Posts Tagged ‘estate taxes’

Will They or Won’t They? An Update on Federal Estate Tax Law

Saturday, August 28th, 2010

By Fredrick P. Niemann, Esq., a Monmouth, Ocean, Middlesex and Mercer County NJ Estate Planning and Administration Attorney

Earlier this year, I spoke about concern over the elimination of federal estate tax for this year. While that sounds like a good thing, it’s not really because the law also eliminated the capital gains “step up” in basis. So many estates which never would have been subject to estate tax (or capital gains tax) may now face capital gains tax, unless Congress decides to retroactively reinstate the old law, which it has been unable to do all year.

We are now 9+ months into the year, the first estate tax returns for those who died in 2010 are now due, and still nothing from Washington. Many estate plans have built in flexibility in terms of placing assets into trusts to take advantage of the tax laws. The problem is that if we don’t know what tax law is in effect how can anyone know what choices to make?

The latest word is that a reinstatement of the old law is unlikely. Democrats want the reinstatement of a $3,500,000 exemption. Republicans want to eliminate the tax entirely.  That would certainly be welcome news to many families. Neither side has the votes to get what it wants, however, a compromise that is now being floated may be good news for all.

Congress may permit more modest estates to elect to benefit from the step up in basis rules that were in effect in 2009. This would mean, for example, that if you inherited, at your dad’s death, his house or stocks that he held for many years, the basis for calculating capital gains tax is not what he paid but the value of the assets at the date of his death. So, if you sell those assets shortly after his death you owe no capital gains tax. This way, the 2010 law would benefit everyone, not just the wealthy.

While this makes a lot of sense, as we all know, that isn’t going to be enough to carry the day, especially in Washington. Lawmakers will be taking their traditional summer recess in a few weeks. It’s not clear whether anything will happen but this all should come to a head soon. Stay tuned.

For further information and advice on any estate planning or estate administration matter, do not hesitate to contact me at 888-800-7442, or fniemann@hnlawfirm.com.

Your New Jersey Estate Plan Review Checklist Part 3

Friday, February 20th, 2009

Fredrick P. Niemann, Esq., NJ Estate Planning Attorney

  • What authority does the Trustee have to distribute the assets in the trust? Is the Trustee’s authority to make distributions limited to health, maintenance, education and support, or are distributions within the Trustee’s total discretion? If the beneficiary is also serving as Trustee, then distributions to the beneficiary/Trustee must be limited to health, maintenance, education and support. If the beneficiary and the Trustee are separate people, you may want to give the Trustee more flexibility in deciding how to distribute assets. You should also let the Trustee know what your goals are in terms of the distribution of assets.

If the trust is for the benefit of the spouse and children, is the primary beneficiary the spouse, the children, or both? If the trust is for the benefit of minor children, is the goal of the Trustee to hold the assets until the child reaches a certain age, or to use them for certain things along the way such as education, marriage, etc? 

  • Are your alternate beneficiary designations appropriate? In the event that all of your primary beneficiaries pass away, who will your assets go to? Many people take the approach that half of the assets will pass to one spouse’s siblings and their children, and the other half of the assets will pass to the other spouse’s siblings and their children. However, this approach may not work for you, in which case you should make sure that your assets are directed to one or more specific people or organizations. This desire should be stated in your Will.

     

  • Are your Executors, Trustees, and Guardians still the appropriate people, in the appropriate order? Over time, people and relationships change, so it may be appropriate to rearrange your Executors, Trustees and/or Guardians.

You have the ability to appoint one or more people to serve in these roles, as well as Successors for those people. In addition, if addresses are listed, you should verify that they are current.

  • If you have a taxable estate (assets exceeding $675,000), have you and your spouse reallocated ownership of and title to your assets to minimize estate taxes? Estate planning for a taxable estate will normally include the formation of a trust upon the death of the first spouse. However, if all of your assets are in joint name, there will be no assets available to fund that trust because all of the assets will pass by operation of law to the surviving spouse.

