The plan backfired

Thor11 wrote:Duck---
She's definitely a POS but I question if she's even bright enough to plan this all out. My suspicion is that someone put her up to it. Since Sterling allegedly had a "plantation" mentality for a long time, I just assumed he rubbed some people the wrong way and one of them hit on a plan to take the motherfucker down. Now, given the fact that the end result of all this should be huge bank for Sterling, I'm even allowing for the possibility that an ally of his set it up. Sterling's not playing with a full deck right now; he strikes me as a maudlin old man whose brain has been rotting for a few years and I doubt that he's capable of concocting such a plan. However I could see a close friend of his doing so... someone who would stand to share or benefit from the old man's windfall. His wife maybe?

I dunno... but there's more to this story than meets the eye.


Duck weighing in with his sleuthing prowess....good show mate!


You can expect a nice accolade from PFKIA,,, he's probably composing as I post this....

Thor

duck wrote:

_HD_ wrote:

duck wrote:

_HD_ wrote:Here you go, Duck.  Here's a journalist who gets it...  They thought they were punishing him.  Instead--they just made Sterling's day everyday for the rest of his life...  In fact--that fucker's sterling no longer.  His name is now Donald Golden...    

[size=35]Donald Sterling's last laugh: Tax-free $2 billion Clippers sale[/size]

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] 
By Robert W. WoodJune 5, 2014 11:19 AM

• [url=https://www.tumblr.com/share/photo?clickthru=http%3A%2F%2Ffinance.yahoo.com%2Fnews%2Fdonald-sterlings-last-laugh-tax-231100454.html%3Fsoc_src%3Dmediacontentstory&caption=L.A. Clippers owner%C2%A0Donald Sterling%C2%A0seems to be sitting pretty. With these high numbers and Sterling%E2%80%99s advanced age%2C income and estate taxes look bleak%2C but are they%3F First%2C let%E2%80%99s take income tax. Mr. Sterling only paid %2412.5 million for the Clippers in][/url]
  

L.A. Clippers owner [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] seems to be sitting pretty. Sure, he endured bad press and probably would not have sold the team were it not for the [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]. He may not even get to do his own negotiating, since the NBA stepped in. But a $2 billion sale to Microsoft’s [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]isn’t half bad.





Still, taxes could eat a big piece of his outsize profit. With these high numbers and Sterling’s advanced age, income and estate taxes look bleak, but are they? First, let’s take income tax.
Mr. Sterling only paid $12.5 million for the Clippers in 1981. The Clippers are apparently a corporation, but is it a [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]? C corporations pay corporate taxes, S corporations don’t. The legal owner is the Sterling Family Trust, though that trust could just be a living trust that avoids probate but is not taxable.
[More from Forbes: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]]
Since Mr. Sterling is probably well advised, the corporation is likely an S corporation. That means whether Mr. Ballmer buys stock or assets, there should be no corporate tax. If the corporation had to pay tax on the $2 billion sale, corporate taxes alone could be $700 million! Then Mr. Sterling would have to pay tax himself when the remaining $1.4 billion was distributed! The two taxes combined could be over 50%.
Assuming the S corporation structure, though, Mr. Sterling and his wife Rochelle would just pay taxes on the deal personally. With a federal long-term capital gain rate of 20%, that’s approximately $397.5 million. It seems unlikely that Mr. Sterling will pay the Obamacare 3.8% net investment income tax. If the Sterlings spent over 500 hours per year on team-related management activities, it should mean the 3.8% tax wouldn’t apply.
What about California taxes? Unless the Sterlings try to quickly move to Nevada, Texas, or another no-tax state, California will collect nicely. The Golden State's top rate rose from 10.3% to 13.3% in 2012. That makes the California income tax on the sale over $264 million. Notably, California doesn’t give any break to long-term capital gain.
[More from Forbes: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[size=16]Sterling to Sell Clippers to Ballmer, Drop LawsuitPlay Video
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.][/size]
Some say that’s the worst part of the state’s tax law, making California capital gain taxed among the highest in any state—or country—in the world. See[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]. It is one reason California is constantly pursuing people who exit right before making a sale.
In all, federal and California income taxes total about $662 million, about a third of the $2 billion sale price. Estate taxes are another matter. It is likely that the Sterlings have an estate plan, and it may in part rely on the team structure. Such things can materially reduce an estate tax bill. But cash is harder, and the sale could be a big hit to the Sterlings’ estate plan.
If the sale nets $2 billion, and the Sterlings pay $662 million in income tax, that leaves $1,338,000,000. Mr. and Mrs. Sterling each get only $5.34 million tax-free, leaving estate tax of over $500 million. Maybe. After all, it's likely that Mr. Sterling has good tax advisers, so don’t look for this check to be written just yet.
First, recall that he is suing the league and claiming $1 billion in damages. That could be an offset. He might even try to report his gain on sale as capital gain, but deduct losses as ordinary! Yet latest reports say Mr. Sterling is dropping his suit, agreeing to the sale.
That could mean Mr. Sterling will try to roll over his gain into other investments. How is that possible? [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] of the tax code allows you to defer taxes when your property is taken involuntarily, like eminent domain. Mr. Sterling can argue the Clippers sale was forced on him by the NBA.
What's more, Mr. Sterling wouldn’t have to buy another team, as long as within 2 years, he invests the money in similar or related investments. Those standards are pretty loose, allowing him to diversify his investments.
Incredibly, Mr. Sterling might even do some estate planning at the same time. Assuming his basis in the Clippers is only the $12.5 million he paid, it would also be his basis in the replacement investments. Upon death, there’s a step up in basis to market value. That could mean that by dying, his $662 million income tax bill just goes away!
[More from Forbes: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]]
Sure, he might face estate taxes, but the basis step up prevents paying income taxes and estate taxes at the same time. Mr. Sterling’s age could give his cadre of advisers big reasons to try Section 1033 treatment. Other ideas might be a structured sale or installment sale deal that would stretch out payments over time. That can work well but may not be ideal for someone of advanced years.
In that sense, the Section 1033 involuntary conversion idea could be a bonanza. If successful, it could eliminate not only the federal income taxes, but California's painful taxes as well. That's right, California replicates Section 1033. Sure, the IRS or the California Franchise Tax Board could disagree. Sure, he or his estate might have to go to court. But Mr. Sterling might enjoy that and there's plenty at stake.
Bottom line? The NBA may be doing Mr. Sterling a big favor.
May be?  Duh?

No argument here.  You sold me on the concept when you explained the advantages of a forced sale.

Sterling did indeed take a PR beating and he will be forever remembered for his rambling racist rant.  However, financially he wins big for the incident.

It's unfortunate that in this day/age someone as privileged as Sterling would harbor such ignorance and distemperance toward a whole race of people, as he apparently does...and yes, there are those out there who if given a gun with two bullets in a room with Hitler, Bin Laden and Sterling--they'd pump both of them into Sterling.  However, what he said was said in private behind closed doors and illegally recorded.  Had this sale not worked out for him so overwhelmingly financially--he would have undoubtedly followed through with a multi-billion $$$$ suit against the league, and guess what chances he would have had to prevail?  The NBA Commissioner made a bold move--no doubt.  However, next to Sterling himself--he's got to be the happiest of all that this went down the way it did because I think it's fairly clear that a court would rule he overstepped his bounds by a wide margin here and exposed the NBA to potentially BILLIONS of punitive damages...not to mention the prospective billion or two in actual damages...  There are things called wiretapping laws in this country.  In varies from state to state as to where one or both parties to a conversation must consent to a recording--but in this case apparently--what she did was illegal.  What do you think the chances are that a judge would find Sterling was offered anything in the way of due process by the league in relying exclusively on an illegal recording that wasn't even yet conclusively established to be Sterling's voice in taking action of the magnitude they did?


