Three categories under §280G(c) and Treas. Reg. §1.280G-1, Q&A-15 through Q&A-20: (1) officers — capped at the lesser of 50 employees or 10% of total employees, ranked by compensation; (2) 1%+ shareholders by voting power or value (attribution rules apply); (3) the highest-paid 1% of employees in the prior 12 months, capped at 250. The determination is opaque to Matter — tax counsel makes it and the platform records the `status_kind` + `status_basis` verbatim.

The 5-year W-2 (Box 1) average for the individual's compensation in the five taxable years preceding the year of the change in control. For individuals with shorter tenure, the base amount is the annualised average of compensation actually received during the tenure (Treas. Reg. §1.280G-1, Q&A-34). Matter computes it from the `compensation_history[]` array — pass partial-year W-2 amounts and the platform handles the annualisation.

What payments count as

Any payment in the nature of compensation that is contingent on a change in control: acceleration value of unvested equity (the lapsed- vesting portion), severance, change-in-control bonuses, retention payments triggered by the deal, the in-the-event-of-cic portion of employment-agreement payments, the gross-up itself if any, and certain deferred comp accelerations. Standard salary, ordinary bonuses, and payments contingent on continued employment after the deal generally do not count. See Treas. Reg. §1.280G-1, Q&A-22 through Q&A-27.

Why 75% and not a simple majority?

The §280G(b)(5)(B)(ii) statute specifies "more than 75 percent of the voting power of all outstanding stock entitled to vote", excluding the disqualified individuals' shares. The 75% number is statutory and not waivable by the corporation, the board, or the stockholders themselves — it is the price of cleansing.

What happens if the vote fails?

Three paths in practice: (1) the deal team re-papers with reduced parachute amounts that no longer breach 3× — the most common outcome; (2) the officers pay the 20% excise tax out of pocket and the corp forfeits the §280G deduction; (3) any §280G gross-up clause in the employment agreement activates. See the "Failed vote → re-paper" variation tab.

Can the disqualified individuals waive the cleansing vote requirement?

No. The statute requires non-disqualified-stockholder approval — the disqualified individuals themselves cannot consent on behalf of others, cannot waive the requirement, and their shares are explicitly excluded from the vote.

When does this recipe NOT apply?

Three cases: (1) public-company targets — §280G(b)(5) is unavailable; (2) deals where every disqualified individual's parachute is below 3× base — the threshold doesn't breach so no cleansing is needed; (3) deals intentionally structured to keep parachutes below 3× via best-net-of clauses, severance haircuts, or accelerated-vesting carve- outs. Matter surfaces case (2) by returning `threshold_breach: false` from `parachute_analyses.compute`; case (3) is a deal-papering choice that sits upstream of this recipe.

Run a 280G cleansing vote

Last updated Jun 14, 2026

Identify disqualified individuals, compute parachute payments, route a stockholder cleansing vote that strips the §280G excise tax.

5 calls · 4 webhooks

Trigger

A change-of-control transaction is on the calendar with payments to disqualified individuals exceeding 3× their base.

Call sequence

1. Create the analysis

POST /v1/parachute_analyses  { entity, transaction, change_of_control_date }

2. Compute payments

POST /v1/parachute_analyses/{id}/compute

3. List eligible (non-disqualified) voters

GET /v1/parachute_analyses/{id}/eligible_voters

4. Route cleansing vote

POST /v1/parachute_analyses/{id}/run

Idempotency

Analysis idempotent on `(entity, transaction)`. Recompute is safe.

Webhooks

Event	Description
`parachute_analysis.computed`	Numbers ready.
`parachute_analysis.vote_signed`	Threshold met → §280G safe harbor.

Errors

Status	Code	Description
`422`	`vote_threshold_failed`	75% of eligible voters did not approve. Excise tax applies.

When this recipe applies

About-to-close M&A where any officer's acceleration + change-in-control payments exceed 3× their 5-year W-2 base amount.
Private-company transactions only — this is the §280G(b)(5) "small business exception", explicitly unavailable to public-company targets.
Deals where the deal team would rather preserve the parachute than gross up the officer or strip the acceleration.
Vested stock only — unvested stockholder votes do not count toward the 75% threshold. Refresh the cap table as of the close-record-date before identifying eligible voters.

This recipe is invoked during the acquire-a-company flow, between due_diligence → definitive and the close package fire. The cleansing vote becomes a close_condition reference on the CorporateTransaction.