This means that the estate tax exemption of the first spouse will be wasted. Accordingly, if you have a taxable estate it is critical that you re-title your assets pursuant to your attorney’s recommendations. By doing this, upon the death of one spouse, he or she will have sufficient assets in his or her individual name to fund the trust(s) that will create the estate tax savings in the future.

  • Is your General Durable Power of Attorney more than 10 years old? If so, banks in New Jersey are not required to accept it. We recommend that your General Durable power of Attorney and Living Will be refreshed every 3 to 6 years.

     

  • Does your General Durable Power of Attorney continue to name appropriate attorneys-in-fact? You are allowed to name one or more attorney(s)-in-fact to act in your place with reference to your financial matters in the event that you are unable to do so. You should verify that your named attorney(s)-in-fact and any successors have current addresses.

     

  • Does your General Durable Power of Attorney allow for Medicaid planning or gifting? Many seniors want the ability to engage in asset protection planning to shelter assets from the cost of nursing home care. Your General Durable Power of Attorney should specifically grant your attorney(s)-in-fact the power to engage in this type of planning. We are recommending to all or our clients that they update their General Durable Power of Attorney if it does not specifically authorize this type of planning in the future.

     

  • Does your Health Care Power of Attorney reference the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (”HIPAA”)? The HIPAA privacy rules have created a new category of private information called “Protected Health Information” (PHI) or “Protected Medical Information” (PMI). In order to avoid any issues about the persons to whom your health care provider may divulge your PHI, you should specifically state who has the right to receive your PHI. We are recommending to all of our clients that they update their Health Care Powers of Attorney to include a HIPAA provision to avoid any inability of a Health Care Representative to receive information in the event of medical emergency.

     

  • Does your Living clearly state your desire about what medical treatment you want to receive or refuse in a terminal situation? You have a right to direct your care if you are terminally ill. You should make sure your Living Will clearly states your desires.

     

  • Does somebody know where all of your estate planning documents are? If you have the greatest estate plan in the world, but nobody knows how to access your documents in the event of an emergency, it is going to be useless to you. One or more trusted people should know where they can find originals and copies of your Last Will and Testament, General Durable Power of Attorney and Living Will/Health Care Power of Attorney. In addition, we recommend having copies of your Health Care Power of Attorney and Living Will placed into your medical record with your primary care physician. Note that your original General Durable Power of Attorney is a very powerful document and could allow somebody to access your accounts while you are alive without your permission. As a result, it may be best not to have the original of the General Durable Power of Attorney easily accessible.

Your New Jersey estate plan is an investment. If your estate plan does not address your current situation, or if it was not completed through appropriate re-titling of assets, then that investment may have little or no value. The law gives you the right to direct what happens to your assets upon your death, and gives you the ability to minimize any tax consequences. You should take advantage of the law to make sure that your estate plan meets your needs today and into the foreseeable future.

Fredrick P. Niemann is managing partner at Hanlon Niemann located at 3499 Route 9 North, Freehold, NJ. His practice focuses primarily in the areas of Elder Law, Asset and Estate Protection Planning, Medicare, Medicaid and Veteran’s Benefit Assistance. He can be reached at fniemann@hnlawfirm.com, or by calling 732-863-9900, Ext. 101.

LLC Ruling Favors Taxpayers

Tuesday, January 27th, 2009

Anna was the mother of three children and the widow of the man who invented the heart defibrillator implant.  In 1992, she created a trust for each of her daughters and gave a portion of her substantial interests in patent licenses to the trusts. In 2001, she created a limited liability company (LLC), to which she made some large transfers. She then gave a 16% interest in the LLC to each of the trusts, keeping a 52% interest to herself. Only four days later, Anna died suddenly and unexpectedly.

The IRS claimed a deficiency of millions of dollars in estate taxes. It pointed to a part of the Internal Revenue Code that provides that all property is to be included in a decedent’s estate to the extent that the decedent has transferred an interest in the property while retaining for life the possession or enjoyment of, or income from, the property. There is an exception to this general rule in cases of a bona fide sale for full and adequate consideration in money, but the IRS argued that the exception did not apply in the case of Anna’s estate.

