It’s a common question in music history: did Elvis Presley Write His Own Songs? The King of Rock ‘n’ Roll himself once admitted to an interviewer, “It’s all a big hoax… I get one third of the [writing] credit just for recording [a song]. It makes me look smarter than I am!” Despite never writing hits like “Hound Dog,” “Jailhouse Rock,” or “Love Me Tender,” by 1950s standards, the Mississippi-born artist who had “never written a song in [his] life” had one of the most favorable and lucrative music publishing contracts around. This remarkable situation was largely due to a savvy agreement brokered between Presley’s manager, Colonel Tom Parker, and the prominent publishing house, Hill and Range Publishing.
The Deal with Hill and Range
Hill and Range Publishing, now largely absorbed into Warner Chappell Music, was primarily known for its formidable country music roster when founders Jean and Julian Aberbach took a gamble on the young Presley in 1954. They signed him to a co-publishing agreement, betting on his burgeoning success. The Aberbachs wisely opted not to sell their specific piece of Presley’s publishing when other Hill and Range assets were sold. Their surviving family members now administer their share of the catalog through Raleigh Music Group.
Co-Publishing in Historical Context
While this deal was certainly advantageous for Presley, various forms of co-publishing agreements weren’t entirely new by 1954 for a major artist. According to attorney Michael Sukin, who previously represented the Presley estate, publishing giants like Chappell Music in the 1920s and ’30s often made deals to split copyright ownership with their biggest writers, typically giving two-thirds to the publisher and one-third to the writer. Even figures like Frank Sinatra were known to have co-publishing arrangements, with his companies Sergeant Music Co. and Saloon Songs receiving portions of the publisher’s share on his behalf. elvis presley for the good times
Defining Co-Publishing and Elvis’s Unique Split
Randall Wixen, founder of Wixen Music Publishing, notes that the term “co-publishing” is “a pretty broad category,” and not all deals are created equal. When signing with a music publisher, there are two main portions of income: the writer’s share (50%) and the publisher’s share (50%). A co-publishing deal involves agreements that transfer any portion of the publisher’s reserved share over to the songwriter. Nowadays, these diverse co-publishing arrangements are the industry standard “template,” says Sukin, although traditional full publishing deals for newer writers still exist, most commonly seen in Nashville.
Parker managed to secure a rare 50/50 split of the publisher’s share for Presley in his 1954 deal, a stipulation uncommon for its time. The money from this share would be funneled into Elvis Presley Music, Inc., the company set up by Presley and Parker specifically to collect the publisher’s share of profits.
Elvis Presley portrait for article on his songwriting credits and publishing deals.
Colonel Parker’s Controversial Fee Increase
However, not all of this lucrative publishing income went directly into Presley’s pocket. In 1966, Presley agreed to a highly controversial new contract with Colonel Parker, increasing the manager’s fee from an already high 25% to half of all gross income. This included Presley’s increasingly valuable publishing stream. Parker’s overreach eventually led to him losing this 50% fee in the Presley enterprises in 1982, after an estate hearing questioned him for “handling affairs not in Elvis’s but his own interest.”
The “Elvis Tax” on Songwriters
By 1957, Presley’s partnership with Hill and Range also included a stipulation requiring songwriters to give Elvis a one-third cut of mechanical royalties for every song he recorded. Alex Halberstadt, biographer for Doc Pomus (who wrote nearly 20 songs for Presley over his career), dubbed this arrangement “The Elvis Tax.” For songwriters eager for Presley to turn their composition into a hit, this was considered a necessary cost of doing business. As Ken Emerson, author of Always Magic in the Air: The Bomp and Brilliance of the Brill Building Era, put it, “It’s better to get a percentage of a hit song than 100% of nothing.” elvis in viva las vegas
The Famous Dolly Parton Exception
Not every songwriter accepted this arrangement, however. Famously, Dolly Parton declined Presley and Parker’s offer to record her iconic song “I Will Always Love You” because it required her to give up half of her publishing rights. Parton recounted in a later interview, “I wanted to hear Elvis sing it, and it broke my heart,” but she was not willing to lose half of her song to the singer. Parton’s gamble proved prescient decades later when Whitney Houston’s cover for the film The Bodyguard became a global phenomenon, topping the Billboard Hot 100 chart for 14 weeks from 1992-1993, setting a record at the time. The Houston version re-charted at No. 3 following her death in 2012. play return to sender by elvis presley
Parallel with Dick Clark’s “Roy-ola”
While some critics might find it objectionable for Presley to take money and ownership for songs he had no hand in writing, this practice wasn’t unique to him or even just major recording artists of the time. Randall Wixen points out that “Dick Clark was notorious for this.” In 1960, the American Bandstand host was investigated along with other broadcast personalities during the U.S. government’s inquiry into payola. Unlike fellow host Alan Freed, who was implicated in taking cash bribes, Clark was found to be taking publishing royalties – a practice Congressman Steven Derounian cleverly nicknamed “roy-ola.”
Variety reported at the time that songs complying with Clark’s requests for publishing stakes allegedly received favorable placement on his weekday and Saturday night ABC-TV programs, including American Bandstand. Clark reportedly earned over $500,000 from music publishing and other music royalty income over the course of about two years – equivalent to roughly $4.9 million in today’s dollars. lonely christmas elvis
Profile image of Elvis Presley later in his career, illustrating article about his music business and publishing.
The Evolution of Music Publishing
Despite the actions of figures like Presley and Clark, publishing wasn’t widely seen as a lucrative, stable industry then. Todd Brabec, a former ASCAP executive and music business expert, explains that “People saw it as a penny business, so not many people really paid attention to how powerful it could be.” The biggest development in publishing came about a decade after Presley’s heyday: the rise of successful singer-songwriters commonplace at the top of the Billboard charts.
When the lines between songwriters and recording artists began to blur, the publisher’s game shifted from finding artists and plugging songs to facilitating and administering copyrights. While pure songwriters still existed and needed assistance, the popularity of people like Carole King, Gerry Goffin, The Beatles, and The Doors ushered in an era dominated by co-publishing and administration deals, where writers retained more or all of the publisher’s share themselves. blue christmas 68 comeback special
Modern Pushback
Today, the legacy of major artists influencing publishing income persists, though not without resistance. Recent movements like The Pact, a group of top songwriters, have publicly vowed to cease giving publishing or songwriting credit to any artist or manager who has not made a “reasonably equivalent/meaningful exchange” on a composition. However, lacking the necessary leverage to consistently push back against these demands from artists and executives, this practice continues, largely uninterrupted.
In conclusion, while Elvis Presley may not have written the lyrics or melodies for his iconic hits, his impact on the business side of music publishing was significant. Through savvy deals negotiated by Colonel Parker, particularly the rare 50/50 split of the publisher’s share and the “Elvis Tax” on songwriters, he secured substantial income and credit. These practices, though sometimes controversial and reflective of the era’s music business landscape, highlight the complex relationship between artists, managers, songwriters, and publishers, a dynamic that continues to evolve even today.