Finally, I'm not excusing what Sterling said, but let's not be hypocrites--we ALL say things behind closed doors that are not intended for public consumption and we'd be embarrassed by if becoming public.  You, me, Ghandi, EVERYBODY.  The biggest scumbag of all in this whole deal is the little bimbo twat who breached any sense of integrity and certainly trust in making the recording and putting it out in public to begin with, in my humble opinion...    

She's definitely a POS but I question if she's even bright enough to plan this all out.  My suspicion is that someone put her up to it.  Since Sterling allegedly had a "plantation" mentality for a long time, I just assumed he rubbed some people the wrong way and one of them hit on a plan to take the motherfucker down.  Now, given the fact that the end result of all this should be huge bank for Sterling, I'm even allowing for the possibility that an ally of his set it up.  Sterling's not playing with a full deck right now; he strikes me as a maudlin old man whose brain has been rotting for a few years and I doubt that he's capable of concocting such a plan.  However I could see a close friend of his doing so... someone who would stand to share or benefit from the old man's windfall.  His wife maybe?

I dunno... but there's more to this story than meets the eye.

_HD_ wrote:

duck wrote:

_HD_ wrote:

duck wrote:

_HD_ wrote:Here you go, Duck.  Here's a journalist who gets it...  They thought they were punishing him.  Instead--they just made Sterling's day everyday for the rest of his life...  In fact--that fucker's sterling no longer.  His name is now Donald Golden...    

[size=35]Donald Sterling's last laugh: Tax-free $2 billion Clippers sale[/size]

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] 
By Robert W. WoodJune 5, 2014 11:19 AM

• [url=https://www.tumblr.com/share/photo?clickthru=http%3A%2F%2Ffinance.yahoo.com%2Fnews%2Fdonald-sterlings-last-laugh-tax-231100454.html%3Fsoc_src%3Dmediacontentstory&caption=L.A. Clippers owner%C2%A0Donald Sterling%C2%A0seems to be sitting pretty. With these high numbers and Sterling%E2%80%99s advanced age%2C income and estate taxes look bleak%2C but are they%3F First%2C let%E2%80%99s take income tax. Mr. Sterling only paid %2412.5 million for the Clippers in][/url]
  

L.A. Clippers owner [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] seems to be sitting pretty. Sure, he endured bad press and probably would not have sold the team were it not for the [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]. He may not even get to do his own negotiating, since the NBA stepped in. But a $2 billion sale to Microsoft’s [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]isn’t half bad.





Still, taxes could eat a big piece of his outsize profit. With these high numbers and Sterling’s advanced age, income and estate taxes look bleak, but are they? First, let’s take income tax.
Mr. Sterling only paid $12.5 million for the Clippers in 1981. The Clippers are apparently a corporation, but is it a [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]? C corporations pay corporate taxes, S corporations don’t. The legal owner is the Sterling Family Trust, though that trust could just be a living trust that avoids probate but is not taxable.
[More from Forbes: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]]
Since Mr. Sterling is probably well advised, the corporation is likely an S corporation. That means whether Mr. Ballmer buys stock or assets, there should be no corporate tax. If the corporation had to pay tax on the $2 billion sale, corporate taxes alone could be $700 million! Then Mr. Sterling would have to pay tax himself when the remaining $1.4 billion was distributed! The two taxes combined could be over 50%.
Assuming the S corporation structure, though, Mr. Sterling and his wife Rochelle would just pay taxes on the deal personally. With a federal long-term capital gain rate of 20%, that’s approximately $397.5 million. It seems unlikely that Mr. Sterling will pay the Obamacare 3.8% net investment income tax. If the Sterlings spent over 500 hours per year on team-related management activities, it should mean the 3.8% tax wouldn’t apply.
What about California taxes? Unless the Sterlings try to quickly move to Nevada, Texas, or another no-tax state, California will collect nicely. The Golden State's top rate rose from 10.3% to 13.3% in 2012. That makes the California income tax on the sale over $264 million. Notably, California doesn’t give any break to long-term capital gain.
[More from Forbes: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[size=16]Sterling to Sell Clippers to Ballmer, Drop LawsuitPlay Video
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.][/size]
Some say that’s the worst part of the state’s tax law, making California capital gain taxed among the highest in any state—or country—in the world. See[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]. It is one reason California is constantly pursuing people who exit right before making a sale.
In all, federal and California income taxes total about $662 million, about a third of the $2 billion sale price. Estate taxes are another matter. It is likely that the Sterlings have an estate plan, and it may in part rely on the team structure. Such things can materially reduce an estate tax bill. But cash is harder, and the sale could be a big hit to the Sterlings’ estate plan.
If the sale nets $2 billion, and the Sterlings pay $662 million in income tax, that leaves $1,338,000,000. Mr. and Mrs. Sterling each get only $5.34 million tax-free, leaving estate tax of over $500 million. Maybe. After all, it's likely that Mr. Sterling has good tax advisers, so don’t look for this check to be written just yet.
First, recall that he is suing the league and claiming $1 billion in damages. That could be an offset. He might even try to report his gain on sale as capital gain, but deduct losses as ordinary! Yet latest reports say Mr. Sterling is dropping his suit, agreeing to the sale.
That could mean Mr. Sterling will try to roll over his gain into other investments. How is that possible? [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] of the tax code allows you to defer taxes when your property is taken involuntarily, like eminent domain. Mr. Sterling can argue the Clippers sale was forced on him by the NBA.
What's more, Mr. Sterling wouldn’t have to buy another team, as long as within 2 years, he invests the money in similar or related investments. Those standards are pretty loose, allowing him to diversify his investments.
Incredibly, Mr. Sterling might even do some estate planning at the same time. Assuming his basis in the Clippers is only the $12.5 million he paid, it would also be his basis in the replacement investments. Upon death, there’s a step up in basis to market value. That could mean that by dying, his $662 million income tax bill just goes away!
[More from Forbes: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]]
Sure, he might face estate taxes, but the basis step up prevents paying income taxes and estate taxes at the same time. Mr. Sterling’s age could give his cadre of advisers big reasons to try Section 1033 treatment. Other ideas might be a structured sale or installment sale deal that would stretch out payments over time. That can work well but may not be ideal for someone of advanced years.
In that sense, the Section 1033 involuntary conversion idea could be a bonanza. If successful, it could eliminate not only the federal income taxes, but California's painful taxes as well. That's right, California replicates Section 1033. Sure, the IRS or the California Franchise Tax Board could disagree. Sure, he or his estate might have to go to court. But Mr. Sterling might enjoy that and there's plenty at stake.
Bottom line? The NBA may be doing Mr. Sterling a big favor.
May be?  Duh?

No argument here.  You sold me on the concept when you explained the advantages of a forced sale.

Sterling did indeed take a PR beating and he will be forever remembered for his rambling racist rant.  However, financially he wins big for the incident.

It's unfortunate that in this day/age someone as privileged as Sterling would harbor such ignorance and distemperance toward a whole race of people, as he apparently does...and yes, there are those out there who if given a gun with two bullets in a room with Hitler, Bin Laden and Sterling--they'd pump both of them into Sterling.  However, what he said was said in private behind closed doors and illegally recorded.  Had this sale not worked out for him so overwhelmingly financially--he would have undoubtedly followed through with a multi-billion $$$$ suit against the league, and guess what chances he would have had to prevail?  The NBA Commissioner made a bold move--no doubt.  However, next to Sterling himself--he's got to be the happiest of all that this went down the way it did because I think it's fairly clear that a court would rule he overstepped his bounds by a wide margin here and exposed the NBA to potentially BILLIONS of punitive damages...not to mention the prospective billion or two in actual damages...  There are things called wiretapping laws in this country.  In varies from state to state as to where one or both parties to a conversation must consent to a recording--but in this case apparently--what she did was illegal.  What do you think the chances are that a judge would find Sterling was offered anything in the way of due process by the league in relying exclusively on an illegal recording that wasn't even yet conclusively established to be Sterling's voice in taking action of the magnitude they did?


