Welcome to the Valensi Rose PLC Blog
To contact one of our attorneys please visit VRMLAW.COM

Showing posts with label Michael R. Morris. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Michael R. Morris. Show all posts

Wednesday, May 28, 2014

Michael R. Morris to Co-Chair 2014 CalCPA Entertainment Industry Conference

Valensi Rose partner, Michael R. Morris, will co-Chair the upcoming 2014 Entertainment Industry Conference presented by CalCPA.  The annual event, held this year on June 19, 2014 at the Hyatt Regency Century City, highlights recent changes in the entertainment industry and provides expert advice and guidance for CPAs and other industry professionals.

In addition to his co-Chair duties, Mr. Morris is also moderating the “Music Industry Update” panel.  The high-powered panel includes Richard Busch, Esq. (King & Ballow), Larry Blake (Concord Music Group, Inc.), D. A. Wallach (Spotify), and Steve Winogradsky, Esq. (Winogradsky/Sobel). Mr. Morris will lead a discussion on licensing vs. sales and digital music royalties.

For more information and to register for the event, click here.

Wednesday, October 23, 2013

What's in a Michael Jackson Name? Plenty Says the IRS!

Michael R Morris
With all of the media focus on the recently decided wrongful-death action in which a jury found AEG not liable in Michael Jackson's death, there is another court battle generating less press, but which could cost hundreds of millions of dollars.  This case pits the Estate of Michael Jackson against the Internal Revenue Service ("IRS") and centers on the $7 million taxable value of the estate's assets reported to the IRS.  Undoubtedly eyebrow raising to the IRS was the valuation of Michael Jackson's name and likeness rights at only $2,105, to which the IRS has countered at greater than $434 million.  In all, the IRS has valued Michael Jackson's estate at more than $1.1 billion, and issued a notice of deficiency in estate taxes of more than $505 million.  And because the IRS contends the executors significantly undervalued the estate's property, it tacked on additions to tax of $196 million for good measure!

In response to the IRS notice of deficiency on July 26, 2013, the estate filed a petition with the U.S. Tax Court, contending the valuations of the assets on the estate tax return "were accurate and based upon qualified appraisals by qualified appraisers who had extensive experience valuing entertainment industry assets."  And on August 20, 2013, the IRS filed its answer, which detailed all of the proposed IRS valuations of Michael Jackson's assets, including his name and likeness. This sets the stage for a contentious valuation battle.

No doubt, the IRS is aware that the exploitation of dead celebrity names and likeness is big business.  In 2009, CNN's story "A Living for the Dead" profiled Mark Roesler and his company, CMG Worldwide, which represents the estates of such icons as James Dean, Buddy Holly and Marilyn Monroe, to name but a few.  What makes the Estate of Michael Jackson's battle with the IRS of extreme interest is while the valuation of an estate's assets for federal estate tax purposes is usually made when a person dies (there is an election of value estate assets as of six months after the date of death), any subsequent dispute with the IRS over the worth of celebrity "name and likeness" rights rarely become public.

The rights of a deceased celebrity's estate to name and likeness rights are governed by state not federal law.  So unless a deceased celebrity died a resident of a state affording posthumous protection for rights of publicity, such rights literally go to the grave along with that celebrity.  This happened in the hotly litigated cases involving Marilyn Monroe, where the ultimate determination of her status as a New York and not a California resident meant Monroe's rights of publicity failed to survive her (since New York has no law protecting posthumous rights of publicity).

Conversely, California has for many years statutorily protected the rights of both living and dead celebrities in their names, voices, signatures, photographs and likenesses.  Cal. Civ. Code §§3344 and 3344.1.   In fact, these rights extend for 70 years after death, and, like most property rights, are licensable, transferable and descendible.
  
The holder of the decedent celebrity's right of publicity must, however, register the claim with the California Secretary of State (a simple procedure), and until that is done, damages cannot be recovered for any use prior to such registration. Cal. Civ. Code §3344.1(f)(1).

