Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email GroupSales@alm.com to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Tax Issues In Charitable NIL Collectives In College Sports

By Todd Kesterson and Alyssa R. Wan
February 01, 2023

The National Collegiate Athletic Association's (NCAA) adoption of an "Interim Name, Image and Likeness (NIL) Policy" opened the door for donors, alumni and fans to effectively pay college athletes, either directly or through NIL "collectives." With a growing number of donor groups forming NIL collectives as not-for-profit entities, there are questions about whether or not these collectives truly qualify as charitable organizations for tax purposes.

In 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court turned college athletics on its head by ruling that players have the right to accept money for his or her name, image and likeness (NIL). See, National Collegiate Athletic Association v. Alston, 141 S. Ct. 2141. Effective July 1, 2021, the NCAA adopted its "Interim Name, Image and Likeness Policy." Thus, amateur athletes can be paid to promote products, services and businesses.

While colleges and universities will continue to award valuable scholarships, now there is an opportunity for donors, alumni and fans to effectively pay NCAA athletes. Southern Methodist University, which in 1987 received the NCAA death penalty for paying players, recently reported that each athlete will earn $36,000 per year. NIL experts predict that Power Five conference player compensation will be a minimum of $50,000.

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at customercare@alm.com or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.

Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin Image

With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.

The Article 8 Opt In Image

The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.

Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York Image

In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?

Fresh Filings Image

Notable recent court filings in entertainment law.