Phase 1 — Identify disqualified individuals

The IRS test under §280G(c) defines three categories: officers (top-50 threshold rules), 1%+ shareholders, and members of the highest-paid 1% (or top 250) of employees in the prior 12 months. Tax counsel makes the determination; Matter records the structured output.

curl -X POST https://api.mattermode.com/v1/parachute_analyses \
  -H "Authorization: Bearer $MATTER_KEY" \
  -H "Matter-Version: 2026-05-01" \
  -H "Idempotency-Key: $(uuidgen)" \
  -d '{
    "corporate_transaction_id": "ctx_2025AcqStr",
    "analysis_kind": "dgcl_pre_close",
    "tax_counsel_firm": "Cooley LLP",
    "disqualified_individuals": [
      {
        "stakeholder_id": "stk_F0und3rCEO",
        "status_kind": "officer",
        "status_basis": "ceo_top_50_compensation",
        "tenure_years": 6.0
      }
    ]
  }'

Add additional entries with status_kind: one_percent_holder or status_kind: other_high_comp if counsel's determination covers more than the CEO. The status determination is opaque to Matter — it stores the counsel-supplied basis verbatim.

Phase 2 — Compute parachute payments

Per individual: base amount (5-year W-2 average), parachute payments (acceleration value + change-in-control bonus + severance + any other in-the-event-of-cic payment), 3× test. The compute endpoint runs the arithmetic, stamps threshold_breach, and returns the canonical breakdown.

curl -X POST https://api.mattermode.com/v1/parachute_analyses/pa_280gCEO/compute \
  -H "Authorization: Bearer $MATTER_KEY" \
  -H "Matter-Version: 2026-05-01" \
  -H "Idempotency-Key: $(uuidgen)" \
  -d '{
    "stakeholder_id": "stk_F0und3rCEO",
    "compensation_history": [
      {"year": 2021, "w2_box_1": {"amount": 18500000, "currency": "usd"}},
      {"year": 2022, "w2_box_1": {"amount": 19200000, "currency": "usd"}},
      {"year": 2023, "w2_box_1": {"amount": 20000000, "currency": "usd"}},
      {"year": 2024, "w2_box_1": {"amount": 20000000, "currency": "usd"}},
      {"year": 2025, "w2_box_1": {"amount": 22300000, "currency": "usd"}}
    ],
    "parachute_components": {
      "acceleration_value":       {"amount": 48000000, "currency": "usd"},
      "change_in_control_bonus":  {"amount": 15000000, "currency": "usd"},
      "severance":                {"amount":  9000000, "currency": "usd"},
      "other_parachutes":         {"amount":        0, "currency": "usd"}
    }
  }'

threshold_breach: true is the trigger. If every individual's breakdown returns false, the cleansing vote is unnecessary — clear the close_conditions placeholder via PATCH /v1/corporate_transactions/{id}/close_conditions and skip ahead to close.

Phase 3 — Assemble pre-vote disclosure

§280G(b)(5)(B)(i) requires "adequate disclosure" to non-disqualified stockholders — who the disqualified individuals are, the parachute amounts, the consequences of approval/disapproval, the procedure. Matter generates the disclosure Document from a versioned template; tax counsel reviews and co-signs.

curl -X POST https://api.mattermode.com/v1/documents \
  -H "Authorization: Bearer $MATTER_KEY" \
  -H "Matter-Version: 2026-05-01" \
  -H "Idempotency-Key: $(uuidgen)" \
  -d '{
    "entity_id": "ent_Nq3KcAbc",
    "kind": "280g_cleansing_vote_disclosure_statement",
    "template_id": "tpl_280g_disclosure",
    "merge_fields": {
      "parachute_analysis_id": "pa_280gCEO",
      "corporate_transaction_id": "ctx_2025AcqStr"
    },
    "co_signers": [
      {"signer_role": "tax_counsel", "signer_email": "partner@cooley.com"}
    ]
  }'

After counsel countersigns (document.execution_status: executed), distribute to every non-disqualified stockholder via the channel of record. Matter auto-emits disclosure.delivered per recipient and stamps a per-recipient delivery timestamp on the resolution's eligible_voters[] array — the IRS disclosure-adequacy test relies on the per-stockholder delivery trail.

