Cappy_Smurf
Well-Known Member
The Millers have already shown that they will pay the LT when the team is in a position to compete at a high level. They've paid it twice.
Utah Jazz Ownership Restructured and Placed in Family Trust
- Thread starter MDAV28
- Start date
The Millers have already shown that they will pay the LT when the team is in a position to compete at a high level. They've paid it twice.
Cappy_Smurf
Well-Known Member
The downside of this is for all the fans who enjoy complaining about how cheap the Millers are will now have to shut their yap.
I don't think [name redacted] has commented in this thread, and maybe I shouldn't out him, but he told me in person well over 6 months ago that this was going to happen. On very good authority. Essentially, no, exactly, from the source this information came from today.
RJF
Well-Known Member
How is this a downside? Haha!
J
JAZZGASM
Guest
Typically a legacy trust protects a family from estate tax and creditors. While an effect may be to keep the team in Utah, I would have to guess it was largely done to protect the family from taxes by allowing it to skip a generation, which would make it easier to keep the team in Utah beyond Greg's generation. I've done this for a few families. There are some amazing benefits. Instead of having a beneficiary buy a house, the trust buys it and the beneficiary lives in it. Creditors can't touch it, and it isn't available in divorce to the non-beneficary spouse as it is a trust asset(generally).
The family will continue to be the beneficiaries of the growing value of the Jazz organization, even though the profits are invested back into the team and/or trust. Without seeing the trust to confirm, I'd imagine this was the intent, similar to every other legacy trust I've worked on.
And a legacy trust does not mean the team cannot be sold or moved. Typically a legacy trust is designed to last for generations, but the corpus could be the team or other assets (such as cash for selling the team, which would be reinvested). Often the trustees have a duty to maximize the trust assets as well as a duty to diversify assets. This duties can be largely waived depending on the language of the trust.
Bottom line, doing this definitely does not increase the odds of the team moving, and likely mean it will be around, but the intent I am sure was not purely philanthropic.
I would think the wording of the trust can be adjusted with stipulations that state the team cannot be moved.
I don't know if this is what happened, but it is something that is possible if desired, correct?
I just don't know if the trustee later can change anything they want to even if the original person starting the trust had something added in.
J
JAZZGASM
Guest
A change in ownership has to be approved by the NBA (just like any franchise). I really doubt the league would allow such a restriction, at least without a lot of stipulations that would give the NBA some control over decisions based on certain factors. And too be honest, I can't see many business owners doing that either, as it would greatly devalue the team when they want to sell it in the future.
I heard some stipulation that the trust itself would make no profits from the team--all profits will go back into the Jazz organization. Anyone know of the details on that? That's got the potential to be huge, if accurate, essentially giving the Jazz a substantially larger operating budget than they would have otherwise. (Maybe 50%? I'm not sure what the appropriate number would be.)
♪alt13
Well-Known Member
I imagine the board is going to be paid handsomely.
Miggs
Well-Known Member
Did I say we won't pay the LT?
Miggs
Well-Known Member
Yep. And executive salaries, specifically family members, who may have seen that money otherwise in the form of bonuses or what have you.
I feel like a business board is less likely to go into the LT than an owner with 100% control.