Michael Jackson’s Probate Reveals Secrets and an Estate of $600M

Moonwalker.Fan

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
3,584
Points
0
Location
Slovakia
Michael Jackson’s Probate Reveals Secrets and an Estate of $600M, but His Children Haven’t Received a Penny, Says UltraTrust.com

Mr. Jackson’s poor estate planning has put his family through years of high-cost litigation and caused $200M in estimated estate taxes. But UltraTrust.com has this financial advice for 2013.

http://www.prweb.com/releases/2013_Michael_Jackson/02_Estate_Planning/prweb10444644.htm

Boston, MA (PRWEB) February 21, 2013

More than three years after the death of Michael Jackson, the trust fund for his children, Prince, Paris, and Blanket, ages 15, 14, and 10, has to yet be dispersed. His estate is $600 million and Estate Street Partners (ESP) has this advice in Feb 2013 for others to avoid a Jackson-like disaster. Rocco Beatrice, Managing Director of ESP, founders of the UltraTrust irrevocable trust, explains that “because of poor estate planning Michael’s family will have to still wait years until his probate, estate taxes, creditors’ claims, and other legal battles are finalized.”

Mr. Beatrice studied in detail Jackson’s estate plan and graded it a “D Minor”. According to the NY Daily News, Mr. Jackson crafted a “pour-over” will and revocable trusts for each of his children and Katherine, his mother and the guardian of his children.

“A will is only good for stating who the guardian of the children will be. Other than that, it’s a poor way to pass on assets, especially significant ones like Mr. Jackson had,” clarifies Mr. Beatrice.
The “pour-over” designation basically describes the will as one that pours over the assets into one or more trusts after death.

Since Michael Jackson’s death, the estate lawyers have decided hundreds of motions, matters, and claims. “When a person dies with even assets of $500,000, everybody wants a piece of the pie. The government wants the taxes, the creditors want their money, the lawyers, appraisers, and accounts involved with the probate want their fees, and lastly, the family gets their share,” explains Mr. Beatrice. “The reason Mr. Jackson’s assets have been tied up in probate court for so long is because there are many issues to sort out. Every single creditor has an opportunity to make and negotiate a claim, property has to be sold and/or maintained, and challenges have to be heard.”

For the Jackson estate, the assets still have not poured into any fund. The children are receiving almost a seven-figure allowance - annually. This includes the mansion, private schooling at the famous Buckley School near Beverly Hills with a yearly $29,000 tuition and vacations. These expenses amount to $70,000 per month according to the NY Daily News.

Family members are wondering where all the money is going. According to the NY Daily News (see sources), they are worried that people are stealing money.

“If Mr. Jackson utilized irrevocable trusts like Steve Jobs, the family could be using their share right now. No waiting, no estate taxes, no public scrutiny, no courts, and asset protection,” states Mr. Beatrice.
The Supreme Court ruled in Estate of Sanford v. Commissioner, 308 U.S. 39 (1939), that a transfer to a revocable trust is not a completed gift. This means that everything is subject to probate and estate tax.
ESP estimates the estate will be taxed about $200 million. “In a good estate plan, one can mitigate the estate tax altogether. The Jackson lawyers were likely more worried about their own paychecks than doing the right thing by Mr. Jackson. Tying up the Jackson estate in probate court is very profitable for Mr. Jackson’s attorneys and could have easily been avoided by using the Ultra Trust,” posits Mr. Beatrice.
An irrevocable trust, like the UltraTrust, should not be confused with a revocable trust. The revocable trust allows the grantor of the trust to change anything at will, resulting in an unprotected estate.

“Even when someone asks for an estate plan and has 1/100th of Mr. Jackson’s assets, I highly recommend an irrevocable trust.” It is a “completed gift”; therefore, the assets in the irrevocable trust are outside of the person’s estate and not subject to the estate tax.

