Employers that include stock, stock options or other equity grants, restricted stock units (RSUs), stock appreciation rights (SARs), phantom stock, or other equity-based compensation in the compensation packages offered to non-exempt employees must use care to understand when federal law requires the employer to include that equity or equity-based compensation in the regular rate of pay of the non-exempt employee for purposes of calculating overtime pay under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (FLSA).
The Regular-Rate Framework, In Brief
Section 7 of the FLSA requires employers to calculate and pay nonexempt employees overtime based on the employee’s “regular rate of pay for hours worked over 40 in a workweek. 29 U.S.C. § 207.
Employers that pay nonexempt employees through a mix of cash wages and equity or equity-based compensation often assume these equity or equity-based incentives sit outside ordinary wage-and-hour rules because they look more like executive compensation than hourly pay. For nonexempt employees, however, that assumption can be dangerous for employers because the FLSA requires employers to calculate and pay overtime for hours worked in excess of 40 per workweek at the employee’s regular rate, 29 U.S.C. § 207(e); 29 C.F.R. § 778.109.
The FLSA as implemented by Department of Labor (DOL) Wage and Hour Division (WHD) require employers to calculate and pay overtime for overtime hours a non-exempt employee works during a workweek based on the “regular rate” of pay of the employee. For purposes of calculating the overtime due, the regular rate of a non-exempt employee “includes all remuneration for employment paid to, or on behalf of, the employee,” except for items Congress specifically carved out pursuant to the enumerated exclusions 29 C.F.R. § 778.108. Thus, the regular rate is total compensation in the workweek, minus statutory exclusions, if any, divided by total hours worked. See Fact Sheet #56A: Overview of the Regular Rate of Pay Under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).
As WHD explains in Fact Sheet #56A, the FLSA requires employers to include equity and equity-based compensation when calculating the regular rate of the employee for overtime purposes unless that compensation falls under one of the express statutory exclusions granted by Congress set forth in Section 7 of the FLSA. Because the applicability of the exceptions and resulting treatment of equity and equity-based compensation can differ under these rules, employers should use care to understand and properly calculate non-exempt employees’ regular rates under these rules, particularly as employers bear the burden of justifying their failure to include any compensation from the regular rate under the FLSA.
FLSA Section 7(e)(8) Exemption For Stock Options, Stock Appreciation Rights and Bona Fide Employee Stock Purchase Program Grants
The FLSA includes a specific rule that governs when stock options, stock appreciation rights and bona fide employee stock purchase program grants are excludible for purposes of determining a non-exempt employee’s regular rate of pay for overtime purposes. Under the Worker Economic Opportunity Act of 2000, Public Law 106–202, Congress amended section 7(e) of the FLSA to add paragraph (8), which expressly exempts from a non-exempt employee’s regular rate any value or income derived from employer-provided grants or rights provided pursuant to a “stock option, stock appreciation right, or bona fide employee stock purchase program” if certain requirements are met.
Paragraph 8 allows employers to exclude the value of stock options, stock appreciation rights and bona fide employee stock purchase program grants when calculating a non-exempt employee’s regular rate of pay for purposes of calculating overtime when the arrangement meets the following criteria:
- The value to be excluded must qualify as made under a stock option, stock appreciation right, or bona fide employee stock appreciation program.
- The employer must provide the employee with information communicated through a reasonable means that explains in an understandable fashion the terms and conditions of the program either when the employee begins participating in the program or when the employer grants the employees stock options or stock appreciation rights.
- Generally, the stock option or stock appreciation rights must not be exercisable for at least 6 months after the grant, except that the arrangement may allow exercise of the option for stock or cash in the event the employee dies, becomes disabled, or retires, or if there is a change in corporate ownership.
- The employer cannot offer such options or appreciation rights to employees at more than a 15 percent discount off the fair market value of the stock or the stock equivalent determined at the time of the grant. This means that the exercise price must be at least 85% of the fair market value of the stock or its equivalent at the time of the grant.
- The employee’s exercise of any grant or right must be voluntary.
