This less than flattering portrait (right) of Ronald S. Lauder, heir to the Estee Lauder fortune, accompanies a less than flattering piece. The article is part of a series about tax shelters for the rich titled, “But Nobody Pays That.” The photo on the left shows Lauder's photo from his corporate bio page on the Central European Media Enterprises website. (http://www.cetv-net.com/en/about-cme/ronald-s-lauder.shtml).
The article opens with a brief description of a gala at Lauder’s private art gallery, held to commemorate the 10th anniversary of New York’s Neue Gallerie, also owned by Lauder. But the nutgraf outlines Lauder’s “shrewd use of the United states tax code”, the “sophisticated strategy [Lauder] used to preserve a fortune” and “a tax sheltering stock deal so audacious that Congress later enacted a law forbidding the tactic.”
The article acknowledges the many contributions Lauder has made to the public good, but surely there were many happier photos taken of Lauder at a gala affair celebrating the success of his indisputably gorgeous contribution to New York’s Museum Mile. I just love that the above-the-fold, front page portrait selected for this piece casts its subject in shadow, avoiding eye contact. The gold-leafed backdrop, Klimt’s “Adele Bloch-Bauer I” was purchased for $135 million, an amount that Lauder came up with shortly after routing profits from his sale of a large stake in CME through Bermuda and the Cayman Islands.
I saw this piece too and think it was very well done, although it seemed a bit snarky in places. I think if the report had been on more than just one person taking what was clearly portrayed as shameful advantage of the tax codes around art, it would have seemed more balanced. I did like how the changes in the tax code were mentioned after one loop hole after another was described, but I didn't get a sense of what that closed loop hole did in this case--did he have to pay taxes, re-channel the deduction into another loop hole, or what?
ReplyDelete