To come within this statutory protection, California law requires that a decedent's right of publicity must have had "commercial value at the time of his or her death, or because his or death." Cal. Civ. Code §3344.1(b).  Indisputably, Michael Jackson's right of publicity (name, likeness, etc.) had commercial value when he died. But how much such rights were worth when he died is the pivotal question facing the U.S. Tax  Court.

Determining the value of intellectual property based on projected future earnings and discounted to a present value is not an exact science.  In the case of the King of Pop, his estate has generated hundreds of millions of licensing post-mortem dollars, which the IRS no doubt factored  into its valuation.  So now, the IRS and the Estate of Michael Jackson are locked in a hotly contested battle over just how valuable is the future earnings power of Michael Jackson's posthumous celebrity rights.  While the Jackson case may settle prior to the Tax Court's adjudicating what these rights are worth, the litigation between the IRS and the Estate of Michael Jackson could well signal similar IRS scrutiny of valuations placed on other high profile  deceased celebrities' name and likeness rights.  Accordingly, the administrators of such estates need to be aware of the necessity to engage both qualified appraisers to value such rights and experienced tax professionals to defend against the inevitable IRS audit.

Contact: Michael Morris

Tuesday, November 6, 2012

Vanity Fair Not Fair To La Toya Jackson, Say Valensi Rose Attorneys

Steve F. Moeller
Michael R. Morris
Valensi Rose entertainment lawyers Michael Morris and Steve Moeller have been retained to pursue a claim against Vanity Fair magazine, and its publisher Advance Magazine Publishers, Inc., regarding certain false and libelous statements made about Valensi Rose client La Toya Jackson. The statements involve Ms. Jackson’s  supposed actions immediately following the 2009 death of her brother Michael Jackson.

The statements appear in an article in the November issue of Vanity Fair entitled “Estate of Siege”, which generally deals with certain disputes involving Michael Jackson’s family and the executors of his Estate.

The firm’s lawyers have made a formal demand for retraction of the statements, since the magazine article includes a description of certain purported actions by members of the Jackson family which are untrue, and unsupported by any reliable sources or witnesses. As of the present date, it has not been determined whether a lawsuit will be filed against the magazine. 

Both Michael Morris and Steve Moeller have been extensively involved in representing recording artists, writers, producers, and other talent for more than 20 years. Steve Moeller is an experienced entertainment litigator who has represented numerous clients in lawsuits involving copyright infringement, trademarks, libel, and many other media related disputes.

Contact: Stephen F. Moeller

Contact: Michael R Morris

Thursday, October 25, 2012

2012 Year-End Tax Planning Tips

Year-end planning is a bigger challenge this year than in past years because, unless Congress acts, tax rates will go up next year, many more individuals will be snared by the alternative minimum tax (AMT), and various deductions and other tax breaks will be unavailable. To be more specific, as a result of expiring Bush-era tax cuts, unless Congress ascts, individuals will face higher tax rates next year on their income, including capital gains and dividends, and estate tax rates will be higher as well. The AMT problem arises because, for 2012, AMT exemptions have dropped and fewer personal credits can be used to offset the AMT. Additionally, a number of other tax provisions expired at the end of 2011 or will expire at the end of 2012. Rules that expired at the end of 2011 include, for example, the research credit for businesses, the election to take an itemized deduction for State and local general sales taxes instead of the itemized deduction permitted for State and local income taxes, and the above-the-line deduction for qualified tuition expenses. Rules that will expire at the end of this year include generous bonus depreciation allowances and expensing allowances for business, and expanded tax credits for higher education costs.

