Greg F

If a court issues an injunction or an order of specific performance, and the order is ignored, the judge can cite them for contempt of court. The judge can then put them in jail until they comply with the court order.

I think the journalist mangled the story. All the specific performance clause's in the contract are simply acknowledging that an order of specific performance is something the county/state/ECSC could seek in relief upon default by the Bills. A court would have to issue an order of specific performance. That was an example for a real estate transaction. In this case an order of specific performance would force the Bills to abide by the terms of the Non-Relocation agreement. IOW, the Bills would have to play their home games at RWS.

From the article the reasons for "highly unlikely": This makes no sense. A court has to issue a order of specific performance. Since nobody has gone to court there is no order of specific performance. While the county may have a case, the article assuming that a court would issue an order of specific performance seems to be a bridge to far.

I think you just showed up on the NSA's radar.

It could also end up in Federal court: Any decisions rendered by the lower courts can, and most likely will, be appealed to a higher court. The $400 million is not for the county/state/ ECSC defaulting on the Non-Relocation agreement, it applies to the Bills defaulting on the agreement. The new owner would have to go to court to have all the provisions of the contract ruled invalid. Writing something into a contract doesn't make it legal.

It is not 'ironclad. If it was there would have been no reason for $400 million penalty. I think the contract was written to make it legally time consuming to break. Which would have subject him to a 15% capital gains tax on the sale.

On what basis could he sue? The only ones that would have standing to sue would be the beneficiaries of the the trust. From all accounts the team is in a trust and therefore Mary doesn't own the team. Although the team could be sold for a dollar, in reality the trust is still responsible for the estate tax which is 40% of the 'fair market value' as defined by the IRS. If a scenario of two offers that Kellyto83TD proposes were to come to pass the IRS would likely consider the $2 billion as the 'fair market value' and asses the tax ($800 million) based on that figure. Don't underestimate Shumer's lack of ethics to utilize a IRS enema on select owners to avoid a vote of approval to move the team.

That is part of the stadium renovations. (pdf)

Voting early and often.

Mr. WEO, All reports indicate that Mary didn't inherit the team. Rather, the team went into a trust and therefore the spousal exemption does not apply. The estate taxes on the trust will be due in December of this year.

Interesting post ICanSleepWhenI'mDead. Some time ago I considered the possibility of Ralph using an irrevocable trust but for a number of reasons I didn't think he did. In 2000 Forbes valued the Bills at $365 million and the gift tax would have been 55% resulting in a gift tax liability of $201 million. In 2005 they were valued at $708 million with a gift tax of 47% the gift tax liability would have been $333 million. I don’t think Ralph would have been a billionaire without the Bills. Would Ralph have had the cash to pay the gift tax? I don’t think so. If Ralph had put the Bills in an irrevocable trust the Bills would no longer be his property, it would be the property of the beneficiaries. This would be an issue with NFL ownership rules. That said I suppose he could have put a percentage of the Bills in an irrevocable trust. Something I had not considered before. He would have had to maintain a percentage consistent with NFL ownership rules. As far as “changing the terms of the trust to favor a local bidder” I don’t think you can dictate from the grave the sale of assets from your estate as they are now the property of the beneficiaries.

I am sure he got top notch legal advice as to what he could and could not do. I do know there is no way to put restrictions (such as not being able to move the team) on the new owner. The lease agreement was likely the best that could be done. Those are two different taxes. The reason Ralph refused to sell the team was due to the capital gains tax. Selling the team would have subjected him to a 15% capital gains tax. So for example had he sold the team for $1 billion he would have paid $150 million in taxes. Upon his death the heirs would have inherited $850 million which would be subject to an additional 40% on the estate. So all together the tax bill would have been $490 million (estate plus capital gains). By waiting till after his death the total tax bill would be $400 million, a $90 million savings. The estate tax is due 9 months after the date of death and is 40% after the exemption ($5.34 million). If the team sells for $1 billion the Fed's will get $400 million. An interesting aspect of the estate tax is the IRS calculates it from what it considers the 'fair market value'. The reason for this is so an asset isn't sold for a reduced price to avoid the tax. If the estate receives a bid for $1.5 billion from someone who intends to move the team but only a $800 million bid from someone who plans to keep the Bills in Buffalo it would be foolish to sell the team to the local bidder. The IRS is likely to see the $1.5 billion bid as the 'fair market value' and assess the estate tax of $600 million even if the team was only sold for $800 million. To the best of our knowledge he didn't leave it to Mary, it was either in a living trust or moved into an trust upon his death. The spousal exemption only delays the estate tax. When the spouse dies the estate tax would have to be paid. It is doubtful the heirs have $400 million laying around to pay the tax man in December.

Are you suggesting that Andrew Cuomo (son of former New York Governor Mario Cuomo) has no influence in Washington? The same Andrew Cuomo who, with no experience other then having been an assistant district attorney in NYC, was appointed as assistant secretary of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (1993-97) and then as secretary of HUD (1997-2001) under President Bill Clinton. Really? You think Cuomo has no pull? False dichotomy. You think that Schumer couldn't make life miserable for some of the owners? What is a few committee hearings investigating drug use (both legal and illegal) in the NFL. The NFL would love that kind of attention. I am sure they could find a few disgruntled former players to testify. Maybe a few IRS audits are in order, you know, with the NFL's not for profit status and all. Oh yea, those convicted felons that play in Canada or London might have to fill out some extra paperwork before getting let back in. Don't worry it will only take a couple of weeks. Schumer doesn't have to give the NFL cement shoes and drop them in the East river when breaking a few knee caps will get the desired results.

You have it backwards, its a popular myth. In reality the government is more like the mafia, you got to pay to play. It's a tried and true routine that goes something like this. 'that is a nice business you got there ... hate to have anything bad happen to it'. That is exactly what happened to Microsoft in the 90's as they were pretty much apolitical until the anti-trust suit. The other thing that drive me crazy is the myth that the 2 parties in Washington are significantly different. They are not. It is the same extortion game.

You speak as if the Senate doing "important work" is a good thing.

If the team wanted a really offensive name they would change the name to the Washington Politicians.

You keep sugar in a sugar bowl. Only makes sense you would keep your cocaine in a coke cup.

If 'Jon Bon Douchebag' has stated he plans to move the team prior to the end of the lease agreement then he is out of luck. If, OTOH, he says he plans to move the team after the expiration of the lease agreement then he is eligible to purchase the team. From the lease agreement:

Well they can, they just can't sell to someone who is planning to move the team prior to the expiration of the stadium lease agreement. IOW, anyone who expresses an intent to break the stadium lease agreement is off limits. From the lease agreement:

$40 million on $500 million is 8% interest. I would say the interest rate is a tad bit to high. Like 4% to 6% to high.

And a Coca Cola can with well placed pin holes can be paraphernalia for ...

I think the more appropriate sequence of events would be as the ball rolled toward the hole a ground hog intercepted it and ran it back to the last hole.