Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Estate Planning’ Category

Estate Planning For Philip Seymour Hoffman

Attribution: Josh Jensen      CC-By-SA-2.0

The sad and tragic death of Philip Seymour Hoffman at age 46 last month is yet another reminder of the importance of estate planning. Most of us go along each day not thinking or worrying about what would happen to our loved ones if we suddenly died.  Some, in an attempt to be conscientious, draft an estate plan but fail to keep such plan up to date.  But most people die without ever doing any estate planning leaving state laws and the courts to decide who should get their estate. When these matters are neglected, surviving family members can be left with momentous legal, tax and financial problems resulting in uncertainty and expensive attorney fees to sort it all out.

Background

Although Mr. Hoffman drafted his will in 2004, he failed to update it after having two children and even after some significant estate tax law changes.  Such changes and ten years usually triggers a meeting with your estate planning attorney. For more on a checklist of events that should result in a meeting with your estate planning attorney please explore Estate Planning Triggers.

Mr. Hoffman’s 2004 will leaves everything to the mother of his children, Marianne O’Donnell.  He was not married to her and this is where the problems start, at least from an estate tax perspective.

Federal and State Estate Taxes

It is estimated that Mr. Hoffman’s estate was around $35,000,000.  Currently, $5,340,000 is exempt from federal taxes (the so-called unified credit) with amounts above that amount being subject to a federal estate tax rate of 40%.  It would appear then that roughly $30,000,000 of his estate would be subject to estate tax at a 40% rate.  This would generate a whopping $12,000,000 in federal estate taxes!

New York also has an estate tax with an exemption of $1,000,000. This New York estate tax has graduated tax rate that goes as high as 16%.  It is estimated that roughly another $3,000,000 in will be paid in New York estate taxes.

Combined estate taxes: $15,000,000.

(Liquidity Side Bar:  Be aware that estate taxes are due nine (9) months after the date of death so hopefully Mr. Hoffman’s estate has enough liquid assets to avoid a forced sale of assets to meet his tax obligations.  Estate Planning Point:  It is not known if Mr. Hoffman had life insurance but having life insurance to provide for liquidity is sometimes essential.  In certain cases, the use of an irrevocable life insurance trust would allow for excluding the life insurance proceeds from being subject to estate tax.)

The point is that even though a meeting in 2004 may have explored marriage as a simple way to save estate taxes, Mr. Hoffman may, for whatever reason, not wanted to be married at that time.  It also could have been that his wealth was not that great in 2004.

But here is the object lesson:  Things change and so should one’s estate plan.

  • A later meeting to review his estate plan would have explored the huge estate tax benefit to being married.  No one is suggesting that people should get married only for tax reasons, however, under federal estate tax rules, inheritances to a surviving spouse are not subject to estate tax.
  • Double Estate Taxation:  Since they were not married, the amounts Ms. O’Donnell receives will be taxed twice.  First, the amount she receives above the unified credit will be taxed at Mr. Hoffman’s death.  When she dies the balance in her estate above her unified credit will be taxed a second time.  Marriage eliminates this double estate tax.
  • Marriage would have provided possible social security, retirement plan, income tax and other financial benefits.
  • If Mr. Hoffman wanted to get married but did not want his wife to have absolute control of his assets, a qualified terminable interest trust (a QTIP trust) could have been used to obtain the estate tax savings while providing income and principal to her during her lifetime.  The assets in this trust would pass to his children at her death.  This would have been the best of both worlds: saving estate taxes but still providing for his wife and children.
  • Sidebar:  A QTIP trust is often used in second marriages where there are children from a prior marriage.

One Strategy To Eliminate Estate Tax At His Death

In a perfect world, Mr. Hoffman could have created a so-called marital deduction trust and a unified credit or by-pass trust by funding each trust based on a formula clause tied to the unified credit applicable in the year of his death.  (Or he could have used the disclaimer trust discussed below to achieve this same result if he was married.) If he had implemented this estate planning strategy his 35,000,000 would have been split between (more…)

Read Full Post »

gift, income tax, estate planning

“Son, I am sick and getting old, so fill out a deed to transfer my house into your name now.”

With the increase of the federal estate tax exemption to $5,340,000 in 2014, most taxpayers are not subject to federal estate taxes.  The focus for many now has shifted to the income tax implications that arise when wealth passes to the next generation.  With no regard to the income tax implications, many times elderly people get the idea that the transfer of real estate to children during their lifetime is a good idea in trying to avoid probate and to make things easier for loved ones. Even uninformed realtors, attorneys and other financial advisers sometime make such a recommendation without knowing the tax impact.  However well-meaning, this uninformed strategy can have disastrous income tax results for the children recipients of such ill-conceived lifetime gifts.

Basis Rules:

It is important to understand the following income tax basis rules for calculating gain or loss:

  • Lifetime Gifts:  Children who receive lifetime gifts take a carryover basis in the property received.  The carryover basis is determined by what the maker of the gift originally paid for the asset plus any improvements made to the property.
  • Bequest At Death:  Beneficiaries who receive assets at the decedent’s death get a step up in basis to the date of death value of such assets received.

Basis Rules:  Illustrating How These Rules Operate

Example:  DIY Dad wants to avoid probate and to transfer during his lifetime his real estate to his son, Sad Son.  DIY Dad bought his house in the 1970s for $17,000 and made improvements during the years of $23,000.  As a result his adjusted basis is $40,000.  The house is now worth $540,000.  To save lawyer fees, DIY Dad asks Sad Son to draft a deed to transfer the property.  Sad Son does so and DIY Dad signs the deed and has it recorded with the recorder of deeds.

  • Since this was a lifetime gift, Sad Son takes a carryover basis for the house of $40,000.  Sad Son sells the house for $540,000 shortly afterwards and has a capital gain of $500,000 which he surprisingly  and shockingly learns from his accountant will cost him $100,000 (20% x $500,000) in federal taxes alone.  His accountant tells him there will also be state income taxes on this gain. Since Sad Son is a Pennsylvania resident, he will pay an extra $15,350 in Pennsylvania income taxes.  Total Taxes: $115,350.
    • Form 709:  Any lifetime gifts of over $14,000 require the filing of a Form 709, United States Gift Tax Return, in the year of the gift.  It should also be noted the IRS now checks recorded deeds.  For more on the IRS policing this area please see IRS Checking Real Estate Transfers For Unreported Gifts.
  • Alternate Universe:  DIY Dad consults with his tax/estate attorney who drafts a will that provides for the transfer of his house at death to Sad Son. Sad Son (who now legally changes his name to Happy) Son, has a basis of $540,000 upon his receipt of the house from the estate.  Happy Son, now sells the house and has zero, yes, zero capital gain (Sale Price $540,000 less basis of $540,000 = 0)!
    • Note: Certain states have inheritance taxes.  For example, in Pennsylvania there would be a 4.5% inheritance tax on the real estate, but this is a smaller cost than the capital gains tax that results from taking a carryover basis via a lifetime gift.
  • Fall Back Solutions:
    • If Sad Son stays in the house long enough to qualify the house as his primary residence and all statutory requirements for exclusion are met, he may then exclude $250,000 of the gain on the sale of the house once he sells the house.  If married and all statutory requirements are satisfied,  Sad Sam may be entitled to a $500,000 exclusion. (more…)

Read Full Post »

On Thanksgiving when you look around the room at your loved ones, think