judgement until we know more. It should be obvious to everyone, however, that no president can just stop conflicts on day one. We now have three… — @jason (@Jason) June 22, 2025 Spencer Hakimian The founder of the hedge fund Tolou Capital Management responded to the strikes in a series of posts on social media, describing the US military operation as "completely undetectable," given that no flight trackers showed US military aircraft over Iran within 30 minutes of the strikes. "Say what you want," Hakimian wrote. "The United States military is A1 and there's not a close competitor at the moment." In a separate post, Hakimian added: "The most escalatory thing that Iran can do is not to bomb U.S. military bases in the Middle East. It's to close the Strait of Hormuz. And if that happens, Oil goes above $100 in the blink of an eye. Iran is no military match for the United States. But they can wreak havoc via inflation. Just like Russia in 2022." The most escalatory thing that Iran can do is not to bomb U.S. military bases in the Middle East. It's to close the Strait of Hormuz. And if that happens, Oil goes above $100 in the blink of an eye. Iran is no military match for the United States. But they can wreak havoc… — Spencer Hakimian (@SpencerHakimian) June 22, 2025 Shaun Maguire Maguire, a partner at Sequoia Capital, praised Trump as the "Greatest President of my lifetime." "You may just not realize it yet," Maguire wrote in a post on X, alongside a picture of Trump with his fist in the air after he was wounded during an assassination attempt in Butler, Pennsylvania. "Bulletproof instincts and nerves of steel." James Fishback A vocal supporter of Trump and cofounder of Azoria investment firm, Fishback praised the US strikes — and criticized those who expressed concern over the rising geopolitical tensions — in a series of posts on X. "Iran can't possibly think this is the start of a U.S. offensive. Trump's been clear from the start: they can't have a nuke. We just accomplished that. We're done here," Fishback said in one post. "If Iran chooses to retaliate against a clearly telegraphed, one-and-done strike, they'd be signing their own death warrant. Trump was right." In a separate post, he added: "The Fordow nuclear site was a uranium enrichment facility, not a mosque. Not everything is Islamophobia. Calm down. Leave your weird identity politics out of this."

USA Today
2 hours ago
- USA Today
Investors brace for oil price spike, rush to havens after US bombs Iran nuclear sites
NEW YORK - A U.S. attack on Iranian nuclear sites on Saturday could lead to a knee-jerk reaction in global markets when they reopen, sending oil prices higher and triggering a rush to safety, investors said, as they assessed how the latest escalation of tensions would ripple through the global economy. The attack, which was announced by President Donald Trump on social media site Truth Social, deepens U.S. involvement in the Middle East conflict. That was the question going into the weekend, when investors were mulling a host of different market scenarios. In the immediate aftermath of the announcement, they expected the U.S. involvement was likely to cause a selloff in equities and a possible bid for the dollar and other safe-haven assets when trading begins, but also said much uncertainty about the course of the conflict remained. Updates: U.S. hits Iran nuclear facilities, braces for counterattack While Trump called the attack "successful", few details were known. He was expected to address the nation later on Saturday. "I think the markets are going to be initially alarmed, and I think oil will open higher," said Mark Spindel, chief investment officer at Potomac River Capital. "We don't have any damage assessment and that will take some time. Even though he has described this as 'done', we're engaged. What comes next?" Spindel said. "I think the uncertainty is going to blanket the markets, as now Americans everywhere are going to be exposed. It's going to raise uncertainty and volatility, particularly in oil," he added. Spindel, however, said there was time to digest the news before markets open and said he was making arrangements to talk to other market participants. How will oil prices and inflation be affected? A key concern for markets would center around the potential impact of the developments in the Middle East on oil prices and thus on inflation. A rise in inflation could dampen consumer confidence and lessen the chance of near-term interest rate cuts. "This adds a complicated new layer of risk that we'll have to consider and pay attention to," said Jack Ablin, chief investment officer of Cresset Capital. "This is definitely going to have an impact on energy prices and potentially on inflation as well." While global benchmark Brent crude futures have risen as much as 18% since June 10, hitting a near five-month high of $79.04 on Thursday, the S&P 500 has been little changed, following an initial drop when Israel launched its attacks on Iran on June 13. Before the U.S. attack on Saturday, analysts at Oxford Economics modeled three scenarios, including a de-escalation of the conflict, a complete shutdown in Iranian oil production and a closure of the Strait of Hormuz, "each with increasingly large impacts on global oil prices." Israel-Iran timeline: How Israeli attack and Iranian retaliation unfolded In the most severe case, global oil prices jump to around $130 per barrel, driving U.S. inflation near 6% by the end of this year, Oxford said in the note. "Although the price shock inevitably dampens consumer spending because of the hit to real incomes, the scale of the rise in inflation and concerns about the potential for second-round inflation effects likely ruin any chance of rate cuts in the U.S. this year," Oxford said in the note, which was published before the U.S. strikes. In comments after the announcement on Saturday, Jamie Cox, managing partner at Harris Financial Group, agreed oil prices would likely spike on the initial news. But Cox said he expected prices to likely level in a few days as the attacks could lead Iran to seek a peace deal with Israel and the United States. "With this demonstration of force and total annihilation of its nuclear capabilities, they've lost all of their leverage and will likely hit the escape button to a peace deal," Cox said. Economists warn that a dramatic rise in oil prices could damage a global economy already strained by Trump's tariffs. Still, any pullback in equities might be fleeting, history suggests. During past prominent instances of Middle East tensions coming to a boil, including the 2003 Iraq invasion and the 2019 attacks on Saudi oil facilities, stocks initially languished but soon recovered to trade higher in the months ahead. On average, the S&P 500 slipped 0.3% in the three weeks following the start of conflict, but was 2.3% higher on average two months following the conflict, according to data from Wedbush Securities and CapIQ Pro. What will this mean for the US dollar? An escalation in the conflict could have mixed implications for the U.S. dollar, which has tumbled this year amid worries over diminished U.S. exceptionalism. In the event of U.S. direct engagement in the Iran-Israel war, the dollar could initially benefit from a safety bid, analysts said. "Do we see a flight to safety? That would signal yields going lower and the dollar getting stronger," said Steve Sosnick, chief market strategist at IBKR in Greenwich, Connecticut. "It's hard to imagine stocks not reacting negatively and the question is how much. It will depend on Iranian reaction and whether oil prices spike." (Reporting by Saqib Iqbal Ahmed, Lewis Krauskopf, Suzanne McGee and Saeed Azhar; Editing by Megan Davies, Diane Craft, Peter Henderson, Marguerita Choy and Jamie Freed)