Phase 4 — Identify non-disqualified stockholders

Eligible voters are every stockholder of record on the close-record-date, excluding the disqualified individuals and persons related to them by family or business under the §280G attribution rules.

curl https://api.mattermode.com/v1/parachute_analyses/pa_280gCEO/eligible_voters \
  -H "Authorization: Bearer $MATTER_KEY" \
  -H "Matter-Version: 2026-05-01"

vote_share_percent percentages renormalise across non-disqualified shares — 75% means 75% of the non-disqualified pool, not 75% of the cap table.

Phase 5 — Execute the cleansing vote

Open the typed resolution. Each non-disqualified stockholder signs with signing_capacity: non_disqualified_stockholder and a per-vote vote: yes | no | abstain. The resolution finalises when either the yes-tally crosses 75% (passed) or the remaining-share arithmetic guarantees yes can never reach 75% (failed).

curl -X POST https://api.mattermode.com/v1/resolutions \
  -H "Authorization: Bearer $MATTER_KEY" \
  -H "Matter-Version: 2026-05-01" \
  -H "Idempotency-Key: $(uuidgen)" \
  -d '{
    "entity_id": "ent_Nq3KcAbc",
    "kind": "cleansing_vote",
    "subject": "§280G cleansing vote — Acme acquisition",
    "cleansing_vote": {
      "parachute_analysis_id":    "pa_280gCEO",
      "disclosure_document_id":   "doc_280gDisc",
      "threshold":                0.75,
      "eligible_voters_source":   "parachute_analyses.eligible_voters",
      "voting_window_days":       21,
      "result":                   "pending"
    },
    "delivery": { "channel": "email", "reminder_cadence_days": 3 }
  }'

Phase 6 — Reference in the close-package

A passed cleansing vote becomes a close-condition entry on the parent CorporateTransaction. The close package can fire only when this condition is satisfied.

curl -X PATCH https://api.mattermode.com/v1/corporate_transactions/ctx_2025AcqStr/close_conditions \
  -H "Authorization: Bearer $MATTER_KEY" \
  -H "Matter-Version: 2026-05-01" \
  -H "Idempotency-Key: $(uuidgen)" \
  -d '{
    "upsert": {
      "condition_kind": "cleansing_vote",
      "cleansing_vote_resolution_id": "res_280gVote",
      "satisfaction_state": "satisfied"
    }
  }'

Once the close-condition flips to satisfied, the closing → closed advance unblocks.

Error recovery

Failure	Cause	Remediation
`409 Conflict` `vote_failed_below_75_percent`	Resolution finalised as `failed` — yes-tally cannot reach 75%.	Re-paper the deal with reduced parachute amounts (deal team typically caps at 2.99× base), then re-run the analysis with the new `parachute_components`. The original `pa_` and `res_` remain recorded for the audit trail.
`409 Conflict` `disclosure_inadequate`	Tax counsel rejects the rendered disclosure.	Edit `parachute_analysis.compute` inputs, regenerate the disclosure Document from the same template, re-distribute to every voter. Existing votes are voided.
`409 Conflict` `stockholder_list_stale`	Cap table refreshed after the analysis was created.	Refresh via `GET /entities/{id}/cap_table?as_of=<record_date>`, then `POST /v1/parachute_analyses/{id}/refresh_eligible_voters`. Already-cast votes from still-eligible voters carry over.
`403 Forbidden` `tier_4_cannot_organize_cleansing_vote`	Token is tier-4 autonomous.	Re-issue a tier-3 token. Cleansing votes require human-signed counsel attestations under any policy.
`412 Precondition Failed` `parachute_analysis_not_computed`	Resolution open attempted before `parachute_analysis.compute` ran.	Run the compute call first.
`408 Request Timeout` on voting window	Voting window expired without crossing 75% yes and without remaining-share guarantee of failure.	Window auto-closes the resolution as `failed`. Re-open via `POST /v1/resolutions/{id}/reopen` only with counsel sign-off and a fresh disclosure.

Full taxonomy: errors.

Variations

The most common shape — CEO is the only officer with parachutes breaching 3×. One disqualified_individuals[] entry, one breakdown, one disclosure paragraph, one eligible_voters query.

CEO + CTO + COO all have acceleration + change-in-control payments breaching 3×. Pass each as a separate entry; Matter computes per-individual breakdowns and aggregates the disclosure.