- Where the stock options or stock appreciation rights program is based on the performance of a business unit or employee, then the determinations of such options or rights must be made:
- based on the employee’s past performance, so long as the determination remains at the sole discretion of the employer and not according to any prior contract requiring the employer to do so; or
- based on future performance meeting previously established criteria (such as hours of work, efficiency or productivity) of a business unit consisting of at least 10 employees, or of an entire facility of any size. or
- based on the employee’s past performance, so long as the determination remains at the sole discretion of the employer and not according to any prior contract requiring the employer to do so.
Where these conditions are met, paragraph (8) allows an employer to disregard the value of stock options, stock appreciation rights, and bona fide stock purchase plan grants when calculating overtime. Employers must keep in mind that the availability of this exemption depends upon the arrangement satisfying the conditions for exemption. Accordingly, the exemption is limited to the listed equity or equity based arrangement and should not be relied upon for exemption of any equity-based arrangement that is not a stock option, stock appreciation rights, or bona fide stock purchase plan or that qualifies as such arrangement but does not meet the listed conditions.
Other Equity-Styled Compensation Under The FLSA
While employers are not required to include the value of stock options, stock appreciation rights, and bona fide stock option grants that meet the conditions to qualify under FLSA Section 7(e)(8) when calculating the regular rate of an employee for overtime purposes, RSUs, phantom stock and other equity based arrangements that either are not expressly listed in Section 7(e)(8) or that while listed, do not meet the conditions to qualify as exempt under Section 7(e)(8) are treated by WHD like other bonus compensation, the value of which at the time of the grant must be included when calculating a non-exempt employee’s regular rate for overtime calculation purposes unless another statutory exclusion applies. See U.S. Department of Labor, Fact Sheet #56C.
Many employers are likely to struggle with this distinction given the functional similarities between SARs compared to phantom stock and RSU arrangements. Functionally defined, stock appreciation rights or “SARs” typically are programs that offer an employee the right to receive cash or stock equal to the appreciation in company stock value over a predetermined exercise price, fostering employee motivation without actual stock ownership. In contrast:
- Phantom stocks are a form of contractual employee incentive compensation where employees receive hypothetical/virtual shares, reflecting actual stock value. Unlike actual equity, however, employees don’t own or have any right to own tangible shares but receive cash or equivalent value upon certain conditions; and
- RSUs are a form of employee compensation where a company contractually grants its employees a certain number of shares, typically linked to performance milestones or tenure. Unlike traditional stock options, however, employees are not required, or perhaps don’t even have any right to buy company stock upon vesting. Instead, they seamlessly acquire the shares once the predetermined vesting conditions are fulfilled.
Where these and other equity-based or styled arrangements are not expressly exempt under Section 7(e)(8), the duty and timing of the employer’s obligation to include their value in the compensation taken into account for purposes of determining an employee’s regular rate for overtime purposes typically will follow the usual rules for determining when and what bonuses are included in the regular rate based on whether the bonus is discretionary or nondiscretionary. See U.S. Department of Labor, Fact Sheet #56C.
Equity-based compensation or other bonuses shown in practice to be based on a predetermined formula, productivity, quality, attendance, or other announced criteria are considered nondiscretionary because employees know about and expect the payment. Nondiscretionary bonuses are required to be included in the regular rate, while employers are allowed to exclude discretionary bonuses. If a payment is promised or expected under a formula, policy, agreement, or plan, WHD guidance specifies that a bonus generally is nondiscretionary rather than discretionary, and nondiscretionary amounts belong in the regular rate unless another exclusion applies. U.S. Department of Labor, Fact Sheet #56C.Whether compensation is discretionary or nondiscretionary is determined by the surrounding facts and circumstances, not its label. The regulations likewise state that bonuses that do not qualify for exclusion must be totaled with other earnings to calculate the regular rate on which overtime pay must be based. 29 C.F.R. § 778.208.]Applying this bonus criteria, when a phantom stock, RSUs, or similar equity-style award mount depends on measurable factors such as company performance, appreciation, length of service, or a vesting schedule tied to continued employment, a phantom stock, RSU, or other an equity-style payment not otherwise exempted by Section 7(e)(8) is more likely to count as compensation for overtime purposes when it is tied to objective criteria, announced in advance, or earned under a set formula. When the employee understands the earning conditions in advance and the employer is operating under plan terms rather than last-minute discretion, the payment is harder to characterize as an excludable discretionary bonus. U.S. Department of Labor, Fact Sheet #56C.