These adverse tax consequences are by no means a certainty. Congress could extend the Bush-era tax cuts for some or all taxpayers, retroactively "patch" the AMT for 2012 to increase exemptions and availability of credits, revive some favorable tax rules that have expired, and extend those that are slated to expire at the end of this year. Which actions Congress will take remains to seen and may well depend on the outcome of the elections. While these uncertainties make year-end tax planning more challenging than in prior years, they should not be an excuse for inaction. Indeed, the almost certain prospect of some higher taxes next year makes it even more important to engage in year-end planning this year. To that end, we have compiled a checklist of actions that may help you save tax dollars if you act before year-end. Many of these moves may benefit you regardless of what Congress does on the major tax questions of the day. Not all actions will apply in your particular situation.

We can narrow down the specific actions that you can take once we meet with you to tailor a particular plan. In the meantime, please review the following list and contact us at your earliest convenience so that we can advise you on which tax-saving moves to make. We also should schedule a follow-up for later this year to see whether the November election results will require changes to year-end planning strategies.

 Year-End Tax Planning Moves for Individuals  

  (1)   Realize losses on stock while substantially preserving your investment position. There are several ways this can be done. For example, you can sell the original holding, then buy back the same securities at least 31 days later. It would be advisable for us to meet to discuss year-end trades you should consider making. 


(2)   If you are thinking of selling assets that are likely to yield large gains, such as inherited, valuable stock, or a vacation home in a desirable resort area, try to make the sale before year-end, with due regard for market conditions. This year, long-term capital gains are taxed at a maximum rate of 15%, but the rate could well be higher next year as noted above. And if your adjusted gross income (as specially modified) exceeds certain limits ($250,000 for joint filers or surviving spouses, $125,000 for a married individual filing a separate return, and $200,000 for all others), gains taken next year (along with other types of unearned income, such as dividends and interest) will be exposed to an extra 3.8% tax (the so-called "unearned income Medicare contribution tax").


(3)   Make gifts sheltered by the annual gift tax exclusion before the end of the year and thereby save gift and estate taxes.You can give $13,000 in 2012 to each of an unlimited number of individuals but you can't carry over unused exclusions from one year to the next. The transfers also may save family income taxes where income-earning property is given to family members in lower income tax brackets who are not subject to the kiddie tax. Savings for next year could be even greater if rates go up and/or the income from the transfer would have been subject to the 3.8% tax in the hands of the donor.

 Year-End Moves for Business Owners

(1)   If your business is incorporated, consider taking money out of the business by way of a stock redemption if you are in the position to do so. The buy-back of the stock may yield long-term capital gain or a dividend, depending on a variety of factors. But either way, you'll be taxed at a maximum rate of only 15% if you act this year. If you wait until next year to make your move, your long-term gains or dividends may be taxed at a higher rate if reform plans are instituted or the Bush-era tax cuts expire. And if your adjusted gross income (as specially modified) exceeds certain limits ($250,000 for joint filers or surviving spouses, $125,000 for a married individual filing a separate return, and $200,000 for all others), gains taken next year (along with other types of unearned income, such as dividends and interest) will be exposed to an extra 3.8% tax (the so-called "unearned income Medicare contribution tax"). Keep in mind that you will need expert help to plan and execute an effective pre-2013 corporate distribution.
  
(2)   Set up a self-employed retirement plan if you are self-employed and haven't done so yet. 

(3)   Increase your basis in a partnership or S corporation if doing so will enable you to deduct a loss from it for this year. A partner's share of partnership losses is deductible only to the extent of his partnership basis as of the end of the partnership year in which the loss occurs. An S corporation shareholder can deduct his pro rata share of an S corporation's losses only to the extent of the total of his basis in (a) his S corporation stock, and (b) debt owed to him by the S corporation.
 
These are just some of the year-end steps that can be taken to save taxes. Again, by contacting us, we can tailor a particular plan that will work best for you.  Please contact a member of the Tax & Wealth Planning Group for more information.

Tuesday, February 14, 2012

Valensi Rose Attorneys Receive 2012 Super Lawyers Designation

We are pleased to announce that four of our attorneys were named by Law and Politics Magazine and the Publishers of Los Angeles Magazine as Super Lawyers in Southern California for 2012. Only 5% of lawyers statewide receive this designation.
  
