International Touring: A Report From The Front Lines

As the U.S. Legal Advisor to the International Artist Managers’ Association (IAMA), I’ve been asked to prepare an update on a variety of current issues involving international touring at the next membership meeting in London on November 27, 2015. Not only do I adore IAMA, but as this would provide a lovely excuse for my wife and I to avoid having to spend Thanksgiving with either of our families, I was more than happy to agree. Having prepared the report, I thought I would share it with all of you…  

Visa Stercus

1.         USCIS is presently taking a minimum of 8 – 10 weeks to process visa petitions at both the Vermont and California Service Centers. This means that, as of today, if you need to have an artist enter the U.S. any earlier than March 2016, you need to pay the additional $1225 for premium processing. (The official visa processing times that USCIS posts on its website have always been purely propaganda and should always be disregarded as such.) 

·         As a reminder, visa petitions can be filed up to one year in advance of the performance date. 

2.         For those of you who have Canadian musicians eligible for P-2 visas, we are receiving reports that Canadian AFM is experiencing a backlog in preparing filing petitions. This is in addition to the current USCIS processing time of 8 – 10 weeks.

3.         I’ve said this before, but the message not getting through, so its worth repeating. ARTISTS CANNOT DO ANYTHING IN THE U.S. ON A TOURIST VISA OR ESTA (Visa waiver) STATUS!!  Please stop listening to the colleges, universities, and festivals that tell you otherwise. They have nothing to lose other than perhaps having to find a replacement artist. On the other hand, I have recently learned of two artists—one from Germany and the other from Spain—who have had their ESTA status permanently revoked because they tried to enter the U.S. in ESTA status to perform in the U.S. Both artists had entered multiple times in the past and one were merely entering to “perform” a master class.

·         It doesn’t matter whether an artist is paid or unpaid, whether the concert is free, or whether the performance is for educational purposes. They must have an appropriate visa—most often an O or P visa. United States Immigration Officers are taking this very seriously. 

4.         In preparing visa petitions, please start collecting and providing the evidence USCIS wants as opposed to giving them what you have lying around in your press package. The days of being able to supply a bio and a few press articles are long gone and we are seeing more and more visa denials and delays because of this.

·         I recently, and with much regret and sadness, had to advise a client to re-cast a role because the artist’s European management was simply refusing to cooperate in our efforts to obtain a visa for the artist. (In case that manager is reading this…no, USCIS will not “just google the artist to find out how famous he is!”)

Tax Stercus

1.         For those of you waiting to receive a refund check from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) for a non-U.S. artist who has had 30% withheld from their gross engagements fees and are due a tax refund, please be advised: the check is NOT in the mail, and won’t be for the foreseeable future. The IRS has added an extra layer of scrutiny to nonresident tax returns involving refunds. Aside from the usual 2 to 3 month processing time, there is a second review to be sure that everything on the 1042-S form is accurate and complete.  If the IRS senses ANYTHING off, the taxpayer will receive a letter asking for more info. To be fair, the IRS has announced that it will be paying interest on all overdue refund checks. To be practical, it doesn’t matter how much interest they offer to pay if, in fact, they never issue the refund.

·         Bottom Line: There is currently a very good chance that if 30% is withheld from an artist’s engagement fee, the artist will not get that money back…or, at least, not for the foreseeable future. Please plan cash flow accordingly. 

2.         A Central Withholding Agreement (CWA) is still the best way of avoiding or reducing the mandatory 30% withholding required from all engagement fees for non-U.S. artists. To be eligible for a CWA, among other requirements, an artist must have filed a U.S. tax return for each prior year in which they have ever performed in the U.S.-- even where no tax was owned. If an artist has not filed past U.S. tax returns, he or she will be required to file them as a prerequisite to obtaining a CWA. Unfortunately, we are seeing a sharp increase in the instances where filing such past tax returns is triggering an IRS audit in which they are requesting documents and records from the artist’s world-wide income.