{
  "corporate_transaction_id": "ctx_2025AcqStr",
  "tax_counsel_firm": "Wilson Sonsini",
  "disqualified_individuals": [
    { "stakeholder_id": "stk_F0und3rCEO", "status_kind": "officer", "compensation_history": [/* … */], "parachute_components": {/* … */} },
    { "stakeholder_id": "stk_F0und3rCTO", "status_kind": "officer", "compensation_history": [/* … */], "parachute_components": {/* … */} },
    { "stakeholder_id": "stk_OprCOO",    "status_kind": "officer", "compensation_history": [/* … */], "parachute_components": {/* … */} }
  ]
}

The disclosure Document carries one section per individual; the resolution remains a single cleansing_vote covering all parachutes in aggregate.

The vote fails. Three real-world paths from here:

Reduce parachutes below 3×. Deal team caps each individual's parachute at 2.99× base (severance trim, acceleration scale-back, or change-in-control bonus reduction). Re-run the analysis with the new components; no second vote required because the threshold no longer breaches.
Officer eats the §4999 excise tax. The deal closes as papered; each officer pays the 20% excise out of pocket; the corp loses the §280G deduction. Record this with PATCH /v1/parachute_analyses/{id} setting disposition: officer_pays_excise for the audit trail.
Gross-up clause activates. If the employment agreement includes a §280G gross-up, the corp pays the officer enough additional non-parachute cash to make them whole post-tax. Rare in 2026 — most modern employment agreements have stripped gross-ups in favour of §280G best-net-of clauses.

This recipe does not apply. The §280G(b)(5) shareholder-approval exception is explicitly available only to private corporations under §280G(b)(5)(A)(ii) — public-company targets cannot cleanse parachutes via stockholder vote. Public acquirers handle parachute exposure via §280G best-net-of clauses, voluntary parachute reductions, or shareholder- advisory votes (which do not confer the same statutory waiver).

If your target is public, drop cleansing_vote from the close_conditions[] array entirely and route parachute mitigation through POST /v1/parachute_analyses/{id}/best_net_of_calculation instead.

FAQ

Acquire a company — the parent recipe; this cleansing-vote flow runs between definitive and closing.
Execute a stock sale — a 100%-cash buyout where parachute analysis is equally applicable.
Run a board consent — the resolution-organising primitive; cleansing votes are a typed kind on the same machinery.
Post-exit manage — the post-close §280G recharacterization variant.

Last updated Jun 14, 2026

Identify disqualified individuals, compute parachute payments, route a stockholder cleansing vote that strips the §280G excise tax.

5 calls · 4 webhooks

Trigger

A change-of-control transaction is on the calendar with payments to disqualified individuals exceeding 3× their base.

Call sequence

1. Create the analysis

POST /v1/parachute_analyses  { entity, transaction, change_of_control_date }

2. Compute payments

POST /v1/parachute_analyses/{id}/compute

3. List eligible (non-disqualified) voters

GET /v1/parachute_analyses/{id}/eligible_voters

4. Route cleansing vote

POST /v1/parachute_analyses/{id}/run

Idempotency

Analysis idempotent on `(entity, transaction)`. Recompute is safe.

Webhooks

Event	Description
`parachute_analysis.computed`	Numbers ready.
`parachute_analysis.vote_signed`	Threshold met → §280G safe harbor.

Errors

Status	Code	Description
`422`	`vote_threshold_failed`	75% of eligible voters did not approve. Excise tax applies.

When this recipe applies

About-to-close M&A where any officer's acceleration + change-in-control payments exceed 3× their 5-year W-2 base amount.
Private-company transactions only — this is the §280G(b)(5) "small business exception", explicitly unavailable to public-company targets.
Deals where the deal team would rather preserve the parachute than gross up the officer or strip the acceleration.
Vested stock only — unvested stockholder votes do not count toward the 75% threshold. Refresh the cap table as of the close-record-date before identifying eligible voters.

Phase 1 — Identify disqualified individuals

curl -X POST https://api.mattermode.com/v1/parachute_analyses \
  -H "Authorization: Bearer $MATTER_KEY" \
  -H "Matter-Version: 2026-05-01" \
  -H "Idempotency-Key: $(uuidgen)" \
  -d '{
    "corporate_transaction_id": "ctx_2025AcqStr",
    "analysis_kind": "dgcl_pre_close",
    "tax_counsel_firm": "Cooley LLP",
    "disqualified_individuals": [
      {
        "stakeholder_id": "stk_F0und3rCEO",
        "status_kind": "officer",
        "status_basis": "ceo_top_50_compensation",
        "tenure_years": 6.0
      }
    ]
  }'