If a person files a lawsuit against Michael Jackson’s estate, the assets in the irrevocable trusts are outside of his estate and not available to creditors or lawsuit winners. Revocable trusts don’t afford this same asset protection
Irrevocable trusts have stood up against the I.R.S. [Dean v. United States], bankruptcy court [IN RE: Jane McLean BROWN], divorce [Cooley v. Cooley] and many different types of creditors (see sources).

“These irrevocable trusts provide asset protection from future lawsuits and only pay out via incentives and age milestones (21, 30, 35, and 40 years old) as well as protect the money from themselves. Nobody believes a 15 year old should have access to 60 million dollars, so the trust with an independent trustee and trust protector protects and provides throughout their lives,” explains Mr. Beatrice.

Michael Jackson came very close to failing his family at death. “I’m glad Mr. Jackson could afford to make a donation to the government, but most people don’t want to throw away 35% to estate taxes (55% in 2013). They want to keep it in their family.” explains Mr. Beatrice.

About Estate Street Partners (UltraTrust.com):
For decades, Estate Street Partners has protected clients’ assets from frivolous lawsuits while eliminating estate taxes and probate and ensuring Medicaid asset protection for parents and children with their Premium UltraTrust® Irrevocable Trust. Call (888) 938-5872 to learn more.


Sources:
Estate of Sanford v. Commissioner - irrevocable-trust.ultratrust.com/court-cases/estate-of-sanford-v-commissioner.html
Dean v. United States irrevocable-trust.ultratrust.com/court-cases/dean-v-united-states.html
Jane McLean BROWN - irrevocable-trust.ultratrust.com/court-cases/Deborah-Menotte-v.-Jane-McLean-Brown-200116211.opn.pdf
Cooley v. Cooley - irrevocable-trust.ultratrust.com/court-cases/cooley-v-cooley.html
nydailynews.com/entertainment/gossip/planned-trust-fund-michael-jackson-children-remains-empty-years-king-pop-tragic-demise-article-1.1150263
wills.about.com/library/JacksonTrust.pdf
lasuperiorcourt.org/Probate/
hosted.ap.org/specials/interactives/_documents/jackson_will.pdf
nydailynews.com/entertainment/gossip/planned-trust-fund-michael-jackson-children-remains-empty-years-king-pop-tragic-demise-article-1.1150263
nypost.com/p/news/national/*****_girl_on_the_fast_tracko_e4Ul88jgkXeWEYNC1sjMHO
 
Last edited:
I would not give too much weight to this because That was written by Rocco Beatrice, who isn't an attorney, and has a less than credible past. Plus it's a advertising plug for his trademarked trust program.
 
Fuse has this show on called ''50 Ridiculously Rich People In Music'' Mihcael came in at #1. she said when Michael died he was $600million dollars rich, and now he is a 1.Billion dollars rich. I wonder were she get her #'s from.
 
Michael and beneficiaries deserve better than this. Planning done was not the best.
 
Fuse has this show on called ''50 Ridiculously Rich People In Music'' Mihcael came in at #1. she said when Michael died he was $600million dollars rich, and now he is a 1.Billion dollars rich. I wonder were she get her #'s from.

MJ was #1 Top Ridiculously Rich person in Music Industry leaving Paul McCartney at #2. Michael Album sales were reported 400+ Million Albums sold, his Mijac catalog was worth 1.2 Biliion and his Immortal tour has paid the estate 400 Million.....

Well, there are some web sites that "report" about the richiest musicians, like these:
:arrow: http://www.hypebot.com/hypebot/2013/01/top-10-richest-musicians-of-all-time.html



:arrow: http://popdust.com/2013/01/22/the-richest-musicians-of-all-time/

... and you can wonder, where MJ is... and its not #1 !
 
Found a simplistic overview of the difference between a revocable and irrevocable trust on youtube. If the ability to make changes is the essential difference, it's totally understandable why Steve Jobs created one as he had a terminable illness. Makes you wonder if he always had one or converted various assets to one when he learned of his condition.

