EFTA02652328

From: Valeria Chomsky < Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2018 11:48 PM To: jeffrey E. Subject: Fwd: Marital Trust This is becoming horrible and it is going to get worse.O=A0 All I know is that this situation has to end one way or another. It is =oing to affect Noam's health. It is not fair and it is not right= They are going beyond all the boundaries. Unacceptable. =What do they want? To destroy our happiness? To destroy Noam h=mself? This is becoming harassment, every day Noam has to deal with =his, instead of relaxing and enjoying our life. It is unbearable.4>=A0 You know my position. If you can contact his la=yer, I think it is a good idea. It is=revealing that after 5 years, three adult children, in their fifties and s=xties, cannot accept the situation that Noam remarried and all they can th=nk about is about their inheritance -- as if they already don't have e=ough --, and disregarding their father's well being, health and our jo=nt state of joie de vivre -- that's what I think bothers them m=st. Best, Valeria =/div> Forwarded message jeffrey E. «= href="mailto:[email protected]">[email protected]> Date: Thu, May 24, 2018 at 7:16 PM Subject: Re: Marital Trust To= Valeria Chomsky < <mailto > > would you like me to =all his lawyer? sorry , but this was my view from day one..=A0 but noam understandbly did not want to accept it. On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 7:11 PM Valeria Chomsky < <=a» wrote: =br> For=arded message From: Noam Choms=y < Date: Thu, May 24, 2018 a= 6:47 PM Subject: Re: Marital Trust To: Harry Chomsky < ar> <mailto > > I'm more than sorry, not just about the convers=tion. Worst thing that's ever happened to me. Could never have i=agined that this would happen in my late years. EFTA_R1_01895566 EFTA02652328 Worth r=flecting why On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 1:44 PM, Harry Chomsky &I=a<=a» <mailto wrote: l&=39;m sorry that this conversation hasn't led to any agreement on chang=s to the trust or to improvement of things between us. On Wed, May 23, =018 at 11:59 AM, Noam Chomsky < <mailto:[email protected]» wrote= As usual, you ignored everything I wrote and and=are pursuing your own agenda. But this letter is nevertheless very h=lpful. I've been asking you repeatedly to clear the air and say =xactly what you want instead of evading it in one way or another, and this=does come close to that. It also finally explains clearly what I did=not want to believe about your refusing my request for some funds for taxe= a few years ago You no doubt recall the circumstances.=C2* Unknown to me, my financial advisers had arranged to rapidly deplete=my main source of support, my IRA, by distributing half of the mandatory w=thdrawal to family members and to use the rest for paying management fees =nd taxes for the entire estate. That meant that when I paid Alex'=s expenses, I had to withdraw over the limit, with exorbitant taxes. Same =ith any other funds for any family matters, and with Wellfleet payments we=l after I stopped using the house, again with exorbitant taxes. Of c=urse I also needed to live, so that meant more withdrawals with exorbitant=taxes. Under those conditions I requested some tax relief from the m=rital trust -- which, of course, was established on the understanding that=it would be available to the survivor. Your react=on, to my amazement, was to refuse, even under these remarkable circumstan=es, by imposing absurd conditions that no o=e with a shred of dignity could accept, no concern of yours. Of course, no=such questions ever were on even the remote horizon when I was trustee, be=ore choosing you to replace me, or on any other occasion when I arranged f=r funds to go to you, either as an ample inheritance or for regular expens=s. Your letter now makes your reasoning very clear. =our proposal is that you should remain in total control, evidently a matte= of great importance for you. And following your principles, as exhi=ited with crystal clarity under even the extreme circumstances just descri=ed, you can ensure that the funds in their entirety will go to you, though=l suppose in your kindness you might relax your strict regimen slightly wh=n the day comes, as it must, when I am no longer in a position to retain a=shred of dignity and to refuse an intrusive and humiliating interrogation.=/span> However, there is a simpler way to realize your objectives= even more fully. You can resign as trustee -- of course possible, j=st as I did when I appointed you. We can then agree that you receive=the entire funds right now, instead of waiting until I die, so that you ca= use them right now for whatever purposes you like. Plainly that'=s more efficient, and even more lucrative for you than your suggestion. It's true that this is one possible proposal, as you sug=est. 2 EFTA_R1_01895567 EFTA02652329 Another proposal is the one I suggested. True, =here are some arcane tax issues, but these can easily be resolved, as your=lawyer can explain to you, with common consent among the beneficiaries -- =hich means your consent. </=pan> There are, of course, other possi=ilities. I could pursue legal measures to have the trust used in the=manner in which it was intended. I could also look into the disburse=ents that have been made to family members (so I have learned) without inf=rming me, and could look into why I haven't been receiving any income =rom the trust for years (until I finally raised the question), and why inv=stments were made the way they were done, yielding long- term returns that =ould be of no use for me, highly irregular for an elderly person -- which,=as I wrote you, greatly surprised financial advisers I consulted when I fi=ally began to pay attention. And, furthermore, why I never received =ny statements about what was going on for years, until I finally asked wha= is going on with the trust. And perhaps other matters that evidentl= concern you, as shown by your request for protection for past actions.Q=A0 But I haven't yet shifted to your domain and still reta=n some illusions about family relations. Th=re are other matters that I've written to you about several times, wit= no response, which means I presume that you do not want to hear them.Q=A0 They don't specifically have to do with this matter, so if you have=gotten this far in the letter, you can stop here. But they are on my=mind, and I want to clear the air -- if anyone wishes to look. <=r> My father could die in peace, knowing his children would ensu=e that his wife would be taken care of. I =on't have that luxury. No lawyers or w=rds were necessary. It was simply obvious that we would hand over to=her what there was of an inheritance, the house and everything in it.40=A0 And of course we were very pleased that he had joy and companionship in=his last years. Valeria and I are very happy toge=her, apart from what you are doing, which is naturally extremely painful.