Finally, I'm not excusing what Sterling said, but let's not be hypocrites--we ALL say things behind closed doors that are not intended for public consumption and we'd be embarrassed by if becoming public.  You, me, Ghandi, EVERYBODY.  The biggest scumbag of all in this whole deal is the little bimbo twat who breached any sense of integrity and certainly trust in making the recording and putting it out in public to begin with, in my humble opinion...    

She's definitely a POS but I question if she's even bright enough to plan this all out.  My suspicion is that someone put her up to it.  Since Sterling allegedly had a "plantation" mentality for a long time, I just assumed he rubbed some people the wrong way and one of them hit on a plan to take the motherfucker down.  Now, given the fact that the end result of all this should be huge bank for Sterling, I'm even allowing for the possibility that an ally of his set it up.  Sterling's not playing with a full deck right now; he strikes me as a maudlin old man whose brain has been rotting for a few years and I doubt that he's capable of concocting such a plan.  However I could see a close friend of his doing so... someone who would stand to share or benefit from the old man's windfall.  His wife maybe?

I dunno... but there's more to this story than meets the eye.

You're WAY overcomplicating this, Duck.  This is a classic case of a sleazy little gold digger bimbo who apparently didn't get her way on something who was either trying to initially blackmail him with the tape and he didn't play ball--or just plain wanted to try to hurt the man.  She went public with the tape and Sterling turned chicken shit into chicken salad with a very savvy strategy to keep on smilin' when most would just fall in step to validate her intentions...


Finally, you make Sterling out to be some old bumbling dementia patient with drool running down his lip...  Nothing could be further from the truth.  This is a self-made man who became that way purely by getting himself a good education, working hard and exploiting every opportunity that came his way--just like he did with the Clipper's situation.  He didn't plan for this to happen.  He didn't choose for it to be so...but since it DID happen--he made it all work out into his best interests... That's what successful people do.


I bet he sent the little slut a fruit/nut loaf for what she did--and look at the calendar, it's not even fucking Christmas...   

duck wrote:

_HD_ wrote:

duck wrote:

_HD_ wrote:

duck wrote:

_HD_ wrote:Here you go, Duck.  Here's a journalist who gets it...  They thought they were punishing him.  Instead--they just made Sterling's day everyday for the rest of his life...  In fact--that fucker's sterling no longer.  His name is now Donald Golden...    

[size=35]Donald Sterling's last laugh: Tax-free $2 billion Clippers sale[/size]

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] 
By Robert W. WoodJune 5, 2014 11:19 AM

• [url=https://www.tumblr.com/share/photo?clickthru=http%3A%2F%2Ffinance.yahoo.com%2Fnews%2Fdonald-sterlings-last-laugh-tax-231100454.html%3Fsoc_src%3Dmediacontentstory&caption=L.A. Clippers owner%C2%A0Donald Sterling%C2%A0seems to be sitting pretty. With these high numbers and Sterling%E2%80%99s advanced age%2C income and estate taxes look bleak%2C but are they%3F First%2C let%E2%80%99s take income tax. Mr. Sterling only paid %2412.5 million for the Clippers in][/url]
  

L.A. Clippers owner [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] seems to be sitting pretty. Sure, he endured bad press and probably would not have sold the team were it not for the [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]. He may not even get to do his own negotiating, since the NBA stepped in. But a $2 billion sale to Microsoft’s [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]isn’t half bad.





Still, taxes could eat a big piece of his outsize profit. With these high numbers and Sterling’s advanced age, income and estate taxes look bleak, but are they? First, let’s take income tax.
Mr. Sterling only paid $12.5 million for the Clippers in 1981. The Clippers are apparently a corporation, but is it a [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]? C corporations pay corporate taxes, S corporations don’t. The legal owner is the Sterling Family Trust, though that trust could just be a living trust that avoids probate but is not taxable.
[More from Forbes: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]]
Since Mr. Sterling is probably well advised, the corporation is likely an S corporation. That means whether Mr. Ballmer buys stock or assets, there should be no corporate tax. If the corporation had to pay tax on the $2 billion sale, corporate taxes alone could be $700 million! Then Mr. Sterling would have to pay tax himself when the remaining $1.4 billion was distributed! The two taxes combined could be over 50%.
Assuming the S corporation structure, though, Mr. Sterling and his wife Rochelle would just pay taxes on the deal personally. With a federal long-term capital gain rate of 20%, that’s approximately $397.5 million. It seems unlikely that Mr. Sterling will pay the Obamacare 3.8% net investment income tax. If the Sterlings spent over 500 hours per year on team-related management activities, it should mean the 3.8% tax wouldn’t apply.
What about California taxes? Unless the Sterlings try to quickly move to Nevada, Texas, or another no-tax state, California will collect nicely. The Golden State's top rate rose from 10.3% to 13.3% in 2012. That makes the California income tax on the sale over $264 million. Notably, California doesn’t give any break to long-term capital gain.
[More from Forbes: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[size=16]Sterling to Sell Clippers to Ballmer, Drop LawsuitPlay Video
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.][/size]
Some say that’s the worst part of the state’s tax law, making California capital gain taxed among the highest in any state—or country—in the world. See[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]. It is one reason California is constantly pursuing people who exit right before making a sale.
In all, federal and California income taxes total about $662 million, about a third of the $2 billion sale price. Estate taxes are another matter. It is likely that the Sterlings have an estate plan, and it may in part rely on the team structure. Such things can materially reduce an estate tax bill. But cash is harder, and the sale could be a big hit to the Sterlings’ estate plan.
If the sale nets $2 billion, and the Sterlings pay $662 million in income tax, that leaves $1,338,000,000. Mr. and Mrs. Sterling each get only $5.34 million tax-free, leaving estate tax of over $500 million. Maybe. After all, it's likely that Mr. Sterling has good tax advisers, so don’t look for this check to be written just yet.
First, recall that he is suing the league and claiming $1 billion in damages. That could be an offset. He might even try to report his gain on sale as capital gain, but deduct losses as ordinary! Yet latest reports say Mr. Sterling is dropping his suit, agreeing to the sale.
That could mean Mr. Sterling will try to roll over his gain into other investments. How is that possible? [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] of the tax code allows you to defer taxes when your property is taken involuntarily, like eminent domain. Mr. Sterling can argue the Clippers sale was forced on him by the NBA.
What's more, Mr. Sterling wouldn’t have to buy another team, as long as within 2 years, he invests the money in similar or related investments. Those standards are pretty loose, allowing him to diversify his investments.
Incredibly, Mr. Sterling might even do some estate planning at the same time. Assuming his basis in the Clippers is only the $12.5 million he paid, it would also be his basis in the replacement investments. Upon death, there’s a step up in basis to market value. That could mean that by dying, his $662 million income tax bill just goes away!
[More from Forbes: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]]
Sure, he might face estate taxes, but the basis step up prevents paying income taxes and estate taxes at the same time. Mr. Sterling’s age could give his cadre of advisers big reasons to try Section 1033 treatment. Other ideas might be a structured sale or installment sale deal that would stretch out payments over time. That can work well but may not be ideal for someone of advanced years.
In that sense, the Section 1033 involuntary conversion idea could be a bonanza. If successful, it could eliminate not only the federal income taxes, but California's painful taxes as well. That's right, California replicates Section 1033. Sure, the IRS or the California Franchise Tax Board could disagree. Sure, he or his estate might have to go to court. But Mr. Sterling might enjoy that and there's plenty at stake.
Bottom line? The NBA may be doing Mr. Sterling a big favor.
May be?  Duh?