·         In this one particular area, the IRS has displayed a remarkable degree of efficiency in identifying artists who have simultaneously made the least amount of money and kept the least amount of records to prove it.

3.         Obtaining Social Security Numbers (SSNs) and Individual Tax Payer Identification Numbers (ITINs) continue to be a challenge. While SSSs are not any easier for an artist to obtain, they have not become harder. ITINs, on the other hand, have become increasingly difficult, if not impossible, to get. Despite both staffing and budget cutbacks, the IRS has been requested to scrutinize ITIN requests more closely—particularly with regard to proof of identity. For most non-US residents, the most obvious and best proof of identity is a copy of their passport. However, the IRS lacks the resources and training to evaluate how to tell legitimate passports from forged ones. As a result, the IRS is now only accepting copies of passports that have been certified by the actual agency that issued the passport. However, even when this is provided, we are seeing the IRS send notices requesting that the actual, physical passport be sent to them instead. DO NOT DO THIS! You will never see that passport again!

·         There IS one option for some Europeans:  There are IRS offices located in the U.S. Consulates in Paris and London. One can go to these offices and request an ITIN in person (with an original passport, which the IRS will review and return on the spot.)  HOWEVER – one can obtain an ITIN only if one has an “immediate tax need”, such as filing a return. So, if requesting an ITIN in the Paris or London Consulates, one must also bring a completed tax return in hand, ready to file.

4.         We are seeing a large number of U.S. presenters--especially those based at colleges and universities—insisting that non-U.S. artists are legally required to have either a SSN or ITIN in order to perform or get paid in the U.S. Please be advised: There is no such law! While such numbers may make book keeping and accounting easier for the presenter, there is no law that requires an artist to have either one. Not only are SSNs and ITINs not proof of work authorization, but as we addressed above, many artists will be unable to get them in advance—if ever.   

5.         Canada requires 15% withholding for gross engagement fees of non-Canadian performers performing there (similar to the 30% withholding requirement in the U,S.) Canada Revenue allows performers to file a waiver/reduction request to reduce/waive the withholding (an R-105 request). On their website, Canada Revenue indicates that the deadline for filing such a request is 30 days prior to the first payment due.  However, it's taking them MUCH longer to process the requests. So, we are recommending that you file your request with them AT LEAST 60 days prior, or earlier, if possible.

General Travel Stercus 

1.         There is nothing new to report with regard to the ban on bringing musical instruments into the U.S. that contain ivory or other protected materials. United States Customs and Border Patrol isn’t strictly enforcing this with any degree of regularity. However, if any orchestras are touring and don’t want to take the risk, we are recommending that they contact Heather Noonan (hnoonan@americanorchestras.org) at the League of American Orchestras (http://americanorchestras.org) who is among the leading and most effective legislative arts advocates in the U.S. and is happy to talk to them about the “Instrument Passport” process.

·         The League and others are continuing to lobby for specific amendments, including exemptions to the rules for “personal effects” (which would include carry-on musical instruments).

2.         There has been some recent concern about Amtrak, the U.S.’s ersatz rail service, implementing a new policy requiring additional seats to be purchased for oversize musical instruments which cannot fit into overhead compartments. To date, this policy has been posted, but not enforced. We are recommending that artists and ensembles that intend to use Amtrak to travel to engagements within the U.S. check with an Amtrak representative in advance of the tour…and then be prepared for whatever they are told in advance to then be either incorrect or disputed by Amtrak at the actual time of travel.  

Other Stercus

1.         When negotiating fees for U.S. engagements, please remember to specify the currency in which the artist is to be paid, including exactly how and when the exchange rate is to be calculated. We are seeing an increased number of misunderstandings over this point.

·         At the same time, use this as an opportunity to clarify any other costs or deductions (such as taxes, visas costs, hotel, travel, etc.) which either are or are not to be included as part of the engagement fee.