In a somewhat surprising decision, given a recent trend favoring the IRS in such disputes, the United States Tax Court sided with the estate and kept the LLC assets out of the gross estate for estate tax purposes. The court ruled that the bona fide sale exception applied, notwithstanding that the LLC activities were not in the nature of a “business.” It was sufficient that Anna had “legitimate and significant nontax reasons” for creating and funding the LLC, including joint management of family assets, pooling family assets to maximize investment opportunities, and providing for each of her daughters on an equal basis.

Some practical lessons for minimizing estate tax liability while using family LLCs emerge from the case of Anna’s estate. They include the following:

(1) document the legitimate and significant motivations, unrelated to estate taxes, for forming such an entity; (2) continue the entity after the decedent’s death, to avoid the appearance of an ordinary trust; (3) if, as in Anna’s case, the donor dies unexpectedly a short time after the gifts, be prepared to demonstrate that the death was unexpected; and (4) keep sufficient assets outside of the entity to cover the donor’s living expenses, to avoid the possibility that the donor will treat the assets of the entity as her own. The planning, drafting, and advice associated with a family LLC entails resolution of complex issues and requires the guiding hand of a knowledgeable professional.

Federal Estate Tax
The federal estate tax credit, currently at $2 million, is set to increase to $3.5 million in 2009.  This means that in 2009 you can leave up to $3.5 million to your heirs without any federal estate tax liability.

If Congress takes no action, the federal estate tax will be repealed altogether in 2010. While this is an unlikely scenario, it does underscore the uncertainty involved in estate planning over the next few years. Make sure to meet with a professional to review your plan.

Your New Jersey Estate Plan Review Checklist Part 2

Tuesday, January 27th, 2009

Fredrick P. Niemann, Esq., a NJ Estate Planning Attorney

Do you own assets held in joint accounts, or where you have a named beneficiary? These assets will not be distributed in accordance with your Will. Instead, all joint assets will pass to the surviving joint owner, and all assets with a beneficiary designation will pass to that beneficiary.

Accordingly, if you have a convenience account with one of your children, the assets in that account will pass to that one child at your death, regardless of what your Will might say. You should carefully review the ownership and beneficiary designation of all of your assets to be sure that the assets will be distributed to the right people at your death. 

  • Are your residuary beneficiaries correct? Residuary beneficiaries are the people who receive the balance of your estate after (i) all the debts, expenses and taxes have been paid, (ii) any specific bequests have been made, and (iii) joint accounts or any assets with beneficiary designations have been distributed to the appropriate people. You should review this section of your estate planning documents carefully. If one of the beneficiaries were to predecease you, will that beneficiary’s share pass to his or her children, your other children, or otherwise?
     
  • Are assets being distributed to your beneficiaries outright or in trust? If assets are distributed to a beneficiary outright, the beneficiary can do whatever he or she pleases with the assets. However, those assets are at risk from the beneficiary’s creditors, spouse in a marital action, and poor judgment. It is possible to create trusts that give the Trustee (who may also be a beneficiary) great flexibility in distributing the assets to the beneficiaries, and at the same time protects those assets from a beneficiary’s immaturity, misuse, creditors, divorce, etc. Also, trusts may be used when you want to direct how assets will pass upon the beneficiary’s death. For instance, many times in a second marriage a trust will be established for the benefit of the spouse, but provide that upon the spouse’s death the assets will pass back to the decedent’s children. You should speak with your attorney about the benefits and drawbacks of using a trust to distribute your assets to your beneficiaries.
     
  • If you currently have a trust established, are the trust terms still appropriate? Many people establish trusts for young beneficiaries. You should look at the ages when the assets will be distributed outright to the beneficiaries, keeping in mind that assets distributed to somebody who is 18 are likely to be spent differently than if distributed to a person who is 25 or 30 or older.  It may be appropriate to increase or reduce the ages at which the beneficiaries will receive an outright distribution from the trust. Alternatively, it may be appropriate to give the beneficiary an income stream, or give the Trustee greater discretion to make distributions from principal. For example, a trust might say that a child will receive the income from the trust starting at age 25, and that the principal must be distributed to the child outright at age 30 and 35. Prior to age 35, the trust principal could be used for the beneficiary pursuant to the terms of the trust. By structuring a trust this way, the beneficiary has an opportunity to learn how to manage money.
     