No argument here.  You sold me on the concept when you explained the advantages of a forced sale.

Sterling did indeed take a PR beating and he will be forever remembered for his rambling racist rant.  However, financially he wins big for the incident.

It's unfortunate that in this day/age someone as privileged as Sterling would harbor such ignorance and distemperance toward a whole race of people, as he apparently does...and yes, there are those out there who if given a gun with two bullets in a room with Hitler, Bin Laden and Sterling--they'd pump both of them into Sterling.  However, what he said was said in private behind closed doors and illegally recorded.  Had this sale not worked out for him so overwhelmingly financially--he would have undoubtedly followed through with a multi-billion $$$$ suit against the league, and guess what chances he would have had to prevail?  The NBA Commissioner made a bold move--no doubt.  However, next to Sterling himself--he's got to be the happiest of all that this went down the way it did because I think it's fairly clear that a court would rule he overstepped his bounds by a wide margin here and exposed the NBA to potentially BILLIONS of punitive damages...not to mention the prospective billion or two in actual damages...  There are things called wiretapping laws in this country.  In varies from state to state as to where one or both parties to a conversation must consent to a recording--but in this case apparently--what she did was illegal.  What do you think the chances are that a judge would find Sterling was offered anything in the way of due process by the league in relying exclusively on an illegal recording that wasn't even yet conclusively established to be Sterling's voice in taking action of the magnitude they did?


Finally, I'm not excusing what Sterling said, but let's not be hypocrites--we ALL say things behind closed doors that are not intended for public consumption and we'd be embarrassed by if becoming public.  You, me, Ghandi, EVERYBODY.  The biggest scumbag of all in this whole deal is the little bimbo twat who breached any sense of integrity and certainly trust in making the recording and putting it out in public to begin with, in my humble opinion...    

She's definitely a POS but I question if she's even bright enough to plan this all out.  My suspicion is that someone put her up to it.  Since Sterling allegedly had a "plantation" mentality for a long time, I just assumed he rubbed some people the wrong way and one of them hit on a plan to take the motherfucker down.  Now, given the fact that the end result of all this should be huge bank for Sterling, I'm even allowing for the possibility that an ally of his set it up.  Sterling's not playing with a full deck right now; he strikes me as a maudlin old man whose brain has been rotting for a few years and I doubt that he's capable of concocting such a plan.  However I could see a close friend of his doing so... someone who would stand to share or benefit from the old man's windfall.  His wife maybe?

I dunno... but there's more to this story than meets the eye.

You're WAY overcomplicating this, Duck.  This is a classic case of a sleazy little gold digger bimbo who apparently didn't get her way on something who was either trying to initially blackmail him with the tape and he didn't play ball--or just plain wanted to try to hurt the man.  She went public with the tape and Sterling turned chicken shit into chicken salad with a very savvy strategy to keep on smilin' when most would just fall in step to validate her intentions...


Finally, you make Sterling out to be some old bumbling dementia patient with drool running down his lip...  Nothing could be further from the truth.  This is a self-made man who became that way purely by getting himself a good education, working hard and exploiting every opportunity that came his way--just like he did with the Clipper's situation.  He didn't plan for this to happen.  He didn't choose for it to be so...but since it DID happen--he made it all work out into his best interests... That's what successful people do.


I bet he sent the little slut a fruit/nut loaf for what she did--and look at the calendar, it's not even fucking Christmas...   

Well, I may be underestimating Sterling but I think you're overestimating his little bimbo.  I think there's a good possibility someone else was also involved in the plan.

And regarding Sterling, you're correct that he was a very smart businessman -- at least in the past.  However, listening to him on the tape and watching him on interviews, I see a rambling old fart who may be showing signs of dementia.  I certainly wouldn't call him sharp as a tack.

_HD_ wrote:

duck wrote:

_HD_ wrote:

duck wrote:

_HD_ wrote:

duck wrote:

_HD_ wrote:Here you go, Duck.  Here's a journalist who gets it...  They thought they were punishing him.  Instead--they just made Sterling's day everyday for the rest of his life...  In fact--that fucker's sterling no longer.  His name is now Donald Golden...    

[size=35]Donald Sterling's last laugh: Tax-free $2 billion Clippers sale[/size]

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] 
By Robert W. WoodJune 5, 2014 11:19 AM

• [url=https://www.tumblr.com/share/photo?clickthru=http%3A%2F%2Ffinance.yahoo.com%2Fnews%2Fdonald-sterlings-last-laugh-tax-231100454.html%3Fsoc_src%3Dmediacontentstory&caption=L.A. Clippers owner%C2%A0Donald Sterling%C2%A0seems to be sitting pretty. With these high numbers and Sterling%E2%80%99s advanced age%2C income and estate taxes look bleak%2C but are they%3F First%2C let%E2%80%99s take income tax. Mr. Sterling only paid %2412.5 million for the Clippers in][/url]
  

L.A. Clippers owner [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] seems to be sitting pretty. Sure, he endured bad press and probably would not have sold the team were it not for the [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]. He may not even get to do his own negotiating, since the NBA stepped in. But a $2 billion sale to Microsoft’s [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]isn’t half bad.





Still, taxes could eat a big piece of his outsize profit. With these high numbers and Sterling’s advanced age, income and estate taxes look bleak, but are they? First, let’s take income tax.
Mr. Sterling only paid $12.5 million for the Clippers in 1981. The Clippers are apparently a corporation, but is it a [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]? C corporations pay corporate taxes, S corporations don’t. The legal owner is the Sterling Family Trust, though that trust could just be a living trust that avoids probate but is not taxable.
[More from Forbes: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]]
Since Mr. Sterling is probably well advised, the corporation is likely an S corporation. That means whether Mr. Ballmer buys stock or assets, there should be no corporate tax. If the corporation had to pay tax on the $2 billion sale, corporate taxes alone could be $700 million! Then Mr. Sterling would have to pay tax himself when the remaining $1.4 billion was distributed! The two taxes combined could be over 50%.
Assuming the S corporation structure, though, Mr. Sterling and his wife Rochelle would just pay taxes on the deal personally. With a federal long-term capital gain rate of 20%, that’s approximately $397.5 million. It seems unlikely that Mr. Sterling will pay the Obamacare 3.8% net investment income tax. If the Sterlings spent over 500 hours per year on team-related management activities, it should mean the 3.8% tax wouldn’t apply.
What about California taxes? Unless the Sterlings try to quickly move to Nevada, Texas, or another no-tax state, California will collect nicely. The Golden State's top rate rose from 10.3% to 13.3% in 2012. That makes the California income tax on the sale over $264 million. Notably, California doesn’t give any break to long-term capital gain.
[More from Forbes: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[size=16]Sterling to Sell Clippers to Ballmer, Drop LawsuitPlay Video
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.][/size]
Some say that’s the worst part of the state’s tax law, making California capital gain taxed among the highest in any state—or country—in the world. See[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]. It is one reason California is constantly pursuing people who exit right before making a sale.
In all, federal and California income taxes total about $662 million, about a third of the $2 billion sale price. Estate taxes are another matter. It is likely that the Sterlings have an estate plan, and it may in part rely on the team structure. Such things can materially reduce an estate tax bill. But cash is harder, and the sale could be a big hit to the Sterlings’ estate plan.
If the sale nets $2 billion, and the Sterlings pay $662 million in income tax, that leaves $1,338,000,000. Mr. and Mrs. Sterling each get only $5.34 million tax-free, leaving estate tax of over $500 million. Maybe. After all, it's likely that Mr. Sterling has good tax advisers, so don’t look for this check to be written just yet.
First, recall that he is suing the league and claiming $1 billion in damages. That could be an offset. He might even try to report his gain on sale as capital gain, but deduct losses as ordinary! Yet latest reports say Mr. Sterling is dropping his suit, agreeing to the sale.
That could mean Mr. Sterling will try to roll over his gain into other investments. How is that possible? [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] of the tax code allows you to defer taxes when your property is taken involuntarily, like eminent domain. Mr. Sterling can argue the Clippers sale was forced on him by the NBA.
What's more, Mr. Sterling wouldn’t have to buy another team, as long as within 2 years, he invests the money in similar or related investments. Those standards are pretty loose, allowing him to diversify his investments.
Incredibly, Mr. Sterling might even do some estate planning at the same time. Assuming his basis in the Clippers is only the $12.5 million he paid, it would also be his basis in the replacement investments. Upon death, there’s a step up in basis to market value. That could mean that by dying, his $662 million income tax bill just goes away!
[More from Forbes: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]]
Sure, he might face estate taxes, but the basis step up prevents paying income taxes and estate taxes at the same time. Mr. Sterling’s age could give his cadre of advisers big reasons to try Section 1033 treatment. Other ideas might be a structured sale or installment sale deal that would stretch out payments over time. That can work well but may not be ideal for someone of advanced years.
In that sense, the Section 1033 involuntary conversion idea could be a bonanza. If successful, it could eliminate not only the federal income taxes, but California's painful taxes as well. That's right, California replicates Section 1033. Sure, the IRS or the California Franchise Tax Board could disagree. Sure, he or his estate might have to go to court. But Mr. Sterling might enjoy that and there's plenty at stake.
Bottom line? The NBA may be doing Mr. Sterling a big favor.
May be?  Duh?