=C240 She left her friends and family, and a professional life. I ha=e almost no pension, as I described, and it terminates when I die. A=cordingly, I have to deal with concerns that my father, luckily for him, n=ver had to consider. The situation is not only ex=remely painful, but in fact surreal. I could never have imagined tha= anything like this would happen in my last years. =orwarded message From: Harry C=omsky < Date: Tue, May 22, 2018 at=2:32 PM Subject: Re: Marital Trust To: Noam Chomsky < <mailto > > I'd like to put together a proposal that I think wou=d address some of your needs and ease our communications. The propos=l would give you some additional access to the trust assets. It woul= also include appointing a new independent trustee to replace Max. H=wever, it would not terminate the trust, and I would remain as one trustee= Are you interested in seeing such a proposal? 3 EFTA_R1_01895568 EFTA02652330 If you feel that it would be a good use of everyone&=39;s time, I will work with my lawyer Jillian to write up an outline of wh=t I have in mind. We will send the outline to you and Rich, unless y=u would prefer we send it only to you. You may wa=t to consult a lawyer to learn more about why we can't just terminate =he trust and split the assets as you suggested. If your lawyer disag=ees with Jillian and feels that such a split would be viable, Jillian woul= be happy to discuss it with your lawyer. On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Noam C=omsky < <mailto > wrote: Sorry, I made the same error as before.4,=A0 I'm finding it hard to shake the illusion that we are discussing th=ngs within a family, and are not characters in Bleak House. l=f139;II try to remember. Below. On Sun, May 20, 2018 at 9:19 PM, Ha=ry Chomsky < <mailto » wrote: It sounds like you would like me to say yes =r no to your proposal exactly as you have stated it, without further discu=sion. I can't do that. Here are some reasons: 1. l='s not permitted under Massachusetts trust law. Can you -- or perhaps your lawyer -- refer me to the part of =ass Trust Law that makes it illegal for beneficiaries to agree on distribu=ing funds from a marital trust and then liquidate it? I can't fi=d it. 1. I agreed to certain obligations when I became trustee,=and I have to make sure to discharge them faithfully. Even if you te=l me you don't care about my fiduciary responsibility, the law says l&=39;m responsible anyway. Your sole=n obligations are no doubt impressive, but there is an easy way to put the= to rest. Simply resign (permitted under Mass law) and then you will=have no further obligations. We can then return to the situation bef=re I appointed you to be a trustee, when I was a trustee and there were no=problems about fiduciary responsibility -- that was before the transition =rom family to Bleak House. 1. It's not specific. For in=tance, you mention dividing the trust into two parts, but you don't sa= what each part would consist of. Correct. I left that for discussion, still laboring under my=illusions. So I therefore suggest that you propose what you think wo=ld be an appropriate split and we can proceed from there. <=lockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px=ficcc solid;padding-left:lex"> 4 EFTA_R1_01895569 EFTA02652331 1. It's not complet=. For instance, you haven't proposed any way to shield us and Ma= from liability for past actions. = hadn't realized that you are concerned that your past actions might m=ke you legally liable. But this too can be handled easily. I&#=9;m sure that your lawyer can construct some document to protect you from =hatever those past infractions were, and since I still labor under my old =Ilusions, that will suffice. =owever, given your assumptions, we should definitely have ironclad agreeme=ts, with batteries of lawyers an notaries and witnesses, including an agre=ment that you will not contest my will, something that had never crossed m= mind before I learned about your assumptions -- which, I admit, I'm s=ill having trouble comprehending. It might be possible to work out all=of these problems and develop a legal, specific and complete agreement bas=d on the framework you've proposed. Would you like to engage wit= me in some kind of process to attempt that? Other than having your =awyer talk to mine, do you have any suggestion about how to do so? Very simple. Proceed as above</=> On Sat= May 19, 2018 at 2:26 PM, Noam Chomsky < wrote: I'm glad =hat you find the idea interesting and think that you might consider it, th=ugh you have to consult lawyers first. My own view is diffe=ent. To me the proposal I suggested seems to be a very simple way of=settling this matter, which to me is extremely troubling. I realize =hat this is just another case of a longstanding difference in the way we a=proach these problems, a difference that has been clear ever since we were=discussing the interest on the loan from the Trust and found that we could=not communicate because I mistakenly assumed that it was a discussion amon= family members while your letters made it very clear and explicit that yo= saw it as a legal issue to be settled among lawyers and Bainco, perhaps w=th a mediator in the adversary proceeding. All matters I find it ver= hard to comprehend, and to live with, but so be it. So by =11 means consult