2.         Too many people are still relying on general, vague, boilerplate, or unspecific contractual language to take the place of actual negotiation. Do not rely on the misguided belief that there are standard legal terms and procedures that magically govern engagements and bookings when words fail. If you want something, or don’t want something, say something—or, preferably, write it down.  

3.         When dealing with performances of new works or contemporary music, bear in mind that licensing laws differ. What’s in the public domain in Europe may not be in the United States. Even a re-arrangement or re-orchestration may not be permissible in certain countries. 

Press "Pause" On That Recording

Dear GG Arts Law:

In reviewing an engagement contract for one of my artists, I was surprised to see that the presenter wants the right to record the artist’s performance as a “work-for-hire”. The Presenter says that this is a standard requirement and also that its reasonable because my artist is protected by language in the contract that says: “In no event shall Producer have the right to exploit the recordings and/or an audiovisual program in connection therewith in any other manner other than non-commercial, educational and/or charitable uses or exhibitions without Artist’s prior written approval and without a separate agreement, negotiated in good faith with respect to any such uses or exploitation thereof.” Is this standard these days? Should I advise the artist to agree to this?

Standard for whom? As I have said, and will keep repeating until someone listens, no terms are “standard”—not recording rights, nor commissions, nor exclusivity restrictions, nor unilateral cancellation rights, nor any other nonsense which parties like to throw at one another under the banner of “standard.”

While, ultimately, it’s your artist’s decision, not yours, you should advise your artist not to agree to the language the presenter has proposed. The proposed language reflects a common mistaken belief within the performing arts part of the entertainment industry that so long as you don’t sell a recording, then all other uses are inherently “non-commercial.” However, particularly in the classical world where a classical recording hasn’t actually generated a profit since the release of “Fantasia”, no one really “sells” recordings anymore—at least, not for a profit. This means that, except in limited situations, there really are no practical uses or exhibitions for recordings other than “non-commercial, educational and/or charitable uses or exhibitions.” This further means that if you were to agree to the proposed terms, the presenter could do just about anything they wanted with your artist’s recording. Their proposed “protection” is meaningless.

Just because a recording isn’t sold, is unprofitable, is used for education, or is used by a non-profit organization does not make it inherently “non-commercial” or valueless. A recording still has value. Using a recording to promote the presenter or further a presenter’s mission provides value to the presenter which the presenter has not paid for. Otherwise, why does the presenter want it in the first place? Presenters need to stop believing that just because they engage an artist and pay for the artist’s performance then that also includes the right to record the artist’s performance and “own” the recording. In the real world, you only get what you pay for. When you buy a car, does it come with a chauffeur? It’s not merely presumptuous, but it completely demeans the value of the artist’s work—which, quite frankly, happens all too often these days by the same parties who should know better.

In addition, an artist always needs to be able to control how the artist is seen and heard. A poor recording of a brilliant performance could have devastating impact on an artist—particular a young or developing artist. Even a good recording, if released in its entirety, could limit an artist’s ability to release a recording of the same work in the future if it has already been made available for free.

While I generally have no objection to a recording being made, it’s the uses of and rights to the recording that need to clearly defined—and limited. First and foremost, unless the engagement fee includes an additional fee for “ownership” of the recording or the opportunity to perform with a particularly presenter is of such magnitude as to provide additional value to the artist, then the whole concept of a “work for hire” should be off the table. Instead, if anything, the presenter should only be able to use limited excerpts of the recording for limited purposes. Just as importantly, the artist should be always able to approve any recording to make sure that the artist is pleased both with her performance as well as with the quality of the recording itself. Third, whatever rights are granted to the presenter in an artist’s recording, should be granted to the artist as well. If the presenter gets the right to make and use a recording, then the artist should get a copy for the artist’s own promotional and marketing purposes as well. Any restrictions or approvals should be mutual.

Never Play Chess With Pigeons

By Brian Taylor Goldstein, Esq.  