The following attorneys were designated Super Lawyers in their individual practice areas:

Philip S. Magaram for Estate Planning and Probate
Designated nine years in a row

 

Michael R. Morris for Tax
Designated seven years successively
Bruce D. Sires for Estate Planning and Probate
Designated six years 



Peggy Lennon for Estate Planning and Probate
Designated seven years




Super Lawyers employs a rigorous selection process – one that has been recognized by bar associations and courts across the country for its credibility and sophistication.  It combines peer nominations and evaluations with third-party research.  Each candidate is evaluated on 12 indicators of peer recognition and professional achievement.  Selections are made on an annual, state-by-state basis. 
   
Super Lawyers are chosen based on a variety of criteria, including transactions, experience, honors and awards, special licenses and certifications, bar and other professional activities and scholarly lectures and writings, just to name a few.

Friday, May 27, 2011

Valensi Rose Attorneys to Moderate and Speak at 2011 Entertainment Industry Conference

Wednesday, June 15, 2011 at 8:30 AM to Wednesday, June 15, 2011 at 5:00 PM
Valensi Rose will make a strong showing at this year's Entertainment Industry Conference, presented by the CalCPA Education Foundation. Michael R. Morris, an active member of the conference's planning committee, will once again moderate the tax update portion of the day long event. Joining him in this session on the tax update panel will be tax and wealth planning partner Philip S. Magaram, who will contribute his expertise to this discussion on the current estate and charitable planning opportunities in the entertainment industry. Bruce D. Sires will also be speaking at the conference on the topic of children in entertainment and the various challenges and laws that go along with this special category of entertainers.

For more information on the conference and to register, click here.

Monday, May 9, 2011

Michael Morris Interviewed About Music Entertainment Law

Michael Morris was recently interviewed on the Experts and Leaders Network on Big Media USA, an Internet broadcasting company. Mr. Morris has blended his tax law expertise and a passion for music and entertainment into a practice that is quite unique. His practice areas include tax controversy, transactional matters, estate planning, music, entertainment and general business law.

Although he has a variety of business and tax clients, the entertainment industry is a niche in which Mr. Morris has developed a strong loyal base. His interest in music and years of servicing clients in entertainment has allowed him to build a solid reputation for providing valuable and effective business solutions in such areas as tax planning, copyrights and contractual matters. His entertainment clients include production companies, post production houses, personal managers, talent agents, industry executives of major studios, and numerous recording artists, including Alice Cooper, Grammy winner Kurt Elling, Ministry and La Toya Jackson.

Click on this picture frame to hear the interview:

Thursday, February 3, 2011

Five Valensi Rose Lawyers Designated 2011 Super Lawyers

Valensi Rose is pleased to announce that five of its attorneys were designated "Super Lawyers" among Southern California lawyers for 2011. Only 5 percent of the lawyers in the state are awarded this designation. Please join us in congratulating our attorneys on their achievement.

Philip S. Magaram
Estate Planning & Probate

Phil has been recognized as a Super Lawyer eight years in a row: 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011





Michael R. Morris
Tax

Michael has been recognized as a Super Lawyer for his sixth year: 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011.





M. Laurie Murphy
Business Litigation

Laurie has been recognized as a Super Lawyer in this practice area for 2011.






Bruce D. Sires
Estate Planning & Probate

Bruce has been recognized as a Super Lawyer for his fifth year: 2004, 2005, 2006, 2009, 2011.





Peggy Lennon
Estate Planning & Probate

Peggy has been recognized as a Super Lawyer for her sixth year: 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009, 2011.

Monday, July 19, 2010

Tax Law Update


Posted by Michael Morris
Tax laws are always changing. Here are some of the most recent changes that may affect you and your clients.
Read...

