Individual Owner Compensation in a Hybrid Limited Liability Entity in a Comparative Context: LLC (the USA), LLP (the UK) and the Small Partnership (Lithuania)

Lina Mikalonienė
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40804-020-00199-4
IF: 1.79
2020-11-02
European Business Organization Law Review
Abstract:The article examines regulatory approaches to individual owner compensation that does not take the form of profit sharing in a hybrid limited liability entity in the three jurisdictions—in a limited liability company (LLC) in the USA, a limited liability partnership (LLP) in the UK (for the sake of accuracy only England will be referred to hereafter), and a small partnership with all members-individuals mandatorily in Lithuania. The comparative analysis reveals a divergence in the regulatory approaches to compensating a hybrid entity owner for the entrepreneurial efforts in small and medium-sized businesses. The most flexible regime includes the default no-compensation rule coupled with the possibility for an owner to act in a non-member capacity and it applies to an LLC in the USA under ULLCA. The Lithuanian legislation imposes the most rigid approach and prohibits a member from compensating for an additional role (either as an employee or an independent contractor) in a small partnership (save for a member–manager in a manager-managed small partnership and a member representative in a member-managed small partnership). England follows an intermediate approach and allows members of an LLP to depart from the no-compensation rule; but England will likely restrict the dual status of a member–employee in the entity. The article concludes that, although partnership principles heavily influence the owners' role in a hybrid entity, the general ban foreseen in the Lithuanian legislation needs to be modified to allow similar freedom as a private limited liability company has to reward hybrid entity owners for their efforts in running business operations.
law,business
What problem does this paper attempt to address?