JavaScript is turned off in your web browser.<br /> Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page. <br>Following the <em>House v. NCAA</em> settlement, which provides for backpay and permits revenue sharing with student athletes, Division I colleges and universities are grappling with regulatory, compliance, and financial challenges that can impact their fiscal health, reputation, and ability to attract top athletes and remain competitive—both on and off the field. <br>The incoming Trump-Vance administration could continue to alter this landscape, potentially bringing shifts in <a href="https://www.morganlewis.com/pubs/2024/11/the-impact-of-the-us-election-on-labor-and-employment-law">labor and employment laws</a> that may influence player union negotiations, student athlete compensation, and the exploitation of name, image, and likeness (NIL) and other rights.<br>The US Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights has indicated that Title IX will apply to revenue sharing, adding to the long list of considerations undertaken by schools as they determine how to distribute settlement funds and establish a forward-looking NIL process. This will require higher education institutions to fully consider and assess the risk of running afoul of the statute as they make these important decisions. <br>As NIL laws continue to evolve on the state and potentially the federal level, and as the NCAA and member institutions work to implement the <em>House </em>settlement, schools need to keep abreast of legal and regulatory developments across each such level, update existing NIL guidance for all stakeholders, and reconsider their NIL structures and partnerships, as well as state and federal pay and discrimination rules, to avoid potential legal and reputational pitfalls. <br>The <em>House </em>settlement raises the potential that campaigns to form student athlete unions will gain momentum. Negotiations with labor unions and organization campaigns tend to be high-profile, complex, and require understanding and compliance with the National Labor Relations Act.<br>Determinations that student athletes are employees under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) will raise questions about how schools pay students and whether benefits can or should be provided and whether such benefits could have implications for state and federal pay laws. Schools should be aware of risk in both spaces, given litigation brought under the FLSA and state wage and hour laws. <br>The changing collegiate athletics landscape could also have implications for visa eligibility of non-US student athletes. Schools would do well to be aware of immigration compliance needs and develop procedures to secure US visas for student athletes. <br>Colleges and universities may need to contend with the tax implications of future direct payments to student athletes, including international tax considerations for non-US athletes. Becoming familiar with audit procedures by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and state regulatory authorities and staying attuned to tax policy changes may be necessary. <br>Given the evolving student athlete compensation landscape, tracking developments emerging from courts and legislatures across the US is paramount. Division I institutions can call on trusted legal counsel for help assessing the potential impact of these developments and devising strategies to stay ahead of the game. <br> If you have any questions or would like more information on the issues discussed in this Insight, please contact any of the following: <br><br><a href="https://news.google.com/rss/articles/CBMiogFBVV95cUxQSWZabXM0LUdIQWk2RWdZSmU4RDRfejlVeUk0RHBmVk9kWVZqYVVKZDdTcFJqQ0JzT1pEOVJJQmpMWlJ0a0FhVzRpdnBfWkhEOWlnMXhmZTZLVmRiWExzeE5yZVN0akQxbVAzaU5sdHVIWHRvUVNTWV9BMmRkQjJaYUtpd25mRXZhaVBmUk1aU0ZKekZxMlJ4UUo0NHZDSUFBU3c?oc=5">source</a>