No argument here.  You sold me on the concept when you explained the advantages of a forced sale.

Sterling did indeed take a PR beating and he will be forever remembered for his rambling racist rant.  However, financially he wins big for the incident.

It's unfortunate that in this day/age someone as privileged as Sterling would harbor such ignorance and distemperance toward a whole race of people, as he apparently does...and yes, there are those out there who if given a gun with two bullets in a room with Hitler, Bin Laden and Sterling--they'd pump both of them into Sterling.  However, what he said was said in private behind closed doors and illegally recorded.  Had this sale not worked out for him so overwhelmingly financially--he would have undoubtedly followed through with a multi-billion $$$$ suit against the league, and guess what chances he would have had to prevail?  The NBA Commissioner made a bold move--no doubt.  However, next to Sterling himself--he's got to be the happiest of all that this went down the way it did because I think it's fairly clear that a court would rule he overstepped his bounds by a wide margin here and exposed the NBA to potentially BILLIONS of punitive damages...not to mention the prospective billion or two in actual damages...  There are things called wiretapping laws in this country.  In varies from state to state as to where one or both parties to a conversation must consent to a recording--but in this case apparently--what she did was illegal.  What do you think the chances are that a judge would find Sterling was offered anything in the way of due process by the league in relying exclusively on an illegal recording that wasn't even yet conclusively established to be Sterling's voice in taking action of the magnitude they did?


Finally, I'm not excusing what Sterling said, but let's not be hypocrites--we ALL say things behind closed doors that are not intended for public consumption and we'd be embarrassed by if becoming public.  You, me, Ghandi, EVERYBODY.  The biggest scumbag of all in this whole deal is the little bimbo twat who breached any sense of integrity and certainly trust in making the recording and putting it out in public to begin with, in my humble opinion...    

She's definitely a POS but I question if she's even bright enough to plan this all out.  My suspicion is that someone put her up to it.  Since Sterling allegedly had a "plantation" mentality for a long time, I just assumed he rubbed some people the wrong way and one of them hit on a plan to take the motherfucker down.  Now, given the fact that the end result of all this should be huge bank for Sterling, I'm even allowing for the possibility that an ally of his set it up.  Sterling's not playing with a full deck right now; he strikes me as a maudlin old man whose brain has been rotting for a few years and I doubt that he's capable of concocting such a plan.  However I could see a close friend of his doing so... someone who would stand to share or benefit from the old man's windfall.  His wife maybe?

I dunno... but there's more to this story than meets the eye.

You're WAY overcomplicating this, Duck.  This is a classic case of a sleazy little gold digger bimbo who apparently didn't get her way on something who was either trying to initially blackmail him with the tape and he didn't play ball--or just plain wanted to try to hurt the man.  She went public with the tape and Sterling turned chicken shit into chicken salad with a very savvy strategy to keep on smilin' when most would just fall in step to validate her intentions...


Finally, you make Sterling out to be some old bumbling dementia patient with drool running down his lip...  Nothing could be further from the truth.  This is a self-made man who became that way purely by getting himself a good education, working hard and exploiting every opportunity that came his way--just like he did with the Clipper's situation.  He didn't plan for this to happen.  He didn't choose for it to be so...but since it DID happen--he made it all work out into his best interests... That's what successful people do.


I bet he sent the little slut a fruit/nut loaf for what she did--and look at the calendar, it's not even fucking Christmas...   

Well, I may be underestimating Sterling but I think you're overestimating his little bimbo.  I think there's a good possibility someone else was also involved in the plan.

And regarding Sterling, you're correct that he was a very smart businessman -- at least in the past.  However, listening to him on the tape and watching him on interviews, I see a rambling old fart who may be showing signs of dementia.  I certainly wouldn't call him sharp as a tack.

Proof is, as they say, in the pudding, Duck...  This whole response from the Sterling side to a very challenging situation was played precisely as it should have been to turn a disaster for most people into a career-defining exploit.  The man recognized a unique opportunity in a forced action for an exit strategy on a TWO BILLION dollar asset to walk away from the table TAX FREE.  Maybe the guy sips a little too much cognac--but what this dude just engineered for himself out of this fiasco isn't pulled off by people who don't play the game to come out the gladiator riding away from the fracas bareback on the other side's prized steed...  You better fucking believe it. 

_HD_ wrote:

duck wrote:

_HD_ wrote:

duck wrote:

_HD_ wrote:

_HD_ wrote:

duck wrote:

JnC4GB wrote:Anyone up for some pancakes?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Sometimes the entire culture evolves, and as people who exist within the culture, we evolve along with it. The evolution can be seismic—making films with derisive attitudes toward women, gay people, or minorities less palatable, for example.

Duck was correct in saying that it's "only a matter of time." 
Whether you choose to be out in front of it, go along with it when it occurs, or to stand on your porch, shaking your fist and yelling at kids to get off your lawn is entirely up to you.

Change can be difficult to accept, especially when it is forced upon us. It's why I always try to keep this Bob Dylan line in mind: Those not busy being born are busy dying.

Old dogs CAN learn new tricks, my friends.

You make a good point about cultures evolving, JnC.  The mindset of Americans is completely different in 2014 than it was in 1914 (before the advent of WW 1) and no doubt will be completely different in 2114.  Our perceptions of women and minorities, for example, have changed dramatically since the post-Teddy Roosevelt era.  It's entirely possible that in 2114 white Americans will be a scorned minority group.

As I've said many times before, I do not see the compelling need to change the name of the Redskins.  I don't think the term is meant in a derogatory sense and the graphics on the team logo are dignified and in no way insulting or provocative.  (In contrast, I feel the Cleveland Indians' logo is indeed a racist caricature.)  Many Native Americans have no issue with the name of the Washington Redskins and if Snyder is throwing some money at Indian causes, where's the beef?  Much ado about nothing, IMHO.

Having said that, I also don't understand the rigid RESISTANCE to change the name.  Teams move to different cities all the time and often change names in the process.  Uniform changes are a dime a dozen.  What's the big deal about changing the name from the Redskins to the Bravehearts or whatever?  Especially if the NFL picks up the tab for any related marketing costs and throws a few extra dollars in Snyder's pocket.