Dear GG Arts Law: 

I’ve been asked sign a bad performance review with a number of inaccuracies. Can I be fired if I don’t sign it? Or should I insist that it be amended to reflect the truth? Our Executive Director is very emotional and hard to deal with, but I’m thinking that I should at least try and sit down and get her to change her mind rather than just give in.    

Unless you have an employment contract—or, in some cases, an employee manual—that specifically sets forth the circumstances and conditions under which you can be terminated, then it probably doesn’t matter whether you sign it or not. Many states, such as the State of New York, are what are referred to as “employment at will” states. You would need to check the laws in your specific state. However, “employment at will” means that an employer can pretty much hire and fire as he or she pleases and a discharged employee usually will have no legal recourse even when the discharge is unfair or unreasonable. The only exceptions would be termination based on statutorily defined discrimination—such as race, religion, gender, age, or disability. (Certain more enlightened jurisdictions, such as New York City, also include sexual orientation and marital status in this list.) Other than that, an employer in an “employment at will” state can walk in one day and fire anyone for any reason. In other words, unless one of the exceptions apply, you can be fired whether you sign the bad review or not.

Ideally, it would great if you could correct the record. A bad review that indicates you failed to follow instructions or disregarded office policies could negatively impact your eligibility for unemployment compensation should you be fired. However, correcting the record may not always be practical or realistic.

If your boss is “very emotional and hard to deal with”, you are not alone. There is no shortage in our industry of exceptionally talented and creative individuals who, nonetheless, should be heavily medicated. Many of these souls find themselves unfettered and autonomously in charge of distinguished arts organizations and businesses.

I am constantly amazed at how many people cling to the belief that a logical argument, persuasive reasoning, or “the right words” will magically transform an otherwise irrational person into Socrates. In fact, whether you are negotiating a contract or trying to mollify an artist, attempting to reason with an emotional or irrational person is like playing chess with a pigeon: it doesn’t matter how brilliant you are, the pigeon is still going to knock over all the pieces and poop on the chess board. Getting such a person to admit he or she is wrong about anything will only be met with defensiveness, paranoia, reminders of how you should be more appreciative of their past largess with regard to your past transgressions (most of which you will have never been told about before), and accusations that you are being argumentative, not a team player, exasperating, and disrespectful.

The best, and only, way to begin any conversation with someone being unreasonable or emotional, and who also happens to be in charge, is to validate, never confront. Assuming you want to remain employed, you need to accept that your boss “owns reality” at the moment and learn to live and work within that fantasy land. You don’t have to admit the facts to admit that your boss’s perception that you have done a poor job or failed to meet expectations is a perception you are enthusiastically willing to correct. Like a bad review of a concert or performance, thank the critic and then move on.

The Truth About Industry Standards

The following was posted on March 21, 2012 on FTM Arts Law's blog "Law and Disorder: Performing Arts Division" which can be found on MusicalAmerica.com:

The Truth About Industry Standards

By Brian Taylor Goldstein

Dear FTM Arts Law:

I was recently reviewing a contract I received from an agent. When I asked for some changes, she told me that her contract was “industry standard” and that nothing could be changed because that’s the way everyone does it. In the future, I don’t want to waste anyone’s time or appear like I don’t know what I’m doing. Are there industry standards for certain types of contracts? Where can I learn what is and is not legally required?

Do not mistake “industry standard” for “legally required.” Something which is “legally required” is mandated by statutes or regulations—such as visas, taxes, licenses, or permits. The term “industry standard”, on the other hand, usually means: “This is how I’m used to doing it and I’d rather not change.” Too often, its employed as a form of peer pressure to make you feel that you have no right to make counterproposals, counter offers, or suggest a new or different way to structure the deal or transaction. Nothing could be further from the truth! The only industry standards in this industry are that there are NO standards! This is not to suggest that there are not ways to structure some deals and transactions that are more common than others, but even a common practice or custom does not mean that it is unchangeable. More significantly, if you polled a cross section of performing arts professionals about any given topic, you will find a significant divergence of opinion as to what is and what is not “standard”. In other words, just because someone has done something a certain way for 20 years does not mean that’s the way everyone else must do it, much less you. It may be “standard” for that individual or organization, but it doesn’t make it “standard” for anyone else.