Thursday, March 18, 2010

Songwriters And Publishers Continue To Score Tax Breaks

By Michael R. Morris, Esq.
(Mr. Morris recently moderated a California Copyright Conference's panel discussion "Monetizing Music Publishing" on March 9, 2010 in Los Angeles.)
Introduction.
Favorable tax law changes originally made in 2006 continues to offer significant tax planning opportunities for both songwriters and music publishers. The potential tax breaks for songwriters were especially ground-breaking, permitting self-created musical compositions or copyrights in self-created musical works to be electively treated as capital assets. Why does this matter? Because gain upon the sale of a long-term capital asset (i.e., an asset held more than 12 months) is generally taxed at an extremely favorably 15% rate, in lieu of regular personal income tax rates presently ranging as high as 35%. Thus, a seller of eligible self-created musical compositions or copyrights in musical works can save a bundle in taxes. Under a related law, buyers of these rights can elect to write off the purchase price over five years, enabling music publishers to take a tax deduction for the purchase price of copyrights (including songwriter advances) ratably over five years. Let's take a closer look at how these favorable tax laws work.

Elective Capital Gains Treatment for Self-Created Musical Works
Under prior law, copyrights, literary, musical or artistic compositions, letters or memoranda or similar property were not considered "capital assets" in the hands of its creator. Thus, a songwriter who sold his or her own songs, like an artist selling a painting, paid "ordinary" income tax rates (currently up to 35%). Conversely, the same songs in the hands of the music publisher who bought those copyrights were considered tax-favored "capital assets." Not only could the music publisher take a tax deduction for the cost of acquiring the copyrights (as a yearly percentage of the purchase price), but the subsequent resale of such copyrights would be at a tax favored capital gains rate of 15% (provided the songs had been held by a non-corporate publisher for at least the 1-year long-term capital gains period). Congress sought to redress this imbalance in tax rates between songwriters and publishers, stating in a report: “ … it is appropriate to allow taxpayers to treat as capital gain the income from a sale or exchange of musical compositions or copyrights in musical works the taxpayer created.”

Initially, this favorable capital gains election for self-created musical works was set to expire on December 31, 2010, but fortunately for songwriters, it was made permanent. However, this lower capital gains rate is not automatic! A songwriter selling compositions held more than 12 months must affirmatively elect the lower tax rate (sounds like a no-brainer, unless you want to voluntarily reduce the national debt).

This tax law does not define what constitutes a self-created "musical composition" or a self-created "musical work." For example, if one songwriter contributed lyrics and another music to a composition, should there be any tax difference? Probably not. But what if a writer's existing poem became the lyrics of a song to which another writer contributed the melody. That song would generally be covered by a single copyright, and in this author's opinion, the sale of that song should entitle the creators of both the lyrics (i.e. the poem) and the melody to favorable capital gains treatment, even though the sale of the stand-alone poem would not qualify.

The law also fails to address what music assets in addition to self-created songs qualify as "capital assets," only stating that both self-created "musical compositions" and "copyrights in musical works" qualify for elective capital gains treatment. Thus, royalty and other income from the exploitation of musical compositions is not eligible for reduced capital gain rates. However, the term "copyrights in musical works" is intuitively more expansive than "musical compositions," and could include copyrights in self-created sound recordings (which, of course, would be recordings of "musical compositions"). This distinction can have real financial impact upon an artist selling both self-created master recordings and the underlying self-created musical compositions. For example, an artist might sell a library of existing recordings concurrently with the copyrights in the underlying musical compositions to a film-TV music production house. Again, this author believes the transfer of master recordings constitutes the sale of a copyright in a self-created musical work, but the IRS has not yet issued any interpretive rulings.

