[sulam]

Yeah, there's a couple reasons for RSUs to exist and the cap is a big one (the other is shareholder limits). However, the issue is vesting, not the RSU itself. You can delay RSU vesting to happen at a liquidity event and the problems go away. That leads to a bad situation where employees are stuck holding their "earned but not vested" RSUs and can't quit (similar to what already happens to people who can't afford to exercise their ISOs, or even if they can, they get bombed by AMT and don't have a liquid stock to pay taxes with). This seems like a solvable problem. If all it did was cause companies to figure out how to make their shares liquid in some fashion (IPO, secondary market, private exchange -- something) that would be net-positive for employees.

[CapnCrunchie]

I worked for a company where RSUs did not vest until liquidity event. There were a lot of earned options that people still haven't been able to exercise. People that have been there for over 8 years. I just forfeited mine and moved on to a different company.

[closeparen]

This has been the strategy, but the bill is invalidating it:

>“Similarly, awards with vesting triggers based on exit events such as an initial public offering or change-in-control would be taxable on grant unless they require the recipient to be employed through the liquidity date.“

From Fenwick’s analysis.