Prince was an icon, one of the best selling artists of all time, and many of the songs are part of modern culture. But Prince zealously guarded his music. He broke with his record label, changed his name to a symbol, got back his original master recordings, and pulled his songs off streaming music services, all to make sure that only he controlled his art. It's a sad irony that Prince will have absolutely no say in what happens to his
music after his death. Though he was quick to hire lawyers to protect his music while he was alive, he did not hire a lawyer to draw up a will, leaving no instructions on how he wanted his music and estate handled. My guests are Terence Ross, a partner at Captain Euten Rosamond, and Laura's Wicker, a partner at Greenberg Glusker. Laura Prince is a state has been said to be worth as much as two million dollars, with a catalog of about a thousand songs. What's happening now to value
the estate? Well? Um, his executors will be filing or preparing to file with the I R S and a state tax return. Um. They'll be working to establish a value for his catalog that's in his name and likeness,
that's reasonable. Um. We've seen in the Michael Jackson estate where m his executors valued name and likeness such as two thousand dollars, a big blowback from the I R S. So I'm sure that Prince's legal advisors or the legal advisors for his executors will have their eye on that and try to come up with a reasonable but perhaps lower number UM for for Prince's name and likeness, his
music catalog, and the balance of his assets. Terry. Since Prince was notoriously protective of his music, is his legacy being protected at all? Or is it a dash for cash? It really is a dash for cash. From what I've read in the popular press. The executors are attempting during the period of their administration, are attempting to maximize the revenue from both the publishing catalog, the recordings, and his likeness.
He during his lifetime, Prince did not allow his image or likeness or name to be used for commercial purposes, and they are now out there trying to do deals involving his his likeness, his image, and his name on top of licensing UM the catalog of songs, and those deals may well be multi year deals that the heirs,
whoever the air eventually is determined to be, are stuck with. So, Laura, since he was protective of is likeness, it doesn't matter that everyone knew he was protective of his life likeness. Are we still going to see his face on T shirts and cups and maybe in ads? Whatever the executors determined is in the best interests of the estate, and the best interests of the estate are to maximize value.
So yes. Unfortunately, unless you create an estate plan that directs control of your name and likeness as well as your other assets UM, your executors are left with a fiduciary duty to maximize value for whoever your beneficiaries are. And Laura's speaking of beneficiaries, Prince had a sister, a half brother, and four step siblings. How will the estate
be distributed among them? So my understanding of Minnesota law is that the step siblings would share as full siblings, although I know that there has been UM discover ory and is already some dispute about who UM is going to take as an heir, And so the probate court in Minnesota is going to determine airship in this case, because again Prince didn't have a state planning documents that
set out who he wished to benefit Terry. Can you and this is a question that has been asked and will never get a real answer, but why someone who spent so much money paying lawyers to protect his music and his rights wouldn't have a document even indicating what
he wanted after his death. It's really criminal. And you would have thought, because of the good legal representation he had in the many UH disputes he had as to how his his his music was being used, that one of those lawyers would have said, hey, have you done any planning with respect here state? UH. And it's not like there aren't a lot of examples out there. There are a number of bands and artists recording our who
have paved the way in this area. He could have set up a foundation UM, or he could have set up a trust and then UM had these assets pour into those um upon his death and put in place a trustee or somebody in charge of the foundation with very explicit instructions as to how to license the works and license his likeness. And he didn't do any of that.
It's just very puzzling. Jim, Laura, have you ever had a case you work in a state planning, have you ever had a case where someone found it difficult to come to an agreement about the state, or you know, came to you and then said, well I can't do this now. Yeah. Um, I had a client who had end stage diabetes and had a very significant estate. UM and his wife came in. We created a state planning
doctor months for them. That would have protected their privacy, That would have made um her life after his passing really simple. UM. But despite many meetings and many phone calls he enjoyed calling to talk, he could not sign the documents and so we were left with a very significant intestacy. Now, Terry, what happens after whords? It goes to the I R s and then Mike. There's still funny about Michael Jackson's the state. I believe there are I mean, I don't know how many years that's been.
But part of it is because a state took such an aggressive position with respect the valuation of the assets that the I R S said, oh, come on, UM, We're we're gonna call you on that one and litigated UM. Here it sounds like they're doing the exact opposite, that they're aggressively maximizing revenue UM and to the extent they get these deals done quickly, UM, they'll have a concrete,
market based valuation of what the assets are worth. But at the end of the day, you know, the real winner out of all of this is the internal Revenue Service Because all of the state planning um that we've been talking about did not get done. There are many mechanisms where you can avoid big tax bills to the i RS. That happened, Laura about thirty seconds left. I understand that the taxes are going to be about fifty of the estate. Is that about right? Um? About a
huge chunk. Still, thank you so much for being with us. Laura's Wicker. She's a partner at Greenberg Glusker. Terry Ross is going to stay with us. As we're talking coming up about Paul McCartney suing Sony to gain control of the Beatles back catalog of music, and he's using a legal tactic that Prince once used. I'm June Grossel. You're listening to Bloomberg Law. This is Bloomberg b