Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Tax Issues In Charitable NIL Collectives In College Sports
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
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- 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
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
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.
The Article 8 Opt In
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.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
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.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Stranger to the Deed Rule
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.