MJ, on the other hand, despite any rumors about him being in fear of his life, understandably would want something that he could change and have acccess to his assets at his discretion.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dNUPd5Hit-E
 
Last edited:
^OMG, what a stupid statement. Buh bye stupid article :ciao:
 
Found a simplistic overview of the difference between a revocable and irrevocable trust on youtube. If the ability to make changes is the essential difference, it's totally understandable why Steve Jobs created one as he had a terminable illness. Makes you wonder if he always had one or converted various assets to one when he learned of his condition.

MJ, on the other hand, despite any rumors about him being in fear of his life, understandably would want something that he could change and have acccess to his assets at his discretion.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dNUPd5Hit-E


Doesn't appear to be an omission by MJ. Flash bulbs popped, when i saw my hometown rags ny post, and daily news are major sources.
 
Why exactly is the Estate in probate court? My mother died in CA with a revocable trust (I am pretty sure) and we had an atty and my brother was Representative and the atty took care of any bills, etc, and then did the dispersal of the remainder and we never had to go to probate. Is it b/c of the size and complexity of the Estate that it is in probabte?
 
I would not give too much weight to this because That was written by Rocco Beatrice, who isn't an attorney, and has a less than credible past. Plus it's a advertising plug for his trademarked trust program.

Exactly. I hope no one is fooled by this. The way he keeps saying Jacksons & about the lawyers stealing the money, I get the feeling he is thinking about Katherine's children. I see they have some advise for the estate, but I am sure they will not be calling. In fact they are in no need of Beatrice or UltraDistrust.com I think since 2009 you have some entity complaining that the trusts have not been funded, or finding some way to belittle Michael's planning. Someone else will pop up next year. Further, this is not the first large estate that has been in probate for 4 years.

Maxoo your statement about the hometown paper is right on.

Not too long ago we had a female journalist who did not understand the information and wrote that Jackson earned millions & when he died only had 30m (or 60M) to fund the trust.

It seems this week is the foolish article week, because a lot of them have been appearing on the forum.

Jamba large estates with bills to pay always make their way to probate court.
 
Last edited:
The family is Michael's mother and Michael's children. The family members are Katherine's children.
 
The family is Michael's mother and Michael's children. The family members are Katherine's children.

I know who the family under the will is. I am just saying that the way the foolish article is wording it hints of a family that is Katherine's children, and the words about lawyers stealing sounds like the person got tutoring from the letter written before granny gate, & read all the articles written by Randy in X17.

By the way, what is this Secret that was supposed to be revealed?
 
@jamba - because the trust was not properly funded and there were significant existing debts

You can see there are many mistakes in this article

- The author claims that Michael came close to failing his family at death, yet the same article says "the children are receiving 7 figure allowances annually". How can you call a multi million allowance as failure.

These irrevocable trusts provide asset protection from future lawsuits and only pay out via incentives and age milestones (21, 30, 35, and 40 years old) as well as protect the money from themselves. Nobody believes a 15 year old should have access to 60 million dollars, so the trust with an independent trustee and trust protector protects and provides throughout their lives,” explains Mr. Beatrice.

I guess the author did not take time to read Michael's trust and see that his trust also calls for payment at 21, 30,35 and 40 and has independent trustees to provide through their lives. So what is the criticizing here?

“I’m glad Mr. Jackson could afford to make a donation to the government, but most people don’t want to throw away 35% to estate taxes (55% in 2013). They want to keep it in their family.” explains Mr. Beatrice.

Michael's Estate planning is also calling for a 20% donation to a charity first. That would significantly reduce the tax burden on the Estate. So most people might not want to "throw away" money but Michael is known to give money to charity. I'm pretty sure for a $600 M Estate he didn't plan to "keep it in their family" but share his wealth with the less fortunate.


