The Utah Attorney General has backed away this fall from his threatened legal attack on the Bowl Championship Series (“BCS”) for college football. For months after the University of Utah fell short of a BCS berth, the Attorney General rattled the saber of an antitrust suit, publicly advertising (twice) for lawyers to sue, recruiting other plaintiffs, and threatening to file suit imminently. In an apparently coordinated maneuver, last year, Senator Orrin Hatch (R. Utah) and others persuaded the Obama administration’s Justice Department to send a letter to the NCAA president inquiring into why the BCS lacked a playoff feature. After… Read more
Newsletters
Winter 2012/2013
Issue 8 — New Laws and Regulations
Manitoba Franchise Legislation Comes Into Effect The Canadian province of Manitoba’s new franchise laws, The Franchise Act and Franchises Regulation, came into effect on October 1, 2012. Manitoba now joins Ontario, Alberta, Prince Edward Island and New Brunswick among Canadian provinces requiring pre-franchise agreement disclosures. Details about Manitoba’s franchise law were discussed in our previous issue. Changes to Ohio’s Business Opportunities Law Changes to Ohio’s business opportunities law became effective September 28, 2012. Senate Bill No. 196 broadens the definition of “business opportunity plan” to include plans purchased with an initial payment up to $100,000, as opposed to the previous… Read more
Love, Taxes & Equality?
On June 24, 2011, New York Governor Andrew M. Cuomo signed the Marriage Equality Act (the “Act”); thereby granting same-sex couples the right to marry in New York. The Act confers the rights and benefits currently enjoyed by opposite-sex married couples under state law to same-sex married couples. The new law states simply: “A marriage that is otherwise valid shall be valid regardless of whether the parties to the marriage are of the same or different sex. … No application for a marriage license shall be denied on the ground that the parties are of the same, or a different,… Read more
SIXTY FEET
It never ceases to surprise me how often I find noteworthy philanthropic endeavors from people that I would least expect. The best part of my job sometimes is simply listening to my clients’ passionate interests in sustaining diverse charitable causes within their community and then passing these interests onto other clients. It thus came as a surprise to me when I learned about a unique charitable endeavor in Uganda (not exactly a country on my radar screen) called SIXTY FEET* (www.sixtyfeet.org) while travelling on an extended business trip in Europe with of all people one of my Atlanta-based partners at… Read more
Might I Suggest an ESOP with That Family Business?
As a family business owner, you understand the vast planning and strategizing required to achieve, maintain and perpetuate success. Often overlooked in business succession and estate planning is use of an Employee Stock Ownership Plan (“ESOP”) to hold the stock of the family business. To a retiring business owner, an ESOP can provide significant tax savings, difficult-to-obtain liquidity, and a well structured estate plan. To the family business, an ESOP produces tax savings, improves company morale, and enhances success. A Bit of History An ESOP is a defined contribution retirement plan which invests primarily in a company’s stock. The stock… Read more
Doctors’ Deduction for Contribution to IRSApproved 501(c)(3) Foundation Disallowed with Penalties Under
Two (husband-and-wife) doctors bought into a plan promoted by a financial services advisor specializing in aggressive tax-avoidance programs for doctors. Under the plan, the doctors would make a charitable contribution to the advisor’s foundation and take a charitable contribution deduction. They could then use the contributed funds to educate their children. The foundation had obtained an IRS determination letter stating it was a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organization, and the foundation was listed in the IRS’s Publication 78, which identifies such organizations for taxpayers’ guidance. In practice, though, the foundation operated for the benefit of its donor-doctors. Each doctor’s donations were kept in a segregated fund to be used as directed by the doctor. The promotional materials stated: “You could take the money out… Read more
Supreme Court Holds NFL’s Licensing Program for Hats Subject to Antitrust Laws
On May 24, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that the National Football League’s licensing program for hats is subject to the federal antitrust law(s). The NFL had set up a licensing subsidiary that had licensed the teams’ logos exclusively to Reebok. That program cut off an apparel manufacturer, American Needle, Inc., that had previously sold licensed products. American Needle sued and lost in the trial court and in the Court of Appeals, which held for NFL under the so-called “Copperweld Doctrine.” That doctrine — named after a 1984 Supreme Court case involving the Copperweld Corporation — held that a… Read more
Deduction Disallowed for Donation of McVeigh Trial Materials
The lead lawyer for Timothy McVeigh, the Oklahoma City bomber, received bankers’ boxes full of documents from the prosecution. The boxes contained FBI memoranda, lab reports, computer discs and photographs relating to the bombing. After the trial, he donated them to the Center for American History at the University of Texas. He claimed a tax deduction based on the appraised value, $294,877, beginning on his 1997 income tax return. The unused portion of the deduction was carried forward for a number of years. In 2004, the IRS caught up with the deduction and disallowed it for the years 2000 ($3675)… Read more
Recent Cases — Issue 7
Franchisor Not Liable for Franchisees’ “Robo-Calls” A federal district court in Washington held that Domino’s Pizza, Inc. could not be held liable for its franchisees’ violations of Washington’s prohibition against automatic dialing and announcing devices. The relevant provisions of the Washington Automatic Dialing and Answering Devices Act (“WADAD”) prohibit the use of an automatic dialing and announcing device (“ADAD”) for purposes of “commercial solicitation,” defined as the “unsolicited initiation of a telephone conversation” for the purpose of encouraging sales. The plaintiffs contended that (i) because Domino’s introduced its franchisees to an automated calling service, (ii) because the Domino’s software platform… Read more