EFTA01052479.pdf
dataset_9 pdf 379.9 KB • Feb 3, 2026 • 5 pages
From: Noam Chomsky
To: "Jeffrey E." <jeevacation@gmail.com>, Valeria Chomsky
Subject: Re: Marital Trust
Date: Mon, 21 May 2018 19:32:43 +0000
Just wrote Harry, along the lines we discussed, and I added what you suggest here about attacking the will. All
crazy. I'd like Harry to come straight out and say what Max attributes to him. I've asked several times, but no
response yet. And may again if the occasion arises.
On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 12:22 PM, jeffrey E. <jeevacation@gmail.com> wrote:
once you get the proposed split. there are many mechanisms , releases etc. they will want you to have a
lawyer so that they can protect against a future lawsuit based on not full understanding , it is common.
FYI, according to max. harrys position is that carol would not have wanted her portion of the money to go to
valeria. its a silly argument. . with releases from all , valeria you hany and your daughters anytihing is
possible. . you will need to include an agreement not to attack your will. to protect valeria.
On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 9:06 PM Noam Chomsky < wrote:
I'll ask directly
On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 11:26 AM, jeffrey E. <jeevacation@gmail.com> wrote:
The elephant in the room is his sugested split
On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 8:11 PM jeffrey E. <jeevacation@gmail.com> wrote:
Ok
On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 8:09 PM Noam Chomsky < wrote:
I'd like to hold off on this for a bit. I'm curious to learn more about Harry's thinking.
I'd like to write to him saying that there's nothing in Mass law that prevents beneficiaries from doing
as I suggested. He can relieve his concerns about future fiduciary responsibility by resigning, and we
can return to the situation before I appointed him trustee, when I was trustee and had no concerns
about fiduciary responsibility. If he feels that he has carried out past actions that make him liable to
some legal process, he should arrange with his lawyer about ways to protect himself. I would also
like to ask him more directly than before what he thinks would be a proper division.
Then we can go on from there.
OK?
On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 2:03 AM, jeffrey E. <jeevacation@gmail.com> wrote:
Rich Kahn can talk with Harry if ok with u
On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 10:13 AM jeffrey E. <jeevacation@gmail.com> wrote:
All silly , they can make s final distribution of 2 million dollars and you and Valeria release all.
Max Harry children and you receive releases - easy
On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 6:46 AM Noam Chomsky < wrote:
the latest.
Mass law prevents beneficiaries to divide up a trust and liquidate it?
EFTA01052479
Forwarded message --------
From: Harry Chomsky <harryOchomsky.net>
Date: Sun, May 20, 2018 at 9:19 PM
Subject: Re: Marital Trust
To: Noam Chomsky
Cc: Avi Chomsky <achomsky®salemstate.edu>, Diana Chomsky <dchomsky@oxfam.org.uk>
It sounds like you would like me to say yes or no to your proposal exactly as you have stated it,
without further discussion. I can't do that. Here are some reasons:
1. It's not permitted under Massachusetts trust law. I agreed to certain obligations when I
became trustee, and I have to make sure to discharge them faithfully. Even if you tell me
you don't care about my fiduciary responsibility, the law says I'm responsible anyway.
2. It's not specific. For instance, you mention dividing the trust into two parts, but you don't
say what each part would consist of.
3. It's not complete. For instance, you haven't proposed any way to shield us and Max from
liability for past actions.
It might be possible to work out all of these problems and develop a legal, specific and
complete agreement based on the framework you've proposed. Would you like to engage with
me in some kind of process to attempt that? Other than having your lawyer talk to mine, do
you have any suggestion about how to do so?
On Sat, May 19, 2018 at 2:26 PM, Noam Chomsky < wrote:
I'm glad that you find the idea interesting and think that you might consider it, though you have to consult
lawyers first.
My own view is different. 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 that this is just another case of a longstanding
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 very 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. 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 perhaps a battery of lawyers, to make sure that your interests
are properly protected. 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 matter is very simple. We can proceed without delay if you agree to settle the issue in the simple
manner that I suggested.
As for 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
think about it.