In your question, you don’t mention the specific terms that were at issue. Depending on the circumstances, what you were asking for may have been completely reasonable or completely ridiculous. But that really doesn’t matter. Perhaps more than in any other industry, the arts is based on relationships and success depends on the health and strength of those relationships. When entering into any arts-based relationship, you should always feel free to ask questions, propose new ways of doing things, and think creatively. This does not mean you will get what you want. That will depend on negotiations and the negotiating positions of the parties. If you need to licensing rights from another party or want to work with them more than they want to work with you, its to be expected that they may counter any or all of your proposals with “take it or leave it.” However, that’s not because of any predetermined “industry standard”, its just that they may be in a better position than you are to dictate the terms they want. That’s not necessarily unfair, its just reality. In response to an attorney who once presented me with a contract which he insisted was “industry standard”, I told him that, according to his “standard”, the artist gets screwed, so we need to pick a better standard. It never hurts to ask!

________________________________________________________________

To ask your own question, write to lawanddisorder@musicalamerica.org

All questions on any topic related to legal and business issues will be welcome. However, please post only general questions or hypotheticals. FTM Arts Law reserves the right to alter, edit or, amend questions to focus on specific issues or to avoid names, circumstances, or any information that could be used to identify or embarrass a specific individual or organization. All questions will be posted anonymously.

Force Majeure: Don't Blame Me, Blame God!

On the evening of Sunday, April 18, my wife and I were scheduled to be enjoying our first night attending a long planned arts conference in France. We imagined ourselves sitting at a bistro in Saint Michel taking in the golden glow of a romantic evening in Paris. Instead, I found myself eating fish tacos with my parents in Virginia. We, like many others, were the victims of the Icelandic volcano-whose-name-cannot-be-pronounced which cancelled almost all trans-Atlantic travel. As the ash spread, so did the cancellations of artists who could not travel to Europe and artists who could not travel to the United States. And then the phone calls began: grumblings from presenters upset because artists were unwilling to change flight plans or take trains as well as grumblings from artists who were upset that presenters were unwilling to compensate them. After all, the volcano wasn’t their fault! I even heard from a manager lamenting that just because the Force Majeure clause in his artist’s contract allowed for a cancellation, he should still be entitled to a commission for booking the engagement in the first place!

“Force Majeure” is nothing more than the fancy, legalistic, and less religious jargon for what everyone else would call an “Act of God.” In essence, a “force majeure” or Act of God is a contractual provision which permits a party to cancel or breach the contract without having to pay damages or incurring any liability to the other. Whereas a cancellation or termination clause typically permits a party to cancel or terminate for ANY reason, a Force Majeure clause allows a party to cancel or terminate only if something happens which is beyond anyone’s control and which could not have been anticipated. So, if the Force Majeure forces the artist to cancel, he/she is not liable to the venue for the venue’s lost ticket sales, lost out of pocket costs, or the costs of hiring and advertising another artist or performance. Similarly, if the Force Majeure forces the venue or presenter to cancel, it is not liable to the artist for the artist’s lost fees or out of pocket costs.