Active Litigation: The Costa v. Apple Matter
In the Costa v. Apple Inc. litigation currently pending in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, a group of nonexempt employees suing Apple contend that Apple was required to include the value of vested RSUs in the regular rate used to compute their overtime. The court’s public docket reflects ongoing proceedings, N.D. Cal. case page, Costa v. Apple Inc., and the court has entered orders addressing case-management issues, including a publicly available order granting plaintiffs’ motion for distribution of judicial notice Order, Costa v. Apple Inc. (N.D. Cal.).
At this stage, the case is best understood as an active trial-court dispute that frames—but has not resolved—the underlying regular-rate question for RSUs. To date, no official U.S. Supreme Court docket source has determined this issue. Employers should treat the legal landscape as unsettled rather than as one in which a definitive appellate or Supreme Court ruling is in hand.
Congressional Attention: The Valuing Employee Stock Today Act
On May 4, 2026, Representative Ryan Mackenzie introduced the Valuing Employee Stock Today Act, described in his official press release, as legislation intended to address how equity compensation is treated for purposes of expanding worker access to equity. The bill’s introduction underscores that, beyond the courts, policymakers are actively considering whether and how to clarify the statutory treatment of stock-based pay. Until Congress acts or a controlling court decision is issued, employers operate under the existing ambiguous statutory and regulatory framework left by the omission of Congress to include RSUs expressly in the incentive stock compensation exemption added to the FLSA. Employers interested in broadening the Section 7(e)(8) exemption to cover RSU, phantom stock or other of equity-based compensation arrangements not currently expressly listed in Section 7(c)(8) should consider following and working with legal counsel to express support for this or other similar amendments.
Practical Tips For Employers
Given the broad statutory definition of remuneration, employers that pay nonexempt employees with equity or equity-based compensation should work with qualified legal counsel within the scope of attorney-client privilege:
- To conduct a focused, documented review to assess the defensibility of their practices for calculating the regular rate of pay for overtime purposes currently and for the previous two years within the past two years; and
- If the employer desires to exclude equity-based or other bonus compensation from regular rate calculations for non-exempt employees, explore the availability and feasibiliity of options to design those arrangements to qualify as discretionary, as an arrangement exempt under FLSA Section 7(e)(8), or both; and
- Other steps to mitigate their FLSA overtime pay and compliance liability.
Due to the potential sensitivity of the analysis and discussions regarding potential past or current compliance concerns, the process of evaluation generally should be conducted within the scope of attorney-client privilege and typically will include the following steps:
- Inventory who receives equity and equity-based compensation and the governing terms of that grant or promise.
- Determine whether your payroll system currently includes vested RSU value in the regular rate, and if not, on what basis the exclusion is being taken. Document the reasoning in light of 29 U.S.C. § 207 and 29 C.F.R. § 778.108.
- Identify and confirm the defensibility of classifications of workers as employees versus contractors and among service providers properly classified as employees, as exempt versus non-exempt keeping in mind the increasingly successful worker misclassification enforcement of the FLSA and other laws.
- Once proper classification is confirmed, identify any nonexempt employees who hold or vest RSUs, stock options, or other equity or equity-based compensation.
- Map equity to workweeks to identify and document grant dates, vesting events, and the workweeks in which value is delivered. The regular-rate calculation is performed on a workweek basis (29 C.F.R. § 778.109).
- Review plan documents against DOL guidance to determine their defensible classification for purposes of the Section 7(e)(8) exemption taking into account the conditions described in DOL Fact Sheet #56.
- For arrangements not meeting the conditions for exemption under FLSA Section 7(e)(8), work with legal counsel conduct a documented evaluation of the defensibility of characterization of the arrangement as a discretionary bonus for purposes of the FLSA.
