Law Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for legal professionals, students, and others with experience or interest in law. It only takes a minute to sign up.
Sign up to join this community
To summarize it, I'll give an example: I'm Bill Gates. I own Microsoft. On a desk, there's a Microsoft Surface that is branded by my company. I decide to take it home and never bring it back, although I didn't buy it personally, and the company's budget was spent on it.
Would that be a theft?
Let's assume this anecdote takes place while Gates was CEO. Bill Gates doesn't own all of Microsoft, and as an officer of the company, he owes a fiduciary duty to act in the best interests of the company and its shareholders as a whole. Taking the company's property for personal use breaches that fiduciary duty.
Now, in this particular hypothetical, Gates might have a decent argument that, as a public figure who can afford any piece of technology he desires, him being seen using a Microsoft Surface actually is acting in the company's best interests. But that wouldn't apply in the hypothetical scenario where he took, say, a printer.
Even if the CEO is the 100% owner of a private company.
Bill Gates and Microsoft are different people: Bill’s stuff is not Microsoft’s stuff and vice versa. If Bill takes Microsoft’s stuff without permission with the intent of permanently depriving Microsoft of it, that’s theft. The fact that Bill has the power to authorize the taking doesn’t matter if he doesn’t exercise that power.
Of course, if Microsoft gave permission, that’s fine - providing everyone paid the right taxes. If Bill has the authority to give permission on behalf of Microsoft he has a fiduciary duty as a director to decide in Microsoft’s best interests - this is true whether he owns some, none or all of Microsoft.
No. At least, not technically. Theft is taking without consent of the owner. The CEO is authorized to act on behalf of the company, and thus can give themself permission to take the computer. Even if the CEO isn't explicitly granted authority to distribute resources, there's a strong implicit authority. To substantiate a charge of theft, a prosecutor would have to show that the CEO had no reasonable basis for believing that they had the authority. While one could imagine a set of circumstances allowing that, in general it would be very difficult.
However, there are other charges that could be leveled, most notably embezzlement. The CEO has a fiduciary duty to act in the best interests of the shareholders. If they give themself permission to take the computer, that makes the act not theft, but the very act of giving themself permission, if done for malicious reasons, can be criminal. If they are using their authority to divert company resources for their own benefit, that can be embezzlement, although it's unlikely to be prosecuted for small amounts.
There are further issues in reporting it. The IRS, would probably consider this income, so not reporting it would be tax evasion. If it's a publicly traded company, then expenses must be reported. However, this is likely small enough to be a rounding error.
This doesn't apply just to CEOs. If an ordinary worker takes their laptop home and doesn't give it back, this is conversion/embezzlement, but probably isn't technically theft.
Let's look at the case from some sides. Does Mr. Gates claim to own the laptop as he takes it home (like, does he sell it or give it away?) or does he treat it as a company-issued tool that just happens to be at his home? In the first case, he would probably need to do the paperwork for transferring the item from the company to his person to prevent that it is theft. In the second case, it just happens to be located at his home.
Now, assume it was just in his home for years to serve a valid work reason. Mr. Gates quits being a part of Microsoft because he becomes a pensioner. Now, there ought to be a document detailing that he has to turn in all company assets, get them transferred to him as a gift on top of the last paycheck or he buys the assets residing at his home. If the asset however stays and is not either given back, gifted to him, or bought (like, for a dime), now he suddenly commits theft.
But it would be up to Microsoft to sue for conversion, and I don't think they would want the bad PR from dragging their former CEO to court for a now obsolete piece of hardware. They might however want the confidential files and data that is stored on it and approach Mr. Gates to hand those over peacefully in the transition period.
As mentioned by other answers, this is company property, not personal property. But the company will have processes where a certain level of authority allows you to take decisions about use of company assets, and the CEO is almost certainly that level. Microsoft are allowed to give Surfaces to influencers, or put mice or headsets in goodie bags at trade shows, or whatever, and someone authorises that.
You would need to update the company asset tracking register to track that it had been given to you, of course. Otherwise it remains company property. The practical impact of this is basically zero though - my company owns my laptop, but due to Covid it's not been on company premises for a year!
What will get you is tax. If you're given something by your company, or if you have the use of some facility that isn't work related, that is normally taxable depending on its value. Exactly how this goes will depend on your country.
A CEO/owner certainly can "profit-take" from a corporation. However the corporation must follow US tax law (since your presumption is Bill Gates/Microsoft). Note the same applies to an LLC which has elected corporate tax treatment.
The Board of Directors can set any amount they please. And the Board is elected by shareholders (1 share = 1 vote), so a majority-holding CEO simply decides who the Board is.
In any case, the payments are documented by appropriate tax paperwork such as a W-4 or 1099.
So yes. It's perfectly legit for the CEO to take home a tablet if the formalities are followed.
Yes, it would be a theft and the rub lies in the statement "never bring it back". The question is why would it ba a theft? Simply because a company is a different entity separate from its shareholders, even if the shareholder owns a majority of the shares. Under most modern countries corporate laws, there is a distinction between a "natural" person and a "legal" person. A "natural" person is a human being while a "legal" person is a legal entity. Thus, both are completely separate and taking the property from one to the other is theft. This is because the "legal" entity is owned by its shareholders who, under the agency principle, appointed a board of directors (or simply directors when there is no board in some countries) to run the company on their behalf with the goals usually set in modern countries' laws to "maximise shareholders' value". Taking this laptop and "never bring it back" is not within the scope of duty of the CEO nor does it serve the purpose of maximisation of shareholders' value nor the operational mandate received by the shareholders. The CEO could be compensated in kind by a resolution of the supervising board and thus receive the laptop and since it would be approved, it would not be theft. Another way would be an allowance to use the laptop at home presumably for work-related activities as long as the CEO is an employee of the company.
YES
To add to what @Dale M mentioned earlier. Even if the CEO is 100% owner, he cannot simply take it. There are two sides of his "power of authorisation" - the objective and the subjective. The objective is he is able to do that for himself. The subjective part is the actual authorisation - basically him signing a document that allows him to take the property. In order for this power to be actually valid, both the objective and the subjective part must exist.
If the CEO of a company enters the company's offices as a private person, finds a laptop, and takes it home to use it as his personal computer, that's theft. Even if he or she owns the company, it is at least tax evasion. It would also be stupid enough to get them fired, because it is very easy for them to get the use of a laptop legally.
As the CEO, he or she can decide that it is for some or other reason in the best interest of the company if the CEO is given a laptop that can also be used for private purposes. And when that decision is made, the CEO sends an email to IT, and the laptop will be promptly delivered. It would be highly unusual if anyone questioned the decision, and tried to turn it against the CEO somehow.
No, NEVER!
Many good answers, but it cannot be considered theft. But you would never do that being the CEO, or even 100% owner, i'm one and i'll thell you why.
You should never mix personal property with company property. That's of course entirely up to your decision. But if you end up mixing it, then let's say your company ends up with a large debt, then your debtor can prove you mixed company property with your personal property, he will be able to require any of your personal property to cover your company debt. And since every enterprise has a lifespan, thats never a wise thing to do.
So, conclusion, it would be considered a bad habit and a unwise decision.
