As featured in The Wall Street Journal, Money Magazine, and more!

Search: celebrity


It’s not often that a young, female star of music, movie, and television can avoid financial scrutiny. Tales of financial woe tend to be much juicier, anyway. It’s not difficult to remember the Britney Spears train wreck. She couldn’t handle earning more than $700,000 a month. At least her antics kept her in the news.

I’ve been recently enamored with Zooey Deschanel. She’s a fine actor and a fine singer; I own her three albums on vinyl — including a Christmas album, something of a stretch for me. But today I learned something that increased my respect for her: she spends responsibly. According to the financial disclosure she included when she filed for divorce last year, obtained by TMZ, she keeps her spending under control.

Zooey DeschanelThat’s not to say she doesn’t spend extravagantly. According to the disclosure, she pays $4,000 per month for a mortgage ($3,000 of which is interest on the loan), $1,000 per month on groceries, $1,000 on entertainment, and $2,600 on clothes including laundry. In all, Zooey spends more than $27,000 a month. That’s not exactly frugal living.

That doesn’t tell the full story. The actor also disclosed that she earns $95,000 per month. She owns her own businesses:

  • Oscar Jaffe Productions, a loan-out company. This is a type of organization used in entertainment so that when a film or television producer hires an actor like Zooey, the production company pays the actor as a corporation, not as an employee. Since the actor wouldn’t be an employee, it reduces the tax liability for the company producing the show or movie (all other things being equal).
  • She & Him LLC, a music licensing company. Again, with a corporation owning the licensing rights to her music, there might be some tax advantages above and beyond what might be the case if Zooey were to own the licensing rights herself.

From the earnings of these two businesses, she passes $95,000 to herself as income. All of Zooey’s expenses, including debt, add up to less than 30% of her pre-tax income. That’s not bad — but it’s not too hard to accomplish when you have $95,000 per month to work with.

Photo: breezy421
TMZ [pdf] via Well Heeled Blog

{ 22 comments }

The Worst Celebrity Tax Problems

This article was written by in Taxes. 10 comments.

It’s with a tinge of schadenfreude that people are fascinated with the failures and foibles of famous celebrities. Every year, the IRS chases people who evade or underpay federal income tax, and actors and popular figures in the media, who often don’t manage their own finances, make the news.

The latest is Lindsay Lohan. You may remember her from such films as Mean Girls, Freaky Friday, and Herbie Fully Loaded. TMZ has discovered that the IRS has obtained against Lindsay for almost $100,000, representing tax she didn’t pay for her income in 2009. Like many busy people, Lindsay employs an accountant to handle her finances, and she says the oversight will be handled immediately.

Lindsay LohanThe sum Lindsay owes is small compared to the problems other celebrities have had with the IRS.

Wesley Snipes failed to pay up to $17 million to the IRS for his income taxes, not including penalties and interest. After his trial and a failed appeal, he was sentenced to prison for three years.

Nicolas Cage also blamed his accountant for his failure to pay a $14 million tax bill in 2010; even more recently, Nic failed to pay over $600,000 for a gift tax.

Pamela Anderson owed $2 million to the IRS and to the state of California.

Annie Leibovitz isn’t a movie star, but she is at the top of the list of famous modern photographers. She owed $2.1 million in back taxes, and pledged to sell her ownership of her photography to pay the bills.

Martha Stewart owed $220,000 to New York for taxes, but she believed she didn’t need to pay this tax because she didn’t spend time in that state.

Celebrities often have tax situations that differ from people who aren’t performers or professional athletes. They need to handle state tax returns for every state in which they’ve earned income each year, just like all taxpayers, but in any given year, performers may have earned income in a large number of states. Celebrities will almost always be too busy to handle their own tax returns, so they trust accountants to handle the paperwork and the payments.

On the other hand, it’s safe to say that some famous individual who owe the government money for failure to pay their tax bills are aware of the situation and are trying to skirt the law as much as possible, until they are forced to pay.

Photo: Rafael Amado Deras
TMZ via Don’t Mess With Taxes, New York Times, UPI, Back Taxes Help

{ 10 comments }

A typical professional athlete may be a prime example of the situation in which an individual might find himself suddenly wealthy. The idea that a person could consider himself middle class or lower one day and wealthy the next is a recipe for financial disaster. It’s easy to look at athletes because their trials and tribulations are often front page news. Michael Vick had some problems with the law, but now he’s dealing with financial fall-out. He has declared bankruptcy, and for the first time, the public is getting to see the choices he made with his money.