Just when the 1-year holding period for long-term capital gains treatment begins can also be an interesting question. Obviously, the 1-year period begins from creation of the work for a songwriter who always retained ownership. But what about situations where a songwriter (or heirs) have rights to reclaim previously granted copyrights under the termination provisions of Sec. 203(a) of the Copyright Act? For example, grants made after 1977 of rights in a copyright may be terminated at any time during the 5-year period beginning 35 years after the date the original grant was executed. The right to the subsequent reversion of a previously transferred copyright gets triggered by the songwriter (or statutorily prescribed heirs) providing timely notice and making the proper filing under Sec. 203 (such right would then be "vested"). This notice must be given not less than 2 nor more than 10 years prior to the effective date of termination. Once the termination provisions of Sec. 203 have been met, the copyright automatically reverts at the designated future date during the 5-years following the expiration of the 35-year grant.

Since the rights to this future reversion can be sold, does the 1-year long term capital gain period begin from the date the Sec. 203 notice was given, enabling the sale of that right to be eligible for favorable tax treatment? Or does the 1-year holding period only run from the date the copyright actually reverted? The earliest effective date for termination under Sec. 203 is January 1, 2013 (for grants made on January 1, 1978). Only if the sale of a future reversion is considered the sale of a copyright in a musical work would the songwriter (or heirs) be eligible for reduced tax rates on sales made 1 year after complying with the Sec. 203 termination provisions. Otherwise, the 1-year long-term capital gain holding period would only commence from the date of actual copyright reversion, so that copyrights which begin reverting in 2013 would only then become eligible for long-term capital gain treatment (after being held for at least 12 months following reversion). Again, the IRS has issued no pronouncements on this issue.

Last year, the IRS did, however, issue proposed and temporary regulations providing that the election to treat a musical composition or copyright as a capital asset must be made separately as to each composition or copyright sold or exchanged during the taxable year. This election must be made on or before the due date of the tax return for the year of sale or exchange (including extensions). Accordingly, creators of musical compositions and copyrights in musical works who sold such rights in 2008 are reminded that an affirmative election is necessary to take advantage of favorable capital gains rates.

Five-Year Amortization Period for Musical Works.
Buyers of eligible musical works and copyrights also continue to get “tax bang” for the buck. Under prior law, the cost of acquiring a musical copyright generally had to be amortized and deducted over the period that the song was projected to generate income under the "income forecast" method (a frequently complicated computation).

Since 2006, any expenses paid or incurred creating or acquiring any "applicable musical property" can be amortized over the 5-year period beginning with the month during which the property was "placed in service" (for example, when a song gets exploited). Both songwriters who incurred expenses creating "applicable musical property" and music publishers who acquire them can take advantage of this business-friendly 5-year schedule. For example, assume a music publisher paid $1,000,000 for applicable musical property on January 2, 2008 and places it in service on January 31, 2008. Provided the 5-year amortization election is made, the publisher would get to deduct $200,000 as an expense for 2008 (and a like amount for 2009-2012). The term "applicable musical property" is defined as any musical composition (including any accompanying words) or any copyright with respect to a musical composition that is depreciable under the income forecast method. This means that sound recordings are probably not eligible for the 5-year amortization schedule.

Conclusion.
Congress has lowered tax rates for songwriters who sell their catalogs and electively take advantage of capital gains treatment, provided such songs were held more than one year. This is in stark contrast to the higher non-capital gain tax rates paid by authors and painters who sell their literary works or paintings. In addition, music publishers buying songs can recover the purchase price over an election 5-year period.

Questions do remain as to what constitute self-created musical works eligible for favorable capital rates. Does it include sound recordings and/or vested future reversion rights? Hopefully, the IRS will provide rulings that favorably resolve these issues. In the meantime, these tax incentives afforded songwriters and publishers will continue to provide a powerful stimuli to the music publishing market.
© 2009 Valensi Rose PLC
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Michael R. Morris is a former president of the California Copyright Conference and a principal in the Century City law firm of Valensi Rose PLC (www.vrmlaw.com). A former IRS trial attorney and Certified Specialist – Taxation Law (State Bar of California), Michael's practice emphasizes music, entertainment and tax-related matters.