A three-page memo distributed to schools provides further clarity regarding Deloitte’s role as the approved clearinghouse for name, image, and likeness (NIL) deals, as outlined in the House settlement and guidance documents. Deloitte’s NIL clearinghouse and review platform will be known as “NIL Go.” We briefly addressed the role of the NIL clearinghouse in a previous blog post.

In December 2024, the NCAA issued two separate guidance documents (one on December 9 and the other on December 23) addressing the impact of the proposed House settlement on Division I institutions. In the December 9 Q&A guidance document, the NCAA addressed the requirement that student-athletes report all third-party NIL deals worth $600 or more (regardless of whether their school opts into the House settlement) so they can be subject to a fair-market-value assessment. Moreover, all agreements with associated entities and associated individuals (worth $600 or more) will be subject to the fair-market-value assessment.

The purpose of NIL Go, according to the memo, is to (i) efficiently clear legitimate third-party NIL deals with a total value of $600 or more, (ii) reflect the true market dynamics for NIL deals without arbitrary value regulation, and (iii) support enforcement, schools, and student-athletes following the approval of the House settlement.

As part of the NIL deal review process, Deloitte will engage in a three-step process:

  1. Payor Association Verification

Schools will initially determine the association status of payors (i.e., whether they are “associated” entities or individuals) to determine whether a fair-market-value assessment is required. In doing so, schools will use several criteria such as whether the entity/individual exists primarily to support the athletics program, provides exclusive NIL opportunities for the school, contributes more than $50,000 over a lifetime, and employs or owns certain roles tied to the school or associated entities

  1. Valid Business Purpose Verification

Next, schools will determine whether a payor’s intent is to use the student-athlete’s NIL to legitimately advance business objectives. On the payor level, the school will verify the payor’s identity and intent. On the deal level, the school will review the details of the NIL deal and any supporting documents for the purpose of flagging any issues.

  1. Range of Compensation Analysis

Finally, Deloitte will use a 12-point analysis to assess whether the compensation aligns with similarly situated individuals in comparable NIL deals. This range of compensation analysis will apply solely to third-party NIL deals with “associated” entities or individuals, using historical deal data involving both college and professional athletes as benchmarks, and excluding roster value and recruiting incentives. Deloitte will assess factors such as athletic performance, social media presence, local and institutional market size, and brand influence to determine the fair-market-value of each individual student-athlete’s deal.

Upon completion of this process, Deloitte will communicate the status of each individual deal as either “cleared,” “in review,” or “information needed.” If a student-athlete’s deal falls into either of the latter two categories (i.e., it is not “cleared”) the student-athlete has four options. They may: (1) renegotiate and resubmit the terms of the deal, (2) proceed at risk of eligibility consequences, (3) cancel the deal, or (4) request a neutral arbitrator to review the deal. Deloitte will not block any student-athlete’s deal, instead allowing the student-athlete to make his/her own decision to accept the deal with the understanding that they risk eligibility.

Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of Callan G. Stein Callan G. Stein

Cal’s broad litigation and investigation practice encompasses white collar criminal matters, corporate and commercial civil litigation, internal investigations, and health care litigation. Cal frequently represents and advises higher education clients, particularly in areas related to collegiate athletics and Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL)

Cal’s broad litigation and investigation practice encompasses white collar criminal matters, corporate and commercial civil litigation, internal investigations, and health care litigation. Cal frequently represents and advises higher education clients, particularly in areas related to collegiate athletics and Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) rights and compliance. Cal provides NIL compliance advice and internal investigation services to major universities, including those that participate in Division I football and basketball, and likewise advises schools on athletics contracts, conference affiliations, conference realignment, and other NCAA-related issues. Cal also represents and advises businesses on NIL contracts, as well as NIL collectives on formation and compliance matters. Cal hosts the firm’s “Highway to NIL” podcast that discusses the legal landscape and developments in the area of NIL law.

Photo of Christopher M. Brolley Christopher M. Brolley

Chris concentrates his practice on federal and statewide product liability litigation through his representation of pharmaceutical and medical device companies involving mass tort, personal injury, and wrongful death claims across the U.S. He also represents clients at the state and federal level in…

Chris concentrates his practice on federal and statewide product liability litigation through his representation of pharmaceutical and medical device companies involving mass tort, personal injury, and wrongful death claims across the U.S. He also represents clients at the state and federal level in matters ranging from breach of contract and corporate governance to data privacy and security. Chris advises higher educational institutions of all sizes, including colleges and universities, on Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) compliance issues. He provides comprehensive guidance on permissible and impermissible NIL activities and navigating state NIL laws, NCAA Bylaws, and other NCAA policies. Chris creates and implements tailored strategies for mitigating the potential risk of NCAA and state attorney general enforcement activity. He co-hosts the firm’s Highway to NIL podcast that discusses the legal landscape and developments in the area of NIL law.