- Audit and confirm how payroll treats each equity and equity-based compensation element for purposes of the FLSA including whether that compensation is included or excluded in the non-exempt employee’s regular rate of pay for overtime purposes when required.
- Coordinate compensation, legal, and payroll. Equity decisions are often made by compensation teams without parallel review of FLSA implications. Build a recurring touchpoint among those functions with appropriate governance, oversight and controls.
- Monitor and track developments in Costa v. Apple Inc. through the court’s public case page and other similar litigation.
- Watch for further action on legislation such as the bill described in Representative Mackenzie’s press release and other similar legislation and share support as your organization determines appropriate.
Bottom Line
Given the significant liability and the burdens of proof employers bear in defending their compliance with the FLSA, employers should exercise care to ensure the defensibility of their practices when taking into account equity and equity-based or other bonus compensation when calculating the regular rate of non-exempt employees for purposes of paying overtime under the FLSA. The FLSA’s regular-rate rules are intentionally broad, and the Department of Labor’s longstanding guidance treats “all remuneration” as the default starting point (DOL Fact Sheet #56A; 29 C.F.R. § 778.108). Employers must know and be prepared to produce documentation to support their compliance with FLSA requirements for tracking and including equity, equity-based and other compensation in the regular rate used to calculate overtime for non-exempt employees.
For Help or More Information
The author of this update, Cynthia Marcotte Stamer has decades of experience advising and assisting employer of all types and sizes to design, audit, administer, and defend their wage and hour, equity and other compensation, and other labor and employment, employee benefits, compensation and other legal and operational compliance including designing and administering equity, equity-based and other bonus compensation and other compensation and employee benefits plans for executives, directors and officers, and non-exempt employees; conducting and defending audits and investigations, designing and updating compliance and risk management programs, responding to government investigations, conducting transaction, governance, and other due diligence, and assisting with other legal and operational compliance and risk management and legislative and regulatory affairs. She is available to assist your organization in assessing the impact of these developments and navigating the compliance and strategic steps that follow. For more information about these or other health care, managed care and other health benefits or other health industry laws or concerns, contact Ms. Stamer via e-mail or via telephone at (214) 452 -8297.
About the Author
A Fellow in the American College of Employee Benefits Counsel and Board Certified in Labor and Employment Law by the Texas Board of Legal Certification, Cynthia Marcotte Stamer is a Martindale-Hubble AV-Preeminent (highest/top 1%) practicing attorney recognized as a “Top Woman Lawyer,” “Top Rated Lawyer,” and “LEGAL LEADER™” in Health Care Law and Labor and Employment Law; among the “Best Lawyers In Dallas” in “Labor & Employment,” “Tax: ERISA & Employee Benefits,” “Health Care” and “Business and Commercial Law for her more than 35 years’ experience, scholarship, thought leadership and advocacy on FLSA and other labor and employment, executive and other compensation, employee benefits, performance and risk management and otherlegal and operational compliance in connection with her work with health care and life sciences, employee benefits, insurance, education, technology and other highly regulated and performance-dependent clients.
Board certified in labor and employment law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization and a Fellow in the American College of Employee Benefits Counsel, Ms. Stamer has more than 35 years experience advising employers about these and other workforce, employee benefits, internal controls and other operations and compliance concerns.
Ms. Stamer is nationally recognized for her decades of leading edge experience on the design, sponsorship, administration and defense of health and other employee benefit, workforce, insurance, healthcare, data and technology and other operations to promote legal and operational compliance, reduce regulatory and other liability and promote other operational goals.