with your lawyer, or perhaps a battery of lawyers, to mak= sure that your interests are properly protected. I don't need a=y lawyer's advice. The matter is perfectly clear and straightfor=ard. So there is no reason for me to hire a lawyer to deal with the =uestion and to have a lawyer contact yours and initiate a discussion in wh=ch we all participate. The matter is very simple. We =an proceed without delay if you agree to settle the issue in the simple ma=ner that I suggested. As for your proposals in your letter =f March 29, as I wrote you, the letter was so shocking that it was hard fo= me to bring myself to respond, but I did, in detail, but decided not to s=nd it. Perhaps I should. Will think about it. =div style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-family:arial,sans-serif;font- size:12=8px;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:norm=l;font-weight:40O;letter- 5 EFTA_R1_01895570 EFTA02652332 spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;t=xt-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;background- color:rgb=255,255,255);text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial">=s for your proposals, my response was the obvious one. I'm sorry=for the stress you had to endure, but your efforts were a waste of time fo= reasons I had already fully explained before you undertook them. As=l'm sure you recall, a few years ago, I requested tax payments from th= marital trust when my IRA was being rapidly depleted by my advisers who w=re distributing half to family and using the other half to pay management =ees and taxes for the entire estate, so that to pay Alex's medical exp=nses and the expenses for Wellfleet I had to withdraw excess funds with ex=rbitant taxes, all that before withdrawing even a cent to live on again wi=h exorbitant taxes. Your response was to refuse the request unless l=agreed to intrusive and insulting financial investigations -- of a kind I =ever considered when providing funds to you for something you needed.Q=A0 I made it clear and explicit at the time that I would not submit to thi= procedure. Since your efforts and proposals simply repeat the same =rocedure, they were a waste of time. There were some things=in your letter that were correct. You're right that despite what=has happened, I'm still a "wealthy man," with income well ab=ve the median, though lacking a pension and accumulated property, not at t=e level of my peers. Furthermore, I can supplement my income by teac=ing large undergraduate courses, something I'd never done and that is =ot that common for people approaching 90, but something that I enjoy.Q.A0 And you too are a wealthy man, for the same reasons: the reasons are th=t I've worked hard all my life, lived fairly simply (and live even mor= simply today), and was therefore able to put aside enough money to ensure=that my children and grandchildren are very well cared for, indefinitely.=C20 But I again suggest that we put all of this asi=e, and deal quickly and simply with what appears to be the one outstanding=issue: dividing the Marital trust and then dissolving it, all very simple,=needing no lawyers, at least on my part. » wrote: 0 =div class="gmail_extra"> On Fri, May 18, 2=18 at 1:44 PM, Harry Chomsky < =blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p= itccc solid;padding-left:lex"> This is an interesting=idea. We could consider it further, but I would need the advice of m= lawyer — and I assume you would want your own lawyer's advice=as well — to ensure that any agreement we reach is consistent with=Massachusetts law and satisfies the interests, needs, and obligations of e=erybody involved. Perhaps, as a next step, you could ask your lawyer=to contact mine and begin a discussion in which we all participate. <=iv> I'm also curious to hear your thoughts about the pro=osals I suggested in my message on March 29th. On Thu, =ay 17, 2018 at 10:05 AM, Noam Chomsky < wrote: As = wrote a little while ago, I did write a long response to your last -- dee=ly depressing -- letter, but decided not to send it. I may return to=that letter later but will keep to some factual matters that ought to be c=eared up. But now I'm writing just about one point,=which seems to be the core of the problem -- a problem, which, again, I do='t understand. But let's put that aside, though I hope we ca= clear it up soon. All of this is a painful cloud that I never=would have imagined would darken my late years. 6 EFTA_R1_01895571 EFTA02652333 T=e core issue seems to be the marital trust. I've explained how M=and I actually set it up with Eric, which seemed to us just plain common s=nse. I've also explained Max's different interpretation.Q=A0 I've asked you for yours, but haven't heard it. But let&#=9;s put that aside too, and just resolve the matter, as can be done very s=mply -- with no need for lawyers to explain the fiduciary responsibility o= the trustee I appointed years ago to replace me, something I never paid a=y attention to before. The simple solution is to =ivide the trust into two parts. One part will go to you, to use as y=u wish. One part will go to me, for me to use without any investigat=ons of my financial situation and other such intrusions that I won't a=cept. Then the trust can simply be dissolved, and it is all over. So I suggest that we proceed this way, and end the w=ole matter -- at least, whatever it is that I understand about what is of =oncern to you. 0 =div class="h5">-- Q=A0 please note The information conta=ned in this communication is confidential, may be attorney-client privi=eged, may constitute inside information, and is intended only for th= use of the addressee. It is the property of JEE Unauthorized use, d=sclosure or copying of this communication or any part thereof is strict=y prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communic=tion in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by e-ma=l to [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> , and destroy this communication and all copies thereof,<=r>including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved 7 EFTA_R1_01895572 EFTA02652334