Skip to main content
← Back to B Definitions

Backdating

What Is Backdating?

Backdating refers to the practice of retroactively assigning an earlier effective date to a document, contract, or financial transaction than the actual date it was created or executed. While the term can apply broadly, in finance, backdating most commonly refers to the illicit practice of setting an earlier grant date for stock options than the date on which they were actually awarded. This falls under the broader category of corporate governance and financial reporting, as it directly impacts how a company's financial statements accurately reflect its financial position and executive compensation. The primary motivation for backdating stock options is to select a date when the company's market price was lower, thereby making the exercise price of the option more favorable and immediately "in-the-money" for the recipient, increasing their potential profit.

History and Origin

The practice of backdating, particularly concerning stock options, became a prominent issue in the mid-2000s, though its origins can be traced back earlier. It flourished during periods when stock options were a popular form of equity compensation but before stringent regulations and accounting rules required immediate expensing of options. Companies would often grant options to executives and employees with a stated grant date that coincided with a historical low point in the company's stock price. This allowed recipients to realize an immediate paper gain upon grant, as the option's strike price would be below the current market price.

The increased scrutiny began with investigative reports from financial media outlets, which highlighted statistically improbable patterns of option grants coinciding with stock price dips. This led to widespread investigations by regulatory bodies, most notably the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). A significant moment occurred when the SEC brought charges against companies like Broadcom Corporation for engaging in systematic backdating schemes. For instance, in May 2008, the SEC charged Broadcom for falsifying its reported income by backdating stock option grants over a five-year period, resulting in a restatement of over $2 billion in additional compensation expense.7

Key Takeaways

  • Backdating typically involves assigning a false, earlier grant date to stock options to ensure a lower exercise price.
  • The practice can lead to inflated executive compensation and materially misstated financial results.
  • Undisclosed backdating violates SEC regulations, generally accepted accounting principles, and tax laws.
  • Companies found to have engaged in backdating have faced significant penalties, earnings restatements, and legal consequences.
  • Enhanced regulatory oversight and accounting standards have aimed to curb the practice.

Interpreting Backdating

When instances of backdating are discovered, they are generally interpreted as serious breaches of fiduciary duty and corporate governance, signaling potential fraud. The act suggests an intent to manipulate financial reporting and clandestinely increase executive and employee compensation without proper disclosure to shareholders. It can also indicate weaknesses in a company's internal controls and oversight mechanisms. Such findings often trigger regulatory investigations, shareholder lawsuits, and a loss of investor confidence, necessitating corrective actions like earnings restatements and changes in corporate leadership.

Hypothetical Example

Consider "Tech Innovations Inc." which intends to grant 10,000 stock options to its CEO. On the actual decision date of July 15, the company's stock price is $50. However, the board's compensation committee, seeking to grant "in-the-money" options without reporting the compensation expense, might retroactively declare the grant date to be June 1, when the stock price was $40.

If this backdating occurred, the CEO's options would have an exercise price of $40, even though the actual grant decision was made when the stock was $50. This creates an immediate $10 per share intrinsic value ($50 current price - $40 exercise price) for the CEO, totaling $100,000 ($10 x 10,000 shares) in immediate, unrecorded compensation. If properly accounted for on the actual grant date of July 15, the company would be required to recognize a compensation expense for this $10 intrinsic value, impacting its reported profits. By backdating, the company avoids this accounting charge and effectively misrepresents its earnings.

Practical Applications

Backdating primarily manifests as a regulatory and legal concern rather than a standard financial practice. Its "applications" are typically in the context of misconduct investigations. Regulatory bodies, such as the SEC, actively scrutinize companies for evidence of backdating, especially during periods of high stock option usage. This involves forensic accounting and analysis of stock grant patterns relative to market fluctuations.

For instance, the SEC pursued a case against UnitedHealth Group for a multi-year backdating scheme, alleging the company concealed over $1 billion in stock option compensation.6 The settlement included significant penalties for former executives and extensive remedial measures by the company.5,4 Similarly, Broadcom Corporation faced SEC charges and restated over $2 billion in expenses due to its backdating activities.3 The legal ramifications can extend to derivative lawsuits brought by shareholders and criminal charges against executives involved in such schemes. Internal auditors and external accounting firms are also tasked with ensuring that companies' equity compensation practices comply with accounting standards and securities laws, specifically looking for red flags that might indicate backdating.

Limitations and Criticisms

The primary "limitation" of backdating is its illegality and ethical reprehensibility. It constitutes a form of accounting fraud that distorts a company's financial health and misleads investors. Critics argue that backdating allows executives to receive additional compensation disguised as legitimate option grants, bypassing proper disclosure and shareholder approval processes. This practice undermines the transparency and integrity of financial markets.

While some cases of backdating might be attributed to "sloppiness" in record-keeping, regulatory bodies generally view undisclosed backdating as a deliberate attempt to circumvent accounting rules and tax laws.2 The consequences of discovery can be severe, including significant financial penalties, forced earnings restatement, damage to corporate reputation, and legal action against implicated individuals and the company itself. Academic research has also explored how backdating might have spread, suggesting that factors like board interlocks and high stock-price volatility increased the likelihood of firms adopting the practice.1 The intense scrutiny and legal repercussions serve as a strong deterrent, aiming to prevent such practices from recurring.

Backdating vs. Option Repricing

While both backdating and option repricing involve adjusting the terms of stock options, their legality, intent, and transparency are fundamentally different.

Backdating involves falsely stating an earlier grant date for an option, typically to achieve a lower exercise price retroactively. This practice is clandestine, often illegal, and involves deception to avoid recognizing compensation expense and providing lower-cost options to recipients. It is a fraudulent act because it misrepresents the true economics and timing of the grant.

Option repricing, on the other hand, is a legitimate, disclosed corporate action where the exercise price of existing stock options is formally lowered, usually when the company's stock price has fallen significantly below the original exercise price, making the options "out-of-the-money" and ineffective as an incentive. Repricing is a formal corporate decision, requires board approval (often shareholder approval), and must be fully disclosed to investors and accounted for under current accounting standards. Its intent is to re-motivate employees and executives by restoring the incentive value of their options, and it does not involve misrepresenting historical grant dates.

FAQs

Is backdating legal?

No, undisclosed backdating of financial documents, particularly stock options, is illegal in most jurisdictions and constitutes a form of accounting fraud. It violates securities laws and often has tax implications.

Why do companies backdate stock options?

Companies backdate stock options primarily to give the recipient a financial advantage by setting a lower exercise price than the stock's actual price on the date the option was truly granted. This can result in a larger potential profit for the option holder and allows the company to avoid recording a compensation expense on its financial statements, thereby artificially inflating reported earnings.

How is backdating discovered?

Backdating is often discovered through forensic analysis of stock option grant patterns, particularly when grants consistently coincide with historical low points in a company's stock price. Whistleblowers, internal investigations, or scrutiny by regulatory bodies like the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) can also uncover such practices.

What are the consequences of backdating?

The consequences can be severe, including significant fines and penalties for the company, earnings restatements, and damage to its reputation. Individuals involved may face civil charges, financial penalties, employment termination, and even criminal prosecution. Shareholder lawsuits seeking to recover losses are also common.