Vick listened to the wrong people and was perhaps a little gullible and trusting. His seemingly unlimited income gave him the opportunity to spend with zeal. He paid $223,000 a year for dubious financial advice, $78,000 a year for allowances for his family members, and an extra sum of $209,000 for his mother. His obligations included various house payments for his family in addition to the allowances, salaries for his entourage, $10,000 per month on jewelry for a period of 20 months, payments for his own houses (four), boats (five), cars (eight), and horses (unknown).

Gold Bars MoneyAnd then he wasted his money on failed business ventures for which his friends and advisers convinced him to part with more of his money, like a rental car franchise, janitorial operations, a restaurant, and of course the issue that eventually landed him in jail, the dog fighting ring.

The result of all his money missteps was bankruptcy, with a variety of companies staking claim to his future earnings. At least in Vick’s case, he is getting a second chance. With his new contract, and with a new approach to managing his money, he should be able to meet all his financial obligations.

The thought of having a sudden influx of cash, particularly if it puts you in a significantly different financial situation that those who are closest to you, is frightening. Suddenly, friends and strangers might approach you with investment ideas or pleas for help. Many suddenly wealthy individuals are grateful for their situation and want to help others, but responding to these requests can be a quick road to losing everything.

Ron Lieber, columnist for the New York Times, offers a three-pronged approach for people, not just professional athletes, whose financial situation changes significantly, quickly: slow, small, and scrutiny.

Slow

Don’t make decisions right away, and keep the money invested safely in cash or bonds from the outset. Don’t give in to the immediate pressure you may receive from friends, family, and strangers looking for investment capital or financial help, even though you may strongly desire to help those closest to you. Decisions made quickly could end up hurting your financial security later, so slow down your approach and resist the temptation to immediately go after investments that promise to pay off handsomely. It’s true that the wealthier you are, the more access you have to potentially lucrative, but complicated, investments, but keeping money invested safely for a while helps you wait until you can make more rational decisions.

Small

The good-hearted among us will want to use newly-acquired wealth, particularly if there is more money available that any one family could use in a lifetime, to make grand gestures with large amounts of money, making the world a better place. The adviser quoted in Lieber’s article points out that many athletes invest in a city only to find out they would be traded to another city the next year. Keeping gestures small would make more sense.

Additionally, if we’ve seen anything from celebrities in Hollywood, there’s often a temptation to use wealth to buy a massive house. Many people, even the wealthy, aren’t prepared for the expenses involved with maintaining a house, particularly if that house is large. There’s always a chance that it proves to be a good investment, if another celebrity makes the risky decision to buy the mansion at a higher price down the road, but there are never any guarantees. In the case of athletes, many become wealthy at a very young age — and they may have never even lived on their own before. The article suggests buying a small home to start, perhaps even a condo.

Scrutiny

Shady advisers appear out of the woodwork when there’s money to be made. The article says it’s a good idea to have an adviser, but be very selective. I’ve written a series about selecting and working with financial planners, and weather you’re suddenly wealthy or looking to build wealth over time, the same concepts apply. The most important factor is finding a fee-only financial planner to serve as a fiduciary, which means they are bound to advise in your best interests only. Even this doesn’t prevent an adviser from taking advantage of a client, though.

I would also argue that a good, solid education about basic money management can go a long way in reducing the need for outside “expert” opinions about how to hold or invest your money.

An athlete signing a professional contract, a lucky individual who wins the lottery, or an entrepreneur selling his company to Apple all might have to deal with a sudden influx of wealth. Keep cool and don’t make any sudden moves. Wait before offering any financial help or investment capital to friends, family, and advisers. From a practical point of view, these are likely to be good priorities:

ESPN, New York Times

{ 16 comments }

Prenuptial agreements are on the rise, as more individuals are concerned about losing their assets in the wake of the recession. Prenups, when handled correctly, can protect an individual’s assets in the increasingly likely event of divorce. Without a prenup explicitly defining how assets should be divvied up, if a divorce occurs, any income earned during the marriage, including any money added to retirement accounts, could be split between the two individuals. Depending on the state, this split could be 50% to each or it could be some other method considered fair by the courts.