Phase 2 — Compute parachute payments

curl -X POST https://api.mattermode.com/v1/parachute_analyses/pa_280gCEO/compute \
  -H "Authorization: Bearer $MATTER_KEY" \
  -H "Matter-Version: 2026-05-01" \
  -H "Idempotency-Key: $(uuidgen)" \
  -d '{
    "stakeholder_id": "stk_F0und3rCEO",
    "compensation_history": [
      {"year": 2021, "w2_box_1": {"amount": 18500000, "currency": "usd"}},
      {"year": 2022, "w2_box_1": {"amount": 19200000, "currency": "usd"}},
      {"year": 2023, "w2_box_1": {"amount": 20000000, "currency": "usd"}},
      {"year": 2024, "w2_box_1": {"amount": 20000000, "currency": "usd"}},
      {"year": 2025, "w2_box_1": {"amount": 22300000, "currency": "usd"}}
    ],
    "parachute_components": {
      "acceleration_value":       {"amount": 48000000, "currency": "usd"},
      "change_in_control_bonus":  {"amount": 15000000, "currency": "usd"},
      "severance":                {"amount":  9000000, "currency": "usd"},
      "other_parachutes":         {"amount":        0, "currency": "usd"}
    }
  }'

Phase 3 — Assemble pre-vote disclosure

curl -X POST https://api.mattermode.com/v1/documents \
  -H "Authorization: Bearer $MATTER_KEY" \
  -H "Matter-Version: 2026-05-01" \
  -H "Idempotency-Key: $(uuidgen)" \
  -d '{
    "entity_id": "ent_Nq3KcAbc",
    "kind": "280g_cleansing_vote_disclosure_statement",
    "template_id": "tpl_280g_disclosure",
    "merge_fields": {
      "parachute_analysis_id": "pa_280gCEO",
      "corporate_transaction_id": "ctx_2025AcqStr"
    },
    "co_signers": [
      {"signer_role": "tax_counsel", "signer_email": "partner@cooley.com"}
    ]
  }'

Phase 4 — Identify non-disqualified stockholders

curl https://api.mattermode.com/v1/parachute_analyses/pa_280gCEO/eligible_voters \
  -H "Authorization: Bearer $MATTER_KEY" \
  -H "Matter-Version: 2026-05-01"

vote_share_percent percentages renormalise across non-disqualified shares — 75% means 75% of the non-disqualified pool, not 75% of the cap table.

Phase 5 — Execute the cleansing vote

curl -X POST https://api.mattermode.com/v1/resolutions \
  -H "Authorization: Bearer $MATTER_KEY" \
  -H "Matter-Version: 2026-05-01" \
  -H "Idempotency-Key: $(uuidgen)" \
  -d '{
    "entity_id": "ent_Nq3KcAbc",
    "kind": "cleansing_vote",
    "subject": "§280G cleansing vote — Acme acquisition",
    "cleansing_vote": {
      "parachute_analysis_id":    "pa_280gCEO",
      "disclosure_document_id":   "doc_280gDisc",
      "threshold":                0.75,
      "eligible_voters_source":   "parachute_analyses.eligible_voters",
      "voting_window_days":       21,
      "result":                   "pending"
    },
    "delivery": { "channel": "email", "reminder_cadence_days": 3 }
  }'

Phase 6 — Reference in the close-package

A passed cleansing vote becomes a close-condition entry on the parent CorporateTransaction. The close package can fire only when this condition is satisfied.

curl -X PATCH https://api.mattermode.com/v1/corporate_transactions/ctx_2025AcqStr/close_conditions \
  -H "Authorization: Bearer $MATTER_KEY" \
  -H "Matter-Version: 2026-05-01" \
  -H "Idempotency-Key: $(uuidgen)" \
  -d '{
    "upsert": {
      "condition_kind": "cleansing_vote",
      "cleansing_vote_resolution_id": "res_280gVote",
      "satisfaction_state": "satisfied"
    }
  }'

Once the close-condition flips to satisfied, the closing → closed advance unblocks.

