Jeffrey Epstein’s once vast estate — art, jewelry, lavish properties and investments — was meant to be drained by settlements to his many sexual abuse victims and payments to resolve other legal claims. But now it appears that two of his most loyal business associates, who are serving as executors of his estate, stand in line to potentially reap a big benefit.
At one point, one of those executors predicted the estate would shrink to less than $40 million from its original $600 million once all the payments were made. But after a $111.6 million tax refund from the Internal Revenue Service last fall, the estate’s assets have swelled to $145 million, a probate court filing in the U.S. Virgin Islands shows.
And with most large claims against the estate having been settled, that newfound cash isn’t likely to make its way to victims of the disgraced financier. Instead some of his assets could be distributed to the coexecutors, along with other beneficiaries chosen by Mr. Epstein before his death, most of whose identities remain largely shrouded in secrecy.
Court filings and depositions have revealed that beyond the coexecutors, who are Mr. Epstein’s longtime accountant and personal lawyer, another beneficiary is a woman who was Mr. Epstein’s girlfriend at the time of his 2019 arrest on federal sex-trafficking charges. But there are many others.
Mr. Epstein, who killed himself while in prison, had one brother, Mark, who says he doesn’t know if he’s among the beneficiaries. Regardless of who they are, the notion that this infusion of cash can’t be claimed by victims who have already settled their cases is frustrating to the women and their advocates.
“I think that it is morally objectionable for anyone other than a victim to benefit from acts of injustice or wrongdoing,” said Marijke Chartouni, who was sexually abused by Mr. Epstein when she was 20 and has already received a payment from the estate. “Victims continue to suffer.”
Representatives for Mr. Epstein’s estate declined to comment.
A college dropout, Mr. Epstein amassed much of his wealth by charging hefty fees for providing tax and estate services to a handful of billionaires like Leslie Wexner, the retail magnate, and Leon Black, the private equity investor.
Mr. Epstein’s estate has paid out about $164 million in settlements to nearly 200 people he sexually abused while they were teenagers or young women. The estate also reached a $105 million settlement with the government of the U.S. Virgin Islands to resolve a lawsuit over big tax breaks Mr. Epstein had received for businesses, and it has paid tens of millions of dollars in fees to lawyers and other professionals. It also repaid a $30 million loan.
The tax refund stems from an estimated $190 million payment the estate made to the I.R.S. in July 2020, based partly on assumptions about the value of assets that have since been sold for far less. Mr. Epstein’s mansion in Manhattan, for instance, sold for nearly $40 million below the asking price.
Tax experts said it was not unusual for the I.R.S. to refund money to a wealthy estate, especially if the executors overvalued some of its properties and underestimated the amount of its debt.
William LaPiana, dean of faculty at New York Law School and an expert on trusts and estates, said some of the refund might also be the result of the estate’s not knowing how much it would owe under the settlements that were reached after the $190 million tax payment was made.
David Boies, the well-known litigator who represented many of Mr. Epstein’s victims, said it was a “terribly frustrating” turn of events that largely unnamed beneficiaries of Mr. Epstein’s estate might benefit instead of his victims.
Mr. Boies’s firm is handling one of the last remaining lawsuits brought on behalf of victims — a potential class action filed against the estate’s coexecutors, Richard Kahn and Darren Indyke. Mr. Kahn was Mr. Epstein’s longtime accountant and Mr. Indyke his longtime personal lawyer. Both are listed as beneficiaries of Mr. Epstein’s estate, court filings show.
The lawsuit filed on behalf of victims who never received a settlement has accused the two men of “aiding, abetting and facilitating” Mr. Epstein’s sex trafficking. In court papers, Mr. Kahn and Mr. Indyke have denied the allegations and said they had no knowledge of his sex trafficking.
With the litigation against the estate winding down, much of the action will move to the U.S. Virgin Islands, where Mr. Epstein’s will is being probated. Once a judge reviewing the will decides there are no more outstanding claims against the estate, the remaining assets will flow into a trust established by Mr. Epstein.
The so-called 1953 Trust, named for the year Mr. Epstein was born, was referred to in the will he signed in a federal jail in Manhattan — just two days before he killed himself on Aug. 10, 2019.
Mr. Kahn discussed how much he expected to be left in the estate in a spring 2023 deposition previously reported on by The New York Times. He also testified that the 1953 Trust was a poorly drafted document and that it was unclear how Mr. Epstein wanted the remainder of his estate distributed. Mr. Kahn said the trust had many beneficiaries, but he declined to disclose them. He added that he didn’t expect to get much of anything from the trust.
The trust has never been made public, but a court document describes Mr. Kahn and Mr. Indyke as co-trustees in addition to their roles as estate beneficiaries.
The only other known beneficiary of Mr. Epstein’s trust is Karyna Shuliak, his girlfriend at the time of his death. The court document reveals that Ms. Shuliak is a potential beneficiary of $4.65 million of the estate’s personal property in Manhattan.
Ms. Shuliak, the last person outside the jail who spoke to Mr. Epstein, did not respond to an emailed request for comment.
Victoria Haneman, a professor at Creighton University School of Law who specializes in tax and estate law, said the secrecy that typically surrounded trusts could be abused.
“People and entities accused of fraud and other crimes can use trust secrecy laws to their advantage,” Ms. Haneman said. “It is a way in which victims with judgments are victimized a second time.”