Regular earned income isn’t the only type of wealth that could be affected. Any increase of the value of an asset, whether stock investments or a business, that occurred during the marriage could be considered marital property and divided by a court. For example, even if one spouse purchased a house before marriage, the increase in the value of the house during the marriage will likely be distributed partially to the spouse who doesn’t own the house. A business that’s started years before the marriage but thrives during the marriage, even if the non-owner spouse is not involved with the business, could be split in the event of a divorce.

For someone who has worked hard his or her entire life to build a solid financial future, a divorce is one of the most financially devastating events one can endure. We buy insurance to protect ourselves against loss of health, we diversify investments and choose an appropriate asset allocation to help shield us from financial downturns. A prenup is just another way of protecting assets.

Although we don’t feel edgy about discussing insurance with someone we plan to spend the rest of our lives with, prenups are one of the most taboo topics within the broader taboo topic of money. No one wants to seem greedy. The point of marriage is to make two lives one, not to continue living two independent lives within the same household. A prenup would indicate that divorce is an option down the road, and many couples would not be interested in facing that possibility at a time, before marriage, when the only thought should be living a happy life together.

Classically, couples who opt for prenups usually have one or two individuals who fall into these descriptions:

  • Wealthy, either by inheritance or by effort. When one individual has a much higher level of wealth than the other, the wealthier spouse often wants to protect his or her money in the event of a divorce.
  • Unequal income. Like an unequal net worth, unequal income or income potential can tilt the balance of power within a marriage. A prenup can either protect the balance or protect the tilt.
  • A business owner. For someone who owns a business, a divorce could mean the end of that business. Selling the business is an option for liquidating enough cash to pay for the expenses of breaking up a marriage. If the business is location-based and the owner prefers to move, this, too, could have a devastating affect on the business.

State laws govern prenuptial agreements, and each state falls into one of two categories. In 41 states, divorce without a prenuptial agreement falls under equitable distribution, where the court considers the individual case, circumstances, and finances to determine the most fair division of assets. In the remaining nine states, courts divide all marital property. Prenups can override these state defaults.

Prenuptial agreements are often in the news when celebrity couples move towards marriage. Most recently, Kim Kardashian, who earns about $12 million a year according to Forbes and has a home in Beverly Hills, has signed a prenup with fiancé Kris Humphries, who earns only $3.2 million a year. Kim will be protected through the prenup; in the event of a divorce, she will keep everything she owns now in addition to any income she earns during the marriage.

For engaged couples whose wealth and income are already evenly split, there is still a case for a prenuptial agreement. The court system can be complicated and expensive. A couple that doesn’t discuss financial issues could have a harder time during a divorce. A prenup can smooth some of these difficulties and help both partners leave the marriage with most of their own wealth intact. While prenups have traditionally been instruments of the wealthy, the recession has affected many people’s approach to protecting their assets. More middle-class couples are considering prenups now.

Would you or did you consider a prenuptial agreement before getting married?

Photo: david_shankbone

{ 18 comments }

Are You On the Credit Bureau VIP List?

by Flexo

If you’re a celebrity, politician, or otherwise in the public eye, you may be on VIP lists maintained by the credit reporting bureaus, granting you a different level of customer service. According to lawyers who have sworn testimony from employees, this two-tiered system favors the well-connected by granting them access to immediate corrections on erroneous ... Continue reading this article…

8 comments Read the full article →

Are Groupon’s Super Bowl Ads Offensive?

by Flexo

Update: Groupon has pulled the controversial ad campaign described here. I’m a big fan of Christopher Guest. He has wrote and directed several great films, popularizing the “mockumentary” genre. This is Spinal Tap is one of his highly-acclaimed films. He has also directed many commercials, some of which feature his regular troupe of actors, those ... Continue reading this article…

30 comments Read the full article →

50 Cent Plugs Stock to 3.8 Million Followers on Twitter, Stock Soars

by Flexo
284622390_3c78388296_b[1]

Here’s a fun experiment. You don’t need many materials, just a little bit of work. Here are the steps: Create a huge following on Twitter. Put your money into a little-known stock with low trading value. Write several messages on Twitter to almost 4 million followers about how good the investment is. Watch the valuation ... Continue reading this article…

17 comments Read the full article →

Extreme Boomerang: Heidi Montag

by Flexo

I am completely disconnected from the genre of television shows called “reality.” The fascination with people whose celebrity status stemmed from reality television, or most celebrities in general, seems to be built on a foundation of schadenfreude. People love to hear about the failures of famous people. Heidi Montag and her husband, a couple who ... Continue reading this article…

5 comments Read the full article →
Page 1 of 41234