  • Do any of your beneficiaries have special needs? If you have a beneficiary who is elderly or disabled, that beneficiary may need to qualify for public benefits in order to maintain their standard of living. If a person who is receiving public benefits receives an inheritance directly, the public benefits will cease, and the person must exhaust the inheritance to pay for the care that the public benefits would otherwise have provided for. Once the inheritance is exhausted, the person must then reapply for benefits. This can be a traumatic and expensive process. Instead, you should consider leaving assets in a purely discretionary Special Needs Trust for the person, drafted in such a way that it does not interfere with the person’s ability to receive public benefits. By using this approach, the trust becomes a security blanket for the beneficiary, not a burden.

Fredrick P. Niemann is managing partner at Hanlon Niemann located at 3499 Route 9 North, Freehold, NJ.  His practice focuses primarily in the areas of Elder Law, Asset and Estate Protection Planning, Medicare, Medicaid and Veteran’s Benefit Assistance. He can be reached at fniemann@hnlawfirm.com, or by calling 732-863-9900, Ext. 101.

Senate Chooses Middle Road on Estate Taxes

Tuesday, April 29th, 2008

Members of the Senate indicated that they want to reduce estate taxes without eliminating estate taxes.  Senators delivered that message through votes on a series of amendments to a non-binding budget resolution.

Senators voted 99-1 for a proposal introduced by Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, to set the estate tax at the 2009 level—with a $3.5 million individual exemption and a 45% maximum tax rate for estates that must pay the tax—and index the exemption for inflation.

A second proposal, to create a reserve fund that would permit the government to increase the individual estate tax exemption to $5 million and cut the maximum tax rate to 35%, lost on a 38-62 vote.  Sen. Ken Salazar, D-Colo., introduced that proposal.

Several senators, including Sen. Blanche Lincoln, D-Ark., say they prefer the Salazar proposal. Those senators contend that freezing the estate tax exemption and maximum tax rate at the 2009 level would not do enough to protect small businesses and family farms.

Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., introduced a proposal that would have set the estate tax exemption at $5 million with a maximum tax rate of 35%.  The Kyl proposal lost on a 50-50 vote.  Sens. Blanche Lincoln, D-Ark., and Mary Landrieu, D-La., voted with the Republicans.  Sen. George Voinovich, R-Ohio, voted with the Democrats.

The vice president can break ties in the Senate, but he was not present at the time of the vote.

Another proposal, introduced by Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., that also would have set the exemption at $5 million and the maximum tax rate at 35% failed 47-52.

Lawmakers considered the proposals on the Senate floor, while working on the fiscal year 2009 federal budget resolution.  The budget resolution has no direct effect on the federal budget, but it will help shape how easily certain types of bills can get to the floor of the Senate.

The Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 calls for the federal government to phase out the estate tax and eliminate it completely in 2010. If, however, Congress fails to act, the estate tax will spring back to 2001 levels – with an individual exemption of $1 million and a 55% maximum tax rate – in 2011.

Under current law, the 2009 individual exemption is set to be $3.5 million, and the maximum tax rate would be 45%.  Historically, opponents of the estate tax, who call it the “death tax,” have favored eliminating the estate tax.

Many life insurers profit from selling products aimed at helping customers reduce or pay their estate taxes, and life groups have supported the idea of reducing the number of taxpayers affected by the estate tax rather than the idea of eliminating the tax.

Larry Raymond, president of the Association for Advanced Life Underwriting, Falls Church, Va., welcomed the Senate votes.  “It is clear from events this week that, even with a large number of competing priorities, the Senate continues to focus time on estate tax reform,” Raymond says. “We know a number of key Senators are very interested in seeing this issue resolved” before 2010.

The Senate Finance Committee will hold a hearing on estate taxes in mid-April, but the AALU does not expect to see action on the issue until 2009, at the earliest.