As 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 for reasons I had already fully explained before you undertook them. As
I'm sure you recall, a few years ago, I requested tax payments from the marital trust when my IRA was
being rapidly depleted by my advisers who were distributing half to family and using the other half to pay
management fees and taxes for the entire estate, so that to pay Alex's medical expenses and the
expenses for Wellfleet I had to withdraw excess funds with exorbitant taxes, all that before withdrawing
even 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
EFTA01052480
funds to you for something you needed. I made it dear and explicit at the time that I would not submit to
this procedure. Since your efforts and proposals simply repeat the same procedure, 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 above the median, though lacking a pension and accumulated
property, not at the level of my peers. Furthermore, I can supplement my income by teaching large
undergraduate courses, something I'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 reasons: the reasons are that
I've worked hard all my life, lived fairly simply (and live even more simply today), and was therefore able to
put aside enough money to ensure that my children and grandchildren are very well cared for,
indefinitely.
But I again suggest that 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 dissolving it, all very simple, needing no lawyers,
at least on my part.
D
On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 1:44 PM, Hany Chomsky <harryAchomsky.net> wrote:
This is an interesting idea. We could consider it further, but I would need the advice of my
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 everybody involved. Perhaps, as a next step, you could ask your
lawyer to contact mine and begin a discussion in which we all participate.
I'm also curious to hear your thoughts about the proposals I suggested in my message on
March 29th.
On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 10:05 AM, Noam Chomsky < wrote:
As I wrote a little while ago, I did write a long response to your last — deeply 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 cleared up.
But now I'm writing just about one point, which seems to be the core of the problem — a problem,
which, again, I don't understand. But let's put that aside, though I hope we can dear it up soon. All
of this is a painful cloud that I never would have imagined would darken my late years.
The 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 sense. I've also explained Max's different interpretation.
I've asked you for yours, but haven't heard it. But lets put that aside too, and just resolve 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 to replace me, something I never paid any attention to before.
The simple solution is to divide the trust into two parts. One part will go to you, to use as you wish.
One part will go to me, for me to use without any investigations of my financial situation and other
such intrusions that I won't accept. Then the trust can simply be dissolved, and it is all over.
So I suggest that we proceed this way, and end the whole matter — at least, whatever it is that I
understand about what is of concern to you.
D
please note
EFTA01052481
The information contained in this communication is
confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may
constitute inside information, and is intended only for
the use of the addressee. It is the property of
JEE
Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this
communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited
and may be unlawful. If you have received this
communication in error, please notify us immediately by
return e-mail or by e-mail to jeevacation@gmail.com, and
destroy this communication and all copies thereof,
including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved
please note
The information contained in this communication is
confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may
constitute inside information, and is intended only for
the use of the addressee. It is the property of
JEE
Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this
communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited
and may be unlawful. If you have received this
communication in error, please notify us immediately by
return e-mail or by e-mail to jeevacation@gmail.com, and
destroy this communication and all copies thereof,
including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved
please note
The information contained in this communication is
confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may
constitute inside information, and is intended only for
the use of the addressee. It is the property of
JEE
Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this
communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited
and may be unlawful. If you have received this
communication in error, please notify us immediately by
return e-mail or by e-mail to jeevacation@gmail.com, and
destroy this communication and all copies thereof,
including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved
please note
The information contained in this communication is
confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may
constitute inside information, and is intended only for
the use of the addressee. It is the property of
JEE
Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this
communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited
and may be unlawful. If you have received this
communication in error, please notify us immediately by
return e-mail or by e-mail to jeevacation@gmail.com, and
EFTA01052482
destroy this communication and all copies thereof,
including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved
please note
The information contained in this communication is
confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may
constitute inside information, and is intended only for
the use of the addressee. It is the property of
JEE
Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this
communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited
and may be unlawful. If you have received this
communication in error, please notify us immediately by
return e-mail or by e-mail to jeevacation@gmail.com, and
destroy this communication and all copies thereof,
including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved
EFTA01052483
Entities
0 total entities mentioned
No entities found in this document
Document Metadata
- Document ID
- be4d53f0-ee0f-421d-b9e9-d38ed6c70651
- Storage Key
- dataset_9/EFTA01052479.pdf
- Content Hash
- c568c8f3e41ae986b8e0837c829ec127
- Created
- Feb 3, 2026