However, nothing in the arts is ever that simple. Many people, incorrectly, assume that there is a common understanding or standard of Force Majeure and that, in the event of a fire, blizzard, flood, or other unforeseen event, there are automatic protocols which will govern the situation. In fact, you will find that presumptions and assumptions differ wildly when it comes to Force Majeure and that people, in the midst of a crisis, tend not be at their most rational. For example, I had one of my clients sued by a presenter when the artist cancelled his concert upon the death of the artist’s mother. Why? Because the “Act of God” clause in the presenter’s contract provided for the death or incapacity of the artist and did not extend to the artist’s relatives or family. (Granted, the presenter also happened to be a heartless, greedy jerk, but that wasn’t the “official” reason.) On the other hand, one of my clients was outraged when, just a few months ago, a venue was forced to cancel her performance due to the “snowmagaddon” that swept the East Coast and wanted the return on the deposit the venue had paid. The artist contended that she was entitled to keep the deposit to cover her lost fees and costs. However, what about the venue’s lost revenue and costs? According to the artist, the Force Majeure clause was intended to protect her, not the venue. Or there was the university-based performing arts center which claimed the right to cancel due to Force Majeure because their facility shares a parking lot with the university’s stadium and when the school rescheduled the homecoming game, the theater lost its parking. I have also known artists who claimed that an opportunity to perform in a movie or sing at the Met was an Act of God entitling them to cancel their conflicting engagement as well as venues who claimed that poor ticket sales or loss of funding could similarly be ascribed to the hand of God. I even know of a manager who claimed that the failure of his artist to obtain a visa was an Act of God which entitled the artist to full payment regardless of the fact that the artist was legally barred from performing in the U.S. (While many believe God is everywhere, I have it on fairly good authority that God dwelleths not in the halls of USCIS!) Just because something is unanticipated, unexpected, or undesirable does not make it an Act of God that legally allows a party to cancel and walk away from an otherwise binding and enforceable contract.

Fortunately, Force Majeure is a creature of contract and, like all other contractual provisions, can be drafted to suit the specific needs, concerns and circumstances of the situation. Unfortunately, like most contractual provisions in arts contracts, Force Majeure clauses tend to err on the side of brevity and oversimplification, rather than nuance and specificity. Or, worse, many just “assume” that all contracts are cancellable if there is an Act of God. In fact, if there is no Force Majeure clause, or the Force Majeure clause is so broad as to be meaningless, you are left with a contractual concept known as “impossibility” whereby a breach of a contract may be excused if performance was truly impossible—not merely inconvenient, but truly impossible. For example, if an artist’s flight is cancelled, would it have been impossible for the artist to drive all night or take a later flight? As the name suggests, meeting the standard of “impossibility” is often, in and of itself, impossible.

The better solution is to have better Force Majeure clauses. It is never too late to dust off your forms and templates and check your Force Majeure clause to make sure that, first and foremost, there is one and, second, it is comprehensive enough to cover your specific circumstances and concerns. While no contract can even contemplate every possible scenario, you want your Force Majeure clause to do more than simply state that “either party can cancel in the event of an Act of God.” Rather, you want your clause at least to provide some parameters within which to address two specific questions: (1) What constitutes a “force majeure” event? (2) What are the ramifications?

Let’s assume the venue is open, but the artist must cancel due to a Force Majeure in the artist’s life or part of the world. Does the artist have to reimburse the presenter for any of its lost marketing expenses or costs? If the artist had already received a deposit, does it have to be returned? What if it’s the presenter who experiences the crisis, but the artist is ready, willing, and able to travel and perform? Does the presenter have to make a good faith effort to re-book the artist at a future date? Can the artist keep any deposits or advanced payments to offset the cancellation? Can an artist claim Force Majeure due to the death or injury of a family member or relative? Can a venue claim Force Majeure if it experiences an unexpected budget shortfall or a financial crisis? What if the engagement is for a series of performances and a Force Majeure forces the cancellation of only some of the performances? Is the artist’s engagement fee reduced on a pro-rata basis? What if the artist is a group and a member becomes sick or injured? Does the group have the option to find a replacement or can the venue claim Force Majeure and cancel? Does it make a difference if it’s a key member of the group?

There are no right or wrong answers. The only wrong approach is to wait until after the Volcano has blotted out the lights of the marquee or the tsunami has filled the orchestra pit to pull out your contract and see what it says.