Are you still asking "Can I expense this...?" Use our free tool!
The question sounds simple, but the answer has real consequences.
Pay yourself too little, and the IRS will reclassify your distributions as wages, then bill you for back taxes, penalties, and interest. Pay yourself as an S-Corporation more than necessary, and you’re wasting money on payroll taxes you didn’t need to pay.
With 4.8 million S-Corporations operating across the United States, reasonable compensation is one of the most scrutinized areas in small business taxation. The IRS knows the temptation: minimize salary, maximize distributions, reduce payroll taxes.
They’ve built enforcement systems specifically to catch it.
If you want to understand how the IRS approaches S Corp compensation, you need to understand Watson v. Commissioner.
David Watson was a CPA running his own firm. He paid himself $24,000 in salary while taking $220,000 in distributions. The IRS reclassified $151,000 of those distributions as wages.
The case went to Tax Court. Watson argued his compensation was reasonable based on his specific circumstances. The court disagreed.
What makes Watson significant isn’t just that he lost. It’s what the court established in ruling against him.
The court laid out a framework that’s now used in every reasonable compensation case: compensation must be based on what the market pays for comparable work, not what’s convenient for tax purposes. It rejected arbitrary formulas, percentage splits, and subjective justifications.
Watson became the reference case. Every IRS revenue agent working an S Corp audit knows it. Every tax attorney defending a compensation structure deals with it. It’s the precedent that defines what “reasonable” means.
Watson established the standard. Now the IRS uses technology to enforce it.
The IRS increased compliance enforcement funding significantly at the end of 2023. They’re using AI and advanced technology to flag payroll tax discrepancies, and reasonable compensation is now one of the highest-priority audit targets.
Here’s what triggers their attention:
If your records show minimal or no salary while you’re actively running the business, you’re a likely audit target.
The biggest red flag? Zero salary.
Paying a token amount doesn’t satisfy the requirement. The IRS looks at whether the salary is reasonable, not whether it exists.
You’ve probably heard about the 60/40 rule: pay yourself 60% as salary, take 40% as distributions, and you’re safe.
It doesn’t work that way.
Tax courts have explicitly rejected arbitrary percentage formulas. In JD & Associates v. Commissioner, the court stated that mechanical formulas cannot substitute for market-based analysis.
There is no formula. The IRS evaluates each situation based on facts and circumstances.
Here’s what most business owners miss: you’re not trying to minimize your salary. You’re trying to defend it.
A business owner with $400,000 in net income might save $15,000 to $25,000 annually through proper S Corp structuring. On $100,000 of business profit, shifting a portion into distributions instead of salary could save you $8,000 to $10,000 in payroll taxes.
That’s real money. But only if it holds up under scrutiny.
The risk isn’t paying too much. The risk is paying too little.
In many cases, audit risk comes from paying too little salary rather than too much. Defensible documentation and consistency matter more than chasing the lowest possible payroll number.
Underpaying invites reclassification. Overpaying wastes payroll tax savings. The goal is the defensible middle.
We walk clients through this every quarter.
Here’s the framework:
Write down what you actually do in the business. Not what your title is. What you do.
Are you the primary salesperson? The operations manager? The technical expert? The person who handles client relationships?
Your compensation should reflect the value of those functions.
Find out what comparable positions pay in your industry and geography. Use sources like:
This isn’t guesswork. This is evidence.
The IRS uses a multi-factor test.
They evaluate:
Your compensation analysis should address these factors.
Documentation is as important as the number itself.
Your compensation decision should be supported by a written analysis: what you do, what the market pays for that role, and how you determined your salary.
This protects you if the IRS questions your position.
Your business changes. Your role changes. Market rates change.
What was reasonable last year might not be reasonable this year. Review your compensation annually and adjust when circumstances warrant it.
Here’s what you’re dealing with:
The IRS can reclassify your distributions as wages. The test is whether the payments were actually compensation for services performed.
Your intent doesn’t matter.
They can reclassify your distributions as salary, then bill you for back payroll taxes, penalties, and interest.
You don’t get to argue intent after the fact.
The conversation we have with S Corp owners always comes back to the same point: you’re not playing defense against the IRS. You’re building a position you can defend.
That means:
The goal isn’t to avoid all payroll taxes. The goal is to pay what’s required and keep what’s yours.
When you get this right, you sleep better. You save money. And if the IRS ever comes asking, you have answers.
That’s not paranoia. That’s planning.
Most business owners ask: “What’s the lowest salary I can pay myself?”
The better question is: “What salary can I defend?”
The savings only matter if they survive scrutiny. And scrutiny is more common than it used to be.
If you’re running an S Corp and haven’t reviewed your compensation in the last year, you’re carrying unnecessary risk.
The fix isn’t complicated. It requires someone who knows both the tax code and how enforcement actually works.
That’s where we come in.
We help you structure compensation that makes sense on paper and holds up under audit. We document everything so you’re covered if questions come up.
If you want to talk through your situation, call us.
We’ll look at what you’re paying yourself now, what the market says is reasonable, and build a defensible position that saves money without creating exposure.
You don’t have to guess at this. You just need someone in the room when the decision gets made.
