Blogcritics: Comments on Labels Conveniently Lose Track of the Whereabouts of Artists

Comment by Jim Carruthers

Wed, 5 May 2004 20:28:13 EDT

Well, somewhat serious, since most major record companies treat their artists as contract "work for hire" liable for all their own taxes, whereas the companies themselves pay no taxes. That's what got Willy in trouble. He thought the label was taking care of the taxes, whereas the label knew Willy would get screwed. Pretty well every act signed to a major label contract gets screwed on taxes because they are considered "work for hire". So they get screwed two ways, they don't own what they create, and they own taxes on it.

Comment by TDavid

Wed, 5 May 2004 20:15:44 EDT

I think you misunderstood, Jim. What I meant was if Willy Nelson had been in tax trouble they can put liens on assets and unclaimed royalties are indeed assets, not liabilities to the artists :) If Willy had been audited when he was having tax trouble (and I'm sure he was audited if he was in trouble) then I'm surprised that this wasn't one of the areas he was audited in when the IRS looked for money to attach / encumber. At that time this should have come out that he had money due him. Accountants and auditors are odd that way. As for the question about if the artists, where required, are paying taxes? Obviously you aren't being serious.

Comment by Jim Carruthers

Wed, 5 May 2004 19:43:15 EDT

If the majors even give the IRS a peek at their books, unaccounted royalties will be the least of their problems (what, you think any of them have paid any taxes in the last 50 years?).

Comment by TDavid

Wed, 5 May 2004 19:25:38 EDT

Didn't Willy Nelson have some tax trouble? I would have thought the IRS could track down those royalties ...

Comment by Jim Carruthers

Wed, 5 May 2004 19:21:15 EDT

I tell ya, I can't find Dolly Parton anywhere! Hey dude, just look over there! What, those hills? yah, dude, that's where the royalties go'' There's no way there's royalties in them there hills.