Is this where you draw the line in the sand??  I think not.

Rightly or wrongly, Snyder is going to be pressured into making the change.  
Really?  I must have missed something, Duck...  Just exactly how might they go about that and prevail?  What force of leverage do they have to *pressure* Dannyboy realistically?

I think he should just negotiate the best deal he can from the NFL... and just get on with it.

Again--you've got it all backwards...  Negotiate the best deal he can from the NFL?  Dannyboy doesn't have anything he needs to be proactive about negotiating.  His position is from a footing of strength--the precedent...the status quo...  Can't you see the NFL has zero--ZIPPO--nada.  Why? 80 years of precedent...and the whole foundation of american jurisprudence is founded on precedent.  Dannyboy will hold out until the NFL sweetens it's offer over and over if it's that important to them.  It's like money in the bank to him.  Finally, at some point, Dannyboy will score his number and possibly relent--of course being outwardly packaged as *sacrificing for the right and better way* thus scoring all the goodwill and political capital he can with it, but no mistake...Dannyboy doesn't do anything in business that doesn't make the ass cheek tingle that presses against his wallet in the ass of his pants...     

Maybe in 2114 he can rename the team to the Whiteskins.  

 I'm guessing by your failure to respond--that you have nothing more to support your position on this than the NFL does in forcing a name change, eh Duck?   

You raise a valid point, HD.  Snyder will no doubt get a sweet payoff in this.  I've always acknowledged that.

However I stick my my central point that political -- and more importantly, economic -- pressure on the NFL will induce them to pressure/negotiate with Snyder to change the name.

It's gonna happen.  The question is when and how.  You're too astute not to realize that.  Stop being so stubborn about it.

If you're shifting your position to now arguing that the name could be changed because eventually the league could make it in Dannyboy's financial best interests to do so...then we have no debate.  You, however, were initially arguing that the league could somehow COMPEL a change of the name (like the NBA compelled action from Sterling)--and that, as I've detailed, just isn't in play here...

Let's just call it that.  I prefer to pick and choose my battles and this is one I am not heavily invested in.

In any case, let's just sit back and watch what happens.  I guarantee you that, however it plays out, the Washington Redskins will have a new name within a couple of years.

I smell a good *C* note bet to help you overcome the one you lost by not backing up your resolve on Randy this last time around...     


Two years from today--June 3, 2016, I'll say the name of the team is still officially the Washington Redskins.  Say we're on...

WTF, Duck?  Silence yet again?  This isn't like you to not stand in at least to either take the nut to the noggin or clobber your foe bitch-crazy.  Let's bring the bitch back to town, eh?       

_HD_ wrote:

_HD_ wrote:

MB20 wrote:Ugh... maybe I'm on the wrong side of history, but IMO this is the biggest bunch of politically correct horseshit to come down the pike in a long, long time. 

Let's say they do manage to get the name of the franchise changed. What does that actually do to improve the day-to-day reality of many poor, disenfranchised Native Americans? Nothing. From a political standpoint, this is just another of a long, long line of things that feckless, stand-for-nothing Democrats "do" to make it appear that they are actually accomplishing something. Don't worry about shit like the economy or effectively dealing with the criminals on Wall Street or fixing the clusterfuck that Obamacare predictably became- just grandstand a little more because THAT is what the country really needs right now. I fucking hate that party with the heat of a thousand suns. Useless fucking dicks.

And assholes like Florio and Peter King should just get fucked already. What a couple of self-important douchebags. And, like the Democrats whose cause they so fervently back, they are a couple of do-nothing jerkoffs, too. What are they actually doing to improve the day-to-day lives of Native Americans? Writing about how offensive the name of a fucking football team is? Florio should go back to making up stories about how Aaron Rodgers hates cancer patients, and King would be better off writing about his travel and coffee experiences as if anyone gave a shit about them.

Plus, like Snyder and the name of his football team or not, he bought the Redskins' brand when he bought the team. I don't know exactly you can compensate him monetarily for what is such an integral part of his investment. Also, why after decades of the team being the Redskins is the name all of a sudden so offensive? The name hasn't been used as a racial slur in decades.

So, so much about this strikes a raw nerve with me.

Speaking of Donald Sterling--his botex not workin' bimbo did him the grandest of favors by releasing that tape.  $2 BILLION dollars for the Clippers...  Are you fucking kidding me?!!  4X the highest amount the next highest NBA franchise has ever sold for ($500M--Milwaukee Bucks)...  But that's not even the best part.  The best part is he has very astutely put his wife in control of the sale which he, due to the $$$$, is privately geeked over but publicly opposes.  Why?  Forced Sale provision dictates that a full one-half of the sale price is sheltered from the capital gains calculation under a forced sale.  He'll put up a half-assed fight to protect the provision--then relent.  In reality, this is the best fucking thing that could have ever happened to him.  He was probably awake at night wondering how he could ever shelter his heirs from the inheritance tax that would have prevented them from keeping the asset.  Interestingly--that is why Jack Kent Cooke's heirs had to sell the 'skins to Dannyboy to begin with upon his death.

    Like clockwork.  Bravo Donald...  Well-played.

duck wrote:

_HD_ wrote:

duck wrote:

_HD_ wrote:

duck wrote:

_HD_ wrote:

duck wrote:

_HD_ wrote:Here you go, Duck.  Here's a journalist who gets it...  They thought they were punishing him.  Instead--they just made Sterling's day everyday for the rest of his life...  In fact--that fucker's sterling no longer.  His name is now Donald Golden...    

[size=35]Donald Sterling's last laugh: Tax-free $2 billion Clippers sale[/size]

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] 
By Robert W. WoodJune 5, 2014 11:19 AM

• [url=https://www.tumblr.com/share/photo?clickthru=http%3A%2F%2Ffinance.yahoo.com%2Fnews%2Fdonald-sterlings-last-laugh-tax-231100454.html%3Fsoc_src%3Dmediacontentstory&caption=L.A. Clippers owner%C2%A0Donald Sterling%C2%A0seems to be sitting pretty. With these high numbers and Sterling%E2%80%99s advanced age%2C income and estate taxes look bleak%2C but are they%3F First%2C let%E2%80%99s take income tax. Mr. Sterling only paid %2412.5 million for the Clippers in][/url]
  

L.A. Clippers owner [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] seems to be sitting pretty. Sure, he endured bad press and probably would not have sold the team were it not for the [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]. He may not even get to do his own negotiating, since the NBA stepped in. But a $2 billion sale to Microsoft’s [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]isn’t half bad.





