EFTA02660990

From: Noam Chomsky < Sent: Saturday, May 19, 2018 9:26 PM To: Harry Chomsky Cc: Avi Chomsky; Diana Chomsky Subject: Re: Marital Trust I'm glad that you find the idea interesting and think =hat you might consider it, though you have to consult lawyers first. =div style="colorrgb(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:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:Opx3=xt- transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:Opx;background-color:rgb=255,255,255);text-decoration- style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial">=br> My own view is different. To me the proposal I suggested se=ms to be a very simple way of settling this matter, which to me is extreme=y troubling. I realize that this is just another case of a longstand=ng difference in the way we approach 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 among family members while your letters made it v=ry clear and explicit that you saw it as a legal issue to be settled among=lawyers and Bainco, perhaps with a mediator in the adversary proceeding.=C24, All matters I find it very hard to comprehend, and to live with, but=so be it. So by all means consult with your lawyer, or perh=ps a battery of lawyers, to make sure that your interests are properly pro=ected. I don't need any lawyer's advice. The matter is=perfectly clear and straightforward. So there is no reason for me to=hire a lawyer to deal with the question and to have a lawyer contact yours=and initiate a discussion in which we all participate. The =atter is very simple. We can proceed without delay if you agree to s=ttle the issue in the simple manner that I suggested. As fo= your proposals in your letter of March 29, as I wrote you, the letter was=so shocking that it was hard for me to bring myself to respond, but I did,=in detail, but decided not to send it. Perhaps I should. Will =hink about it. As for your proposals, my response was the o=vious one. I'm sorry for the stress you had to endure, but your =fforts were a waste of time for reasons I had already fully explained befo=e you undertook them. As I'm sure you recall, a few years ago, l=requested tax payments from the marital trust when my IRA was being rapidl= depleted by my advisers who were distributing half to family and using th= other half to pay management fees and taxes for the entire estate, so tha= to pay Alex's medical expenses and the expenses for Wellfleet I had t= withdraw excess funds with exorbitant taxes, all that before withdrawing =ven a cent to live on again with exorbitant taxes. Your response was=to refuse the request unless I agreed to intrusive and insulting financial=investigations -- of a kind I never considered when providing funds to you=for something you needed. I made it clear and explicit at the time t=at I would not submit to this procedure. Since your efforts and prop=sals simply repeat the same procedure, they were a waste of time. There were some things in your letter that were correct. You&n=9;re right that despite what has happened, I'm still a "wealthy m=n," with income well above the median, though lacking a pension and a=cumulated property, not at the level of my peers. Furthermore, I can=supplement my income by teaching large undergraduate courses, something l&=39;d never done and that is not that common for people approaching 90, but=something that I enjoy. And you too are a wealthy man, for the same =easons: the reasons are that I've worked hard all my life, lived fairl= simply (and live even more simply today), and was therefore able to put a=ide enough money to ensure that my children and grandchildren are very wel= cared for, indefinitely. EFTA_R1_01909009 EFTA02660990 But I again suggest t=at we put all of this aside, and deal quickly and simply with what appears=to be the one outstanding issue: dividing the Marital trust and then disso=ving it, all very simple, needing no lawyers, at least on my part. 0 On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 1:44 PM, Harry Chomsky &l= <=a» <mailto > wrote: This is an interesting idea. We could consider it further, but I w=uld need the advice of my lawyer — and I assume you would want you= own lawyer's advice as well — to ensure that any agreement we=reach is consistent with Massachusetts law and satisfies the interests, ne=ds, and obligations of everybody involved. Perhaps, as a next step, =ou could ask your lawyer to contact mine and begin a discussion in which w= all participate. I'm also curious to hear yo=r thoughts about the proposals I suggested in my message on March 29th. On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 10:05 AM, Noam Chom=ky < > wrote: <mailto As I wrote a little while ago, I did w=ite a long response to your last -- deeply depressing -- letter, but decid=d not to send it. I may return to that letter later but will keep to=some factual matters that ought to be cleared up. But n=w I'm writing just about one point, which seems to be the core of the =roblem -- a problem, which, again, I don't understand. But let&4=9;s put that aside, though I hope we can clear it up soon. All of th=s is a painful cloud that I never would have imagined would darken m= late years. The core issue seems to be the marit=l trust. I've explained how M and I actually set it up with Eric= which seemed to us just plain common sense. I've also explained=Max's different interpretation. I've asked you for yours, bu= haven't heard it. But let's put that aside too, and just re=olve the matter, as can be done very simply -- with no need for lawyers to=explain the fiduciary responsibility of the trustee I appointed years ago =o replace me, something I never paid any attention to before. The simple solution is to divide the trust into two parts.Q=A0 One part will go to you, to use as you wish. One part will go to =e, for me to use without any investigations of my financial situation and =ther such intrusions that I won't accept. Then the trust can sim=ly be dissolved, and it is all over. So I suggest=that we proceed this way, and end the whole matter -- at least, whatever i= is that I understand about what is of concern to you. 0 2 EFTA_R1_01909010 EFTA02660991