Cross posting cuz the story is important, re Annie Leibowitz

[MichaelHarris]

Recently Annie Leibovitz had to sell all of her past, present, and future copyrights to all of her photographs. What happened, in a nutshell, is with the death of her long-time companion, Susan Sontag she inherited a large amount of debt. When this story broke people said things like, "she should have managed her money better,", things of that nature. There was very little pity.

She couldn't afford all of the houses Sontag had left her. Or so we thought. The truth is so much uglier and shows just what American Conservatism can do.

"The truth of the matter is her financial woes stemmed from her inheritance of her long time partner, Susan Sontag ’s, estate... Same-sex couples do not have the same privileges as straight married couples when it comes to inheritance. If your partner passes away and leaves her estate to you, you have to pay up to 50 percent of the value of your inheritance in taxes. However, if you and your partner were recognized as a married couple, you wouldn’t have to pay a dime. And it is precisely this unjust double standard that got Annie Leibovitz into financial trouble."

The most important part, "When Sontag died in 2004, she bequeathed several properties to Leibovitz, who was forced to pony up half of their value to keep them. Yes, she makes a nice chunk of change from Vanity Fair, and yes, she probably could have just sold the properties when the market was good in 2004, but that’s not really the point. The point is she should never have been in the position of paying or selling to not pay as much in the first place. Her wealth and poor decision-making are incidental."

Dumb-ass freeps, this woman is suffering and had to sell her life's work to pay for your stupidity!

http://www.afterellen.com/blog/juliamiranda/annie-leibovitz-is-in-a-jam

[Taverner]

1. Fuck! She (and Sontag) are visionaries our society should be lauding

Not sending into fucking debt!!!

[MichaelHarris]

2. I posted in GD

and even there some couldn't get over these two points, "Her wealth and poor decision-making are incidental." or "she probably could have just sold the properties when the market was good in 2004". They jut can't grasp the notion that she should have never been put in the situation, married couples wouldn't have faced this situation in the same way.

[Taverner]

4. A society is only as good as its art

That's all I gotta say

Is there any kind of fund?

[MichaelHarris]

5. not really

I had heard she wanted to keep it private but the "pawn" shop where she sold her copyrights leaked the story. A very interesting side note, I'm a member of the National Press Photographers Association and on the cover of their magazine this month is a photo of a "produce" looking truck with 30 or 40 photographers following the Obama inaugural motorcade. If you look at the bottom most photographer in the pile it's Annie Leibovitz. I won't infer from that anything but it's odd that she's back in the press pool.

[blueraven95]

10. I also wouldn't infer anything from that story

it may be that she's back to working in a press pool because she needs money, but I think it's just as likely (if not more so) that she was there because it was clearly an historic day and she wanted to be there. :shrug:

[MichaelHarris]

11. I wish there was a way I could share the photo

It's really an amazing shot of all the press photogs and Annie at the bottom. Here is a link to a small photo http://www.nppa.org/news_and_events/magazine/

[blueraven95]

13. I remember seeing that shot

right after the inauguration. You are right, it is amazing!

[truedelphi]

7. That was my reaction too.

In France, both of these women would be members of some type of Legion of Honor, and have annual stipends that would keep them out of debt.

And of course, in France, they would both be able to find protection in having marriage equality, not like here.

Why is this such a dumb ass country??

[bluedawg12]

15. This is a dumbass country because

there is money to be made in bigotry, it's easy to use superstitious mindless fear baiting ideas that come from a "magic book" to get the foot soldiers all revved up to protect their way of life and open their wallets to donate to the "leaders" who are then well rewarded for spouting this sh*t and that's the life cycle of the parasitic righwinged American phobe worm.

[luvspeas]

3. thank you for posting this

This got me choked up a little. It's truly wrong.

[MichaelHarris]

6. you're very welcome

it's also bothering me immensely.

[tbyg52]

8. Horrible, horrible.

:cry:

[blueraven95]

9. oh god, this makes me furious

she should have never, ever been put in this position.





The decent thing would be for the person who bought up the rights to give them back to her.

[bluedawg12]

12. This is a tragedy and an injustice and sickening.

Some people still think that same sex marriage rights are all about the frivolousness of weddings.

Except, when it comes to their own family, inheritance rights, and all of things they would squeal about if they were to lose those rights.

:grr:

[Rhythm]

14. These are the kids of issues i try to explain to people who,

for non-religious reasons, oppose same-gender marriage. The religious objectors could care less about our ability to care for our families.

[mitchtv]

16. This is why many senior Gays end up on the street

even after they've taken all the legal steps. that is if the family of the deceased partner doesn't through them out first

[Booster]

17. I have a question about inheritance maybe someone can

answer. I have a living will that has my partner as the executrix of my estate, which is considerable. I have annuities which have the beneficiaries stated so that shouldn't be any problem. My question is about my house, which I owe $200,000 on but is worth $550,000. My financial advisor says the house will automatically go to my estate and my partner, but I'm not so sure. Should I put my partner's name on the deed now or is my advisor correct? Should I also put my partner's name on all bank accounts, etc, so there won't be any question about who should get that money? I had a friend die recently and she had her partner on everything she owned and the partner had absolutely no problem with anything, including greedy relatives of the deceased. Anybody have any advice on the best way to handle this?

[LostinVA]

18. PUT HER ON THE DEED NOW

If your state allows non-spouses to have survivorship, DO THAT. If not, just do a Quit Claim for 50%. It's fats and cheap to do. You can download free forms online. Put in your will that you leave your share of the house to her and her alone. She'll still get screwed re: taxes, etc., and it'll still be a pain for her (via the OP), but at least SHE can decide what to do.

Put her name on all accounts and put in your will she's the sole beneficiary of your checking, savings, whatever.

You do not legally have the same right as spouses right now, and relatives can cause trouble. If Prop 8 is voted down, get married and you'll be covered without all of this. Just have a "sweetheart clause" will.

Seriously. Do this ASAP.

[Booster]

19. Thanks for the response. I think it's sound advice and I will

do it now. This has been gnawing at me for awhile and the advice from the advisor just didn't sound right to me. I appreciate your input.