Still, taxes could eat a big piece of his outsize profit. With these high numbers and Sterling’s advanced age, income and estate taxes look bleak, but are they? First, let’s take income tax.
Mr. Sterling only paid $12.5 million for the Clippers in 1981. The Clippers are apparently a corporation, but is it a [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]? C corporations pay corporate taxes, S corporations don’t. The legal owner is the Sterling Family Trust, though that trust could just be a living trust that avoids probate but is not taxable.
[More from Forbes: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]]
Since Mr. Sterling is probably well advised, the corporation is likely an S corporation. That means whether Mr. Ballmer buys stock or assets, there should be no corporate tax. If the corporation had to pay tax on the $2 billion sale, corporate taxes alone could be $700 million! Then Mr. Sterling would have to pay tax himself when the remaining $1.4 billion was distributed! The two taxes combined could be over 50%.
Assuming the S corporation structure, though, Mr. Sterling and his wife Rochelle would just pay taxes on the deal personally. With a federal long-term capital gain rate of 20%, that’s approximately $397.5 million. It seems unlikely that Mr. Sterling will pay the Obamacare 3.8% net investment income tax. If the Sterlings spent over 500 hours per year on team-related management activities, it should mean the 3.8% tax wouldn’t apply.
What about California taxes? Unless the Sterlings try to quickly move to Nevada, Texas, or another no-tax state, California will collect nicely. The Golden State's top rate rose from 10.3% to 13.3% in 2012. That makes the California income tax on the sale over $264 million. Notably, California doesn’t give any break to long-term capital gain.
[More from Forbes: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[size=16]Sterling to Sell Clippers to Ballmer, Drop LawsuitPlay Video
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.][/size]
Some say that’s the worst part of the state’s tax law, making California capital gain taxed among the highest in any state—or country—in the world. See[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]. It is one reason California is constantly pursuing people who exit right before making a sale.
In all, federal and California income taxes total about $662 million, about a third of the $2 billion sale price. Estate taxes are another matter. It is likely that the Sterlings have an estate plan, and it may in part rely on the team structure. Such things can materially reduce an estate tax bill. But cash is harder, and the sale could be a big hit to the Sterlings’ estate plan.
If the sale nets $2 billion, and the Sterlings pay $662 million in income tax, that leaves $1,338,000,000. Mr. and Mrs. Sterling each get only $5.34 million tax-free, leaving estate tax of over $500 million. Maybe. After all, it's likely that Mr. Sterling has good tax advisers, so don’t look for this check to be written just yet.
First, recall that he is suing the league and claiming $1 billion in damages. That could be an offset. He might even try to report his gain on sale as capital gain, but deduct losses as ordinary! Yet latest reports say Mr. Sterling is dropping his suit, agreeing to the sale.
That could mean Mr. Sterling will try to roll over his gain into other investments. How is that possible? [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] of the tax code allows you to defer taxes when your property is taken involuntarily, like eminent domain. Mr. Sterling can argue the Clippers sale was forced on him by the NBA.
What's more, Mr. Sterling wouldn’t have to buy another team, as long as within 2 years, he invests the money in similar or related investments. Those standards are pretty loose, allowing him to diversify his investments.
Incredibly, Mr. Sterling might even do some estate planning at the same time. Assuming his basis in the Clippers is only the $12.5 million he paid, it would also be his basis in the replacement investments. Upon death, there’s a step up in basis to market value. That could mean that by dying, his $662 million income tax bill just goes away!
[More from Forbes: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]]
Sure, he might face estate taxes, but the basis step up prevents paying income taxes and estate taxes at the same time. Mr. Sterling’s age could give his cadre of advisers big reasons to try Section 1033 treatment. Other ideas might be a structured sale or installment sale deal that would stretch out payments over time. That can work well but may not be ideal for someone of advanced years.
In that sense, the Section 1033 involuntary conversion idea could be a bonanza. If successful, it could eliminate not only the federal income taxes, but California's painful taxes as well. That's right, California replicates Section 1033. Sure, the IRS or the California Franchise Tax Board could disagree. Sure, he or his estate might have to go to court. But Mr. Sterling might enjoy that and there's plenty at stake.
Bottom line? The NBA may be doing Mr. Sterling a big favor.
May be?  Duh?

No argument here.  You sold me on the concept when you explained the advantages of a forced sale.

Sterling did indeed take a PR beating and he will be forever remembered for his rambling racist rant.  However, financially he wins big for the incident.

It's unfortunate that in this day/age someone as privileged as Sterling would harbor such ignorance and distemperance toward a whole race of people, as he apparently does...and yes, there are those out there who if given a gun with two bullets in a room with Hitler, Bin Laden and Sterling--they'd pump both of them into Sterling.  However, what he said was said in private behind closed doors and illegally recorded.  Had this sale not worked out for him so overwhelmingly financially--he would have undoubtedly followed through with a multi-billion $$$$ suit against the league, and guess what chances he would have had to prevail?  The NBA Commissioner made a bold move--no doubt.  However, next to Sterling himself--he's got to be the happiest of all that this went down the way it did because I think it's fairly clear that a court would rule he overstepped his bounds by a wide margin here and exposed the NBA to potentially BILLIONS of punitive damages...not to mention the prospective billion or two in actual damages...  There are things called wiretapping laws in this country.  In varies from state to state as to where one or both parties to a conversation must consent to a recording--but in this case apparently--what she did was illegal.  What do you think the chances are that a judge would find Sterling was offered anything in the way of due process by the league in relying exclusively on an illegal recording that wasn't even yet conclusively established to be Sterling's voice in taking action of the magnitude they did?


Finally, I'm not excusing what Sterling said, but let's not be hypocrites--we ALL say things behind closed doors that are not intended for public consumption and we'd be embarrassed by if becoming public.  You, me, Ghandi, EVERYBODY.  The biggest scumbag of all in this whole deal is the little bimbo twat who breached any sense of integrity and certainly trust in making the recording and putting it out in public to begin with, in my humble opinion...    

She's definitely a POS but I question if she's even bright enough to plan this all out.  My suspicion is that someone put her up to it.  Since Sterling allegedly had a "plantation" mentality for a long time, I just assumed he rubbed some people the wrong way and one of them hit on a plan to take the motherfucker down.  Now, given the fact that the end result of all this should be huge bank for Sterling, I'm even allowing for the possibility that an ally of his set it up.  Sterling's not playing with a full deck right now; he strikes me as a maudlin old man whose brain has been rotting for a few years and I doubt that he's capable of concocting such a plan.  However I could see a close friend of his doing so... someone who would stand to share or benefit from the old man's windfall.  His wife maybe?

I dunno... but there's more to this story than meets the eye.

You're WAY overcomplicating this, Duck.  This is a classic case of a sleazy little gold digger bimbo who apparently didn't get her way on something who was either trying to initially blackmail him with the tape and he didn't play ball--or just plain wanted to try to hurt the man.  She went public with the tape and Sterling turned chicken shit into chicken salad with a very savvy strategy to keep on smilin' when most would just fall in step to validate her intentions...


Finally, you make Sterling out to be some old bumbling dementia patient with drool running down his lip...  Nothing could be further from the truth.  This is a self-made man who became that way purely by getting himself a good education, working hard and exploiting every opportunity that came his way--just like he did with the Clipper's situation.  He didn't plan for this to happen.  He didn't choose for it to be so...but since it DID happen--he made it all work out into his best interests... That's what successful people do.


I bet he sent the little slut a fruit/nut loaf for what she did--and look at the calendar, it's not even fucking Christmas...   

Well, I may be underestimating Sterling but I think you're overestimating his little bimbo.  I think there's a good possibility someone else was also involved in the plan.

And regarding Sterling, you're correct that he was a very smart businessman -- at least in the past.  However, listening to him on the tape and watching him on interviews, I see a rambling old fart who may be showing signs of dementia.  I certainly wouldn't call him sharp as a tack.

Proof is, as they say, in the pudding, Duck...  This whole response from the Sterling side to a very challenging situation was played precisely as it should have been to turn a disaster for most people into a career-defining exploit.  The man recognized a unique opportunity in a forced action for an exit strategy on a TWO BILLION dollar asset to walk away from the table TAX FREE.  Maybe the guy sips a little too much cognac--but what this dude just engineered for himself out of this fiasco isn't pulled off by people who don't play the game to come out the gladiator riding away from the fracas bareback on the other side's prized steed...  You better fucking believe it. 

You don't think the old man could have gotten any guidance or assistance from his advisors, do you?    