- Also Estate has established children's trusts and got the court approval for a preliminary distribution.
 
why even bother posting articles that are so blantently full of rubbish? just cause its about mj doesnt mean its worth posting
 
I would not give too much weight to this because That was written by Rocco Beatrice, who isn't an attorney, and has a less than credible past. Plus it's a advertising plug for his trademarked trust program.


This is a blatant advertisement, full of lies by subterfuge.
 
Yes it is a twisted advertising campaign, poorly excecuted because on one hand 'shock, horror' MJ's children have not seen a penny and then goes on to their monthly allowance. Lol

But, if you are searching Michael news this comes up on the first page, so it is good that @ Moonwalker.Fan posted this piece so we are aware that it is out there and if it is quoted we know straight away to debunk it. Knowledge is power.
 
OnirMJ;3781244 said:
"the questionable investments started coming quickly. He dropped $47.5 million to buy ATV Music ($101 million today), which included the Beatles’ catalog (which Paul McCartney would later buy back at a bargain)."

Hahahahaha.. That is the funniest thing I've read in a very long time!

http://popdust.com/2013/01/22/the-richest-musicians-of-all-time/

... and thats why I repeatedly ask for the so.called MJ fan power reaction and we have to react, post comments or emails to the authors of any "misleading articles" ... full of rubbish - because not only MJ fans read them, and many readers simply believe seriously looking articles....

elusive moonwalker;3781350 said:
why even bother posting articles that are so blantently full of rubbish? just cause its about mj doesnt mean its worth posting

THATS WHY!:

LastTear;3781357 said:
Yes it is a twisted advertising campaign, poorly excecuted because on one hand 'shock, horror' MJ's children have not seen a penny and then goes on to their monthly allowance. Lol

But, if you are searching Michael news this comes up on the first page, so it is good that @ Moonwalker.Fan posted this piece so we are aware that it is out there and if it is quoted we know straight away to debunk it. Knowledge is power.
 
Was the children's trust funded? They have time. What about Katherine's trust? I can understand why her children would be concerned about her receiving her due.

I already know some fans think her children want Katherine's due for themselves but, there is no proof of that. If I were her child, I would want to see her get her portion in her lifetime.
 
Yes it is a twisted advertising campaign, poorly excecuted because on one hand 'shock, horror' MJ's children have not seen a penny and then goes on to their monthly allowance. Lol

But, if you are searching Michael news this comes up on the first page, so it is good that @ Moonwalker.Fan posted this piece so we are aware that it is out there and if it is quoted we know straight away to debunk it. Knowledge is power.

Yes but maybe after the poster puts it in, he/she can comment about the weaknesses in the article, because right after it was posted you have posts from fans who seem to believed what was written, because they do not understand the will & trust. Also there are 2 threads that people could look at to help them see the holes in this article as well: 1 dealing with the thread on the will & (2) the thread about the funding of the trust.

Tygger I can see that you need some help in understanding the will & the trust, based on your last post & especially the comment about Katherine's children seeing her get her "portion in her lifetime." Try looking at the thread Ivy did on the will & trust.

There is a misconception out there that Katherine is going to get 40% of the money after probate so that she will get this money "in her lifetime" & all attempts are being made for her to get it. It is the same erroneous thinking that Katherine's sons have & some members of the media.
 
Last edited:
What don't I understand? Please clear this up for me.
 
What don't I understand? Please clear this up for me.

It seems you need some more information about the will/trust & how they work. Again I am basing this on your comment above, so I am suggesting that you look at those threads^^, especially the one about the will. You will then get a detailed understanding of both, because Ivy did a good job of it. I have found that reading threads thoroughly gives me a lot of knowledge about things I do not understand myself. When you read the thread you can see questions others have & how they are answered. Also, the forum consists of individuals with various strengths, talents, professions, abilities & they share these with you in the threads. Additionally, your post at #20, if you look back to the previous page (page 1), you will see that Ivy commented about the funding of the trust.
 
