RSUs

Should Startups Use RSUs Instead of Options

Options remain the default for early stage European startups because of tax-advantaged regimes and lower cost at low valuations. RSUs tend to make more sense once a company is larger, better funded, or approaching an IPO.

Early stage default
Stock options, often EMI, CSOP or BSPCE
Later stage shift
RSUs become more common as valuations rise
Key structural fix
Double trigger vesting to avoid dry income at private companies
Main RSU risk pre-IPO
Tax due before any market exists to sell shares

Leveraging low valuations with startup stock options

At an early stage startup, the share price is low, so a stock option with a low strike price gives employees substantial percentage upside if the company succeeds, for very little cost today. This is why stock options remain the default early instrument in Europe. Tax-advantaged regimes such as UK EMI and French BSPCE were specifically designed around options, offering capital gains treatment that RSUs generally cannot access, which reinforces options as the default early instrument.

RSUs at a very early stage would deliver shares, and typically trigger a tax charge, on a company that might still fail entirely, exposing employees to real cash tax costs on highly uncertain value. This asymmetry, on top of the taxation treatment, makes RSUs a poor fit before a company has meaningful, demonstrable value.

Shifting to restricted units at later stages

  • The company has raised enough capital that its valuation is well established and a low option strike price would look unusually generous relative to fair value.
  • The company is approaching an IPO or has already gone public, where RSUs are the market standard and shares are readily tradable.
  • The company wants to simplify equity administration for a larger workforce, avoiding the exercise and payment mechanics of options.
  • Employees or the local tax regime make deferred cash-free grants more attractive than an early exercise decision.

Growth stage and pre-IPO companies in Europe increasingly mix both instruments, using options for early joiners and RSUs, usually with double trigger vesting, once the company is more mature.

Selecting instruments based on European funding rounds

Company stageRecommended instrumentKey consideration
Pre-seed to Series AStock optionsUse tax-advantaged regimes like EMI or BSPCE where eligible
Series B to pre-IPOMix of options and double trigger RSUsAvoid dry income risk by delaying delivery to a liquidity event
Post-IPORSUsShares are liquid, tax at vesting is manageable via sell-to-cover

Whichever instrument is chosen, the underlying goal is the same: give employees meaningful upside aligned with company growth, without exposing them to tax bills they cannot afford to pay from illiquid holdings. Double trigger vesting for RSUs, and sensible exercise windows for options, are the two most important structural tools for managing that risk in Europe.

Founders and candidates often ask

Can a startup grant both options and RSUs at the same time?
Yes. Many later stage companies run both an option plan and an RSU plan side by side, often using RSUs mainly for new senior hires once the valuation is well established.
Is it a bad sign if a private startup offers RSUs instead of options?
Not necessarily, but employees should check whether the RSUs use double trigger vesting. Single trigger RSUs at a private company with no market to sell into can create a real tax cash flow problem.

General information for founders, not legal or tax advice. Thresholds and rates change, so confirm the current position with an adviser in the relevant country before granting.

Compare RSUs with other instruments

Subscribe to equity insights for European founders

Get concise updates on employee equity, tax changes and founder decisions.