本稿では株式譲渡契約に付されるアーンアウト条項及び表明・保証条項が実際の裁決例や裁判例においてどのように判断されたかを通して，会計・税務処理にもたらす影響を検討した。ここで，アーンアウト条項とは，対象企業が一定の財務上・非財務上の目標を達成した場合に，売手が将来追加的な対価を得，達成しない場合にはすでに移転した対価を返還する場合のあることを定めた契約条項である。アーンアウト条項は，停止条件と解され，契約の効力は条件成就の時に発生する。また，表明・保証条項とは，契約の一方が他方に対して，契約の目的物の内容等に関する一定の事実が一定の時点で真実かつ正確である旨を表明・保証する条項である。その違反がある場合，相手方は金銭の補償を受領できる補償条項も合わせて規定されるのが通例であり，受領した補償金が損害賠償金なのか売買代金の返還なのかは契約内容から決められる。
しかし，実際の裁決例や裁判例では，契約当事者の意図とは裏腹に，契約に付した条項が停止条件ではないと判断されたり，和解調書には金員の返還が売買代金の過大による旨の記載があるにも拘らず損害賠償金であると判断されている。これにより取引当事者は取得原価の修正ではなく譲渡損益への計上や損益の認識時期の変更を余儀なくされるなど，会計・税務処理に多大な影響を受けている。
このような判断がなされるのは，株式譲渡契約条項に関する実務が欧米に由来し，我が国では未だ多くの事例が蓄積していないこと，会計基準や税法規定がこの分野で十分に整備されていないことに要因の一端があるのではなかろうか。今後これらの条項を付したM&Aの増加が見込まれることや，法的判断次第では取引当事者の会計・税務処理に少なからずインパクトをもたらすことに鑑みると，法律・会計・税務を包含した株式譲渡契約条項に関する包括的な研究が不可欠である。
This paper examines how the earn-out clause and the representations and warranties clause contained in the stock purchase agreement were judged in National Tax Tribunal cases and court cases and examines the impacts on accounting and tax treatments. The earn-out clause is a contractual clause stipulating that the seller of the target company is to obtain additional consideration in the future if the target company achieves certain financial and non-financial goals and if it does not, the seller may return the previously transferred consideration. The earn-out clause shall be interpreted as a condition precedent and shall become effective upon fulfillment of the condition. Representations and warranties clause is a contractual clause stipulating that one party to a contract represents and warrants to the other party that certain facts concerning the contents of the contract are true and accurate at a certain point in time. In the event of a violation, the clause of indemnification under which the other party may receive monetary compensation is usually also stipulated, and whether the compensation received is compensation for damages or the return of the purchase price is determined by the contents of the contract.
However, in actual National Tax Tribunal cases and court cases, contrary to the intention of the contracting parties, it was judged that the clause contained in the contract was not a condition precedent or that the refund of money was compensation for damages despite the statement in the settlement record that it was due to excessive acquisition cost. As a result, the party to the transaction is greatly affected by accounting and tax treatment such as recording capital gains and losses, not adjustment of acquisition costs, and changing the timing of recognition of gains and losses.
The factors such judgments are made may be partly because the practices on the stock purchase agreement clauses are derived from Europe and America and many cases have not been accumulated in Japan and partly because accounting standard and tax law are not sufficiently developed in this field. Considering that the number of M&As with these clauses is expected to increase in the future and that legal decisions have significant impacts on the accounting and tax treatment of the parties, comprehensive study, including law, accounting, and tax, of stock purchase agreement clauses is essential.
|