Along with her decades of legal and strategic consulting experience, Ms. Stamer also contributes her leadership and experience to many professional, civic and community organizations. She currently serves as Co-Chair of the ABA Real Property Trusts and Estates (“RPTE”) Section Welfare Plan Committee, Co-Chair of the ABA International Section International Employment Law Committee and its Annual Meeting Program Planning Committee, Chair Emeritus and Vice Chair of the ABA Tort Trial and Insurance (“TIPS”) Section Medicine and Law Committee, and Chair of the ABA Intellectual Property Section Law Practice Management Committee. She also has served as Scribe for the Joint Committee on Employee Benefits (“JCEB”) annual agency meetings with the Department of Health and Human Services and JCEB Council Representative, International Section Life Sciences Committee Chair, RPTE Section Employee Benefits Group Chair and a Substantive Groups Committee Member, Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group Chair, as TIPS Section Medicine and Law Committee Chair and Employee Benefits Committee and Workers Compensation Committee Vice Chair, Tax Section Fringe Benefit Committee Chair, and in various other ABA leadership capacities. Ms. Stamer also is a former Southwest Benefits Association Board Member and Continuing Education Chair, SHRM National Consultant Board Chair and Region IV Chair, Dallas Bar Association Employee Benefits Committee Chair, former Texas Association of Business State, Regional and Dallas Chapter Chair, a founding board member and Past President of the Alliance for Healthcare Excellence, as well as in the leadership of many other professional, civic and community organizations. She also is recognized for her contributions to strengthening health care policy and charitable and community service resolving health care challenges performed under PROJECT COPE Coalition For Patient Empowerment initiative and many other pro bono service involvements locally, nationally and internationally.
Ms. Stamer is the author of many highly regarded works published by leading professional and business publishers, the ABA, the American Health Lawyers Association, and others. Ms. Stamer also frequently speaks and serves on the faculty and steering committee for many ABA and other professional and industry conferences and conducts leadership and industry training for a wide range of organizations.
For more information about Ms. Stamer or her health industry and other experience and involvements, see http://www.cynthiastamer.com or contact Ms. Stamer via telephone at (214) 452-8297 or via e-mail here.
, working on equity and nonequity executive and other workforce compensation, FLSA, and other labor, employment, compensation and employee benefit plan design, administration and complance, and other labor and employment, compensation, employee benefits, performance management, governance, regulatory and legislative affairs and other legal and operational risk management and complianc econcerns.
Former lead advisor to the Government of Bolivia on its Social Security Privatization reform, miss Stamer also has extensive legislative and regulatory affairs experience on federal, state and international employee benefits, healthcare, workforce, education, insurance, data privacy and security, antitrust, and other regulations and reforms.
In addition, Ms. Stamer contributes her time and leadership to numerous policy, professional, civil and other organizations, Ms. Stamer currently or previously served as the Scribe leading annual agency meetings on HIPAA and other issues with the Department of Health and Human Services; leadership Council Representative, speaker, author and faculty lead for the American Bar Association (“ABA”) Joint Committee on Employee Benefits; the ABA International Section International Employment Law Committee and International Life Sciences Committee Chair; the ABA Tort Trial and Insurance Practice Section Medicine and Law Committee Chair and Employee Benefits and Worker’s Compensation Committees Vice Chair; the ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group Chair and Risk Management Interest Group Chair; the ABA RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Group Chair and Welfare Benefit, Fiduciary Responsibility, and Plan Terminations and Transactions Committees Chair; Vice President and Executive Director of the North Texas Health Care Compliance Professionals Association; a Southwest Benefits Association Board Member; a SHRM Consultants National and Region IV Board Chair; WEB National Board Member and Dallas Chapter President; National Kidney Foundation of North Texas Board Member and Compliance Chair; Richardson Development Center (now Warren Center) for Children Early Childhood Intervention Agency Board President; a North Texas United Way Long Range Planning Committee Member; and other leadership involvement in a broad range of other professional and civic organizations.
Author of hundreds of highly regarded works on health and other benefits, human resources, health care, insurance, data privacy and security and other related concerns, examples of these publications include “Transparent PBM Contracting,” “ACOs, Direct Contracting: Legal & Practical Challenges For Employers, Providers & TPAs,” “The Medicare Advantage Contracting Manual,” “Third Party Administrator (TPA) Contracting Principles and Strategies and a multitude of other publications and presentations.
For more information about Ms. Stamer or her health industry and other experience and involvements, see www.cynthiastamer.com or contact Ms. Stamer via telephone at (214) 452-8297 or via e-mail here.
HR & Benefits Update 