Last edited:
I remember the estate already putting $30 million in a trust for the kids. They are still dealing with the debt first. I understand that they will get certain amounts at certain ages. What the kids and the estate get monthy is pretty good. A lot of people would not see that kind a money in a year let alone in a month. I like the way Michael set up his will.
 
Petrarose, I remember being in a thread about the will/trust but, I don't know if that is the one you are referring too and if it talked about funding (and why the children's trust would be funded before his elderly mother). I'm a little new here so, if someone understood, it would have been nice to just let me know but, I will look for the thread.
 
Petrarose, I remember being in a thread about the will/trust but, I don't know if that is the one you are referring too and if it talked about funding (and why the children's trust would be funded before his elderly mother). I'm a little new here so, if someone understood, it would have been nice to just let me know but, I will look for the thread.

OK Tygger look here:

http://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/t...rrecting-Misconceptions?highlight=wills+trust

http://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/t...sly-Boring-Truth-About-Michael-Jackson-s-Will
 
^^^Thank you for the links Petrarose. Please tell me if I understand this.

Trust cannot be funded until probate is over but, it was approved by a judge to fund children's trust for $30M. I don't know if it was funded or not but, they have time and are fine with allowances.

Michael's mother gets allowance too. She can't have a trust with the estate in probate unless approved. I never heard of a trust approved for her. Even when she has one, the executors can still decide how much she gets out of it where the children would get some of it based on age. Years later they get full access to their share. Katherine never does.

I can see why Katherine's children question that. She is not allowed to will the money to her own children because it goes to Michael's children. If she wanted to give them the money (as most mothers would want to do if they can), she has to do it while she is alive. There is a chance she would not get access to her trust at all if probate lasts for years.

I think it is normal for her and her children to question that set-up. She can't make her own decisions even when (if ever) she gets her share.

I know there are fans think Michael set it up this way but, I'm not so sure. He gave her money for years and never questioned where it went. This is so different from what he did for years.
 
Last edited:
@Tygger
"I know there are fans think Michael set it up this way but, I'm not so sure. He gave her money for years and never questioned where it went. This is so different from what he did for years."

I just wanted to comment this bit as it is not true.
MJ just didn't give money to Katherine not knowing she was giving it to someone else who he didn't want to support.
While MJ was in Middle East (or somewhere there), he left 1 million to his attorney to give Katherine for her expense.
Katherine went to this attorney and asked to get 1 million at one go, but attorney refused this request as Michael had instructed him not to give money out just like that, so MJ did know that Katherine was supporting others, and he didn't want his money to be used for supporting people.
 
Yes but maybe after the poster puts it in, he/she can comment about the weaknesses in the article, because right after it was posted you have posts from fans who seem to believed what was written, because they do not understand the will & trust. Also there are 2 threads that people could look at to help them see the holes in this article as well: 1 dealing with the thread on the will & (2) the thread about the funding of the trust.

Tygger I can see that you need some help in understanding the will & the trust, based on your last post & especially the comment about Katherine's children seeing her get her "portion in her lifetime." Try looking at the thread Ivy did on the will & trust.

There is a misconception out there that Katherine is going to get 40% of the money after probate so that she will get this money "in her lifetime" & all attempts are being made for her to get it. It is the same erroneous thinking that Katherine's sons have & some members of the media.

Yes they could have posted a note assuming the poster realised it was fundamentally an ad, and as you said right after there are posts from people who believed it, I'm sorry but that kind of proves my point. And as I said in my original post, this article comes up on the main news search, it's not buried.
 
I disagree Bubs but, its ok. I don't think fans and the media know why she wanted the money up front and they don't know why Michael wanted it doled out. It is one instance at a very troubling time for him anyway.

I just wanted to make sure I understood the trust funding and how Katherine would get hers. I see why some question it and some don't. That is ok too.
 
Back
Top