Error recovery

Failure	Cause	Remediation
`409 Conflict` `vote_failed_below_75_percent`	Resolution finalised as `failed` — yes-tally cannot reach 75%.	Re-paper the deal with reduced parachute amounts (deal team typically caps at 2.99× base), then re-run the analysis with the new `parachute_components`. The original `pa_` and `res_` remain recorded for the audit trail.
`409 Conflict` `disclosure_inadequate`	Tax counsel rejects the rendered disclosure.	Edit `parachute_analysis.compute` inputs, regenerate the disclosure Document from the same template, re-distribute to every voter. Existing votes are voided.
`409 Conflict` `stockholder_list_stale`	Cap table refreshed after the analysis was created.	Refresh via `GET /entities/{id}/cap_table?as_of=<record_date>`, then `POST /v1/parachute_analyses/{id}/refresh_eligible_voters`. Already-cast votes from still-eligible voters carry over.
`403 Forbidden` `tier_4_cannot_organize_cleansing_vote`	Token is tier-4 autonomous.	Re-issue a tier-3 token. Cleansing votes require human-signed counsel attestations under any policy.
`412 Precondition Failed` `parachute_analysis_not_computed`	Resolution open attempted before `parachute_analysis.compute` ran.	Run the compute call first.
`408 Request Timeout` on voting window	Voting window expired without crossing 75% yes and without remaining-share guarantee of failure.	Window auto-closes the resolution as `failed`. Re-open via `POST /v1/resolutions/{id}/reopen` only with counsel sign-off and a fresh disclosure.

Full taxonomy: errors.

Variations

The most common shape — CEO is the only officer with parachutes breaching 3×. One disqualified_individuals[] entry, one breakdown, one disclosure paragraph, one eligible_voters query.

CEO + CTO + COO all have acceleration + change-in-control payments breaching 3×. Pass each as a separate entry; Matter computes per-individual breakdowns and aggregates the disclosure.

{
  "corporate_transaction_id": "ctx_2025AcqStr",
  "tax_counsel_firm": "Wilson Sonsini",
  "disqualified_individuals": [
    { "stakeholder_id": "stk_F0und3rCEO", "status_kind": "officer", "compensation_history": [/* … */], "parachute_components": {/* … */} },
    { "stakeholder_id": "stk_F0und3rCTO", "status_kind": "officer", "compensation_history": [/* … */], "parachute_components": {/* … */} },
    { "stakeholder_id": "stk_OprCOO",    "status_kind": "officer", "compensation_history": [/* … */], "parachute_components": {/* … */} }
  ]
}

The disclosure Document carries one section per individual; the resolution remains a single cleansing_vote covering all parachutes in aggregate.

The vote fails. Three real-world paths from here:

Reduce parachutes below 3×. Deal team caps each individual's parachute at 2.99× base (severance trim, acceleration scale-back, or change-in-control bonus reduction). Re-run the analysis with the new components; no second vote required because the threshold no longer breaches.
Officer eats the §4999 excise tax. The deal closes as papered; each officer pays the 20% excise out of pocket; the corp loses the §280G deduction. Record this with PATCH /v1/parachute_analyses/{id} setting disposition: officer_pays_excise for the audit trail.
Gross-up clause activates. If the employment agreement includes a §280G gross-up, the corp pays the officer enough additional non-parachute cash to make them whole post-tax. Rare in 2026 — most modern employment agreements have stripped gross-ups in favour of §280G best-net-of clauses.

If your target is public, drop cleansing_vote from the close_conditions[] array entirely and route parachute mitigation through POST /v1/parachute_analyses/{id}/best_net_of_calculation instead.

FAQ

Acquire a company — the parent recipe; this cleansing-vote flow runs between definitive and closing.
Execute a stock sale — a 100%-cash buyout where parachute analysis is equally applicable.
Run a board consent — the resolution-organising primitive; cleansing votes are a typed kind on the same machinery.
Post-exit manage — the post-close §280G recharacterization variant.

Run a 280G cleansing vote

Trigger

Call sequence

1. Create the analysis

2. Compute payments

3. List eligible (non-disqualified) voters

4. Route cleansing vote

Idempotency

Webhooks

Errors

Who counts as a 'disqualified individual' under §280G?

How is the 'base amount' computed?

What payments count as 'parachute payments'?

Why 75% and not a simple majority?

What happens if the vote fails?

Can the disqualified individuals waive the cleansing vote requirement?

When does this recipe NOT apply?

On this page

Run a 280G cleansing vote

Trigger

Call sequence

1. Create the analysis

2. Compute payments

3. List eligible (non-disqualified) voters

4. Route cleansing vote

Idempotency

Webhooks

Errors

Who counts as a 'disqualified individual' under §280G?

How is the 'base amount' computed?

What payments count as 'parachute payments'?

Why 75% and not a simple majority?

What happens if the vote fails?

Can the disqualified individuals waive the cleansing vote requirement?

When does this recipe NOT apply?

On this page