Old men of wealth are like young women of beauty, Duck...everyone wants a piece of their ass, eh?  It's like these little bimbo's who wait tables in the pricey restaurants--they gain their pride/identity/'tude by their shallow perceived caliber of those they wait on.  Donald Sterling undoubtedly draws every dick wrangler with a rope on the rodeo circuit to cup his balls and yank themselves a puddle of pistachio out of his wallet...and in so doing, those who add more pudding to the pantry than what they take are able to hang around for a little while...  The point is this:  Yes--Donald might have risen in the morning, scratched his balls and grabbed the paper on his way out to enjoy some orange juice in his cashmere robe out by the sunny pool--only to discover on the front page his name had been slandered by some little whore who lives on his credit card and he was facing a tough week--and the next thing you know, three of his Wharton lieutenants had arrived to brief him on the reality of the situation and their recommended course of action for his approval--but WTF does it matter?  HE'S the guy to set himself up with those types of resources for when they're needed--for when they're needed is NOT the fucking time to go shopping for them...   

Thor11 wrote:

_HD_ wrote:

_HD_ wrote:

MB20 wrote:Ugh... maybe I'm on the wrong side of history, but IMO this is the biggest bunch of politically correct horseshit to come down the pike in a long, long time. 

Let's say they do manage to get the name of the franchise changed. What does that actually do to improve the day-to-day reality of many poor, disenfranchised Native Americans? Nothing. From a political standpoint, this is just another of a long, long line of things that feckless, stand-for-nothing Democrats "do" to make it appear that they are actually accomplishing something. Don't worry about shit like the economy or effectively dealing with the criminals on Wall Street or fixing the clusterfuck that Obamacare predictably became- just grandstand a little more because THAT is what the country really needs right now. I fucking hate that party with the heat of a thousand suns. Useless fucking dicks.

And assholes like Florio and Peter King should just get fucked already. What a couple of self-important douchebags. And, like the Democrats whose cause they so fervently back, they are a couple of do-nothing jerkoffs, too. What are they actually doing to improve the day-to-day lives of Native Americans? Writing about how offensive the name of a fucking football team is? Florio should go back to making up stories about how Aaron Rodgers hates cancer patients, and King would be better off writing about his travel and coffee experiences as if anyone gave a shit about them.

Plus, like Snyder and the name of his football team or not, he bought the Redskins' brand when he bought the team. I don't know exactly you can compensate him monetarily for what is such an integral part of his investment. Also, why after decades of the team being the Redskins is the name all of a sudden so offensive? The name hasn't been used as a racial slur in decades.

So, so much about this strikes a raw nerve with me.

Speaking of Donald Sterling--his botex not workin' bimbo did him the grandest of favors by releasing that tape.  $2 BILLION dollars for the Clippers...  Are you fucking kidding me?!!  4X the highest amount the next highest NBA franchise has ever sold for ($500M--Milwaukee Bucks)...  But that's not even the best part.  The best part is he has very astutely put his wife in control of the sale which he, due to the $$$$, is privately geeked over but publicly opposes.  Why?  Forced Sale provision dictates that a full one-half of the sale price is sheltered from the capital gains calculation under a forced sale.  He'll put up a half-assed fight to protect the provision--then relent.  In reality, this is the best fucking thing that could have ever happened to him.  He was probably awake at night wondering how he could ever shelter his heirs from the inheritance tax that would have prevented them from keeping the asset.  Interestingly--that is why Jack Kent Cooke's heirs had to sell the 'skins to Dannyboy to begin with upon his death.

    Like clockwork.  Bravo Donald...  Well-played.

My goodness HD...I sure do sleep much better these days knowing that somehow you know this Sterling guy and all the legal moves he'll make...shit , I don't even need to read any factually viable news sources with you around here,,,NOT!!! lol...

You are good reading tho,,,,if nothing else.

Attorney: Donald Sterling says no deal; suit is on
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Thor

Poor Thor...it's like nursing a baby trying to help you interpret this shit...     

What this means, Thorbait, is that Sterling requires additional leverage to get what he wants out of his position of strength here.  It could be a lot of things.  For example, I thought at the time he should not be so hasty and publicly relented on the lawsuit too soon--before he may possibly had actually secured a commitment in writing from the NBA to rescind the $2.5M fine--which would be something obvious he'd leverage against.  Perhaps he has gotten council that he needs to actually have a judicial order compelling the sale of the team to gain the forced sale provision from the IRS.  That's a BILLION DOLLARS huge...  Fuck--it could be many things in application...but the drive behind it all is leverage.  He feels he has a club to wield and somebody has some cash to keep their ass from being clobbered that hasn't yet been properly transferred from their wallet to his, little bitch...  Night night, sweetheart...   

_HD_ wrote:

What this means, Thorbait, is that Sterling requires additional leverage to get what he wants out of his position of strength here.  It could be a lot of things.  For example, I thought at the time he should not be so hasty and publicly relented on the lawsuit too soon--before he may possibly had actually secured a commitment in writing from the NBA to rescind the $2.5M fine--which would be something obvious he'd leverage against.  Perhaps he has gotten council that he needs to actually have a judicial order compelling the sale of the team to gain the forced sale provision from the IRS.  That's a BILLION DOLLARS huge...  Fuck--it could be many things in application...but the drive behind it all is leverage.  He feels he has a club to wield and somebody has some cash to keep their ass from being clobbered that hasn't yet been properly transferred from their wallet to his, little bitch... 

JnC4GB wrote:

_HD_ wrote:

What this means, Thorbait, is that Sterling requires additional leverage to get what he wants out of his position of strength here.  It could be a lot of things.  For example, I thought at the time he should not be so hasty and publicly relented on the lawsuit too soon--before he may possibly had actually secured a commitment in writing from the NBA to rescind the $2.5M fine--which would be something obvious he'd leverage against.  Perhaps he has gotten council that he needs to actually have a judicial order compelling the sale of the team to gain the forced sale provision from the IRS.  That's a BILLION DOLLARS huge...  Fuck--it could be many things in application...but the drive behind it all is leverage.  He feels he has a club to wield and somebody has some cash to keep their ass from being clobbered that hasn't yet been properly transferred from their wallet to his, little bitch... 

OR....

It could be that a man in his 80s, who has long possessed a vast fortune, who has bought everything he could ever possibly imagine, who has more money than he can ever possibly spend, and who has an infinite line of sycophants who will do or say anything to please him, DOESN'T CARE ABOUT THE MONEY?

That maybe, just MAYBE it's really just about him? His pride? His sense of self and the one thing he can't buy or control: how he will be remembered?  
You know, his legacy?

In the end--this will never go to trial.  The NBA will start looking at it's legal fees to defend such a suit and with the greater than average likelihood they would lose--Sterling will ultimately get what he is leveraging the lawsuit to gain and soon will be whistling this shit into the ear of his next bimbo (after he does a strip search for recording devices, obviously)    

JnC4GB wrote:

_HD_ wrote:

What this means, Thorbait, is that Sterling requires additional leverage to get what he wants out of his position of strength here.  It could be a lot of things.  For example, I thought at the time he should not be so hasty and publicly relented on the lawsuit too soon--before he may possibly had actually secured a commitment in writing from the NBA to rescind the $2.5M fine--which would be something obvious he'd leverage against.  Perhaps he has gotten council that he needs to actually have a judicial order compelling the sale of the team to gain the forced sale provision from the IRS.  That's a BILLION DOLLARS huge...  Fuck--it could be many things in application...but the drive behind it all is leverage.  He feels he has a club to wield and somebody has some cash to keep their ass from being clobbered that hasn't yet been properly transferred from their wallet to his, little bitch... 

OR....

It could be that a man in his 80s, who has long possessed a vast fortune, who has bought everything he could ever possibly imagine, who has more money than he can ever possibly spend, and who has an infinite line of sycophants who will do or say anything to please him, DOESN'T CARE ABOUT THE MONEY?

That maybe, just MAYBE it's really just about him? His pride? His sense of self and the one thing he can't buy or control: how he will be remembered?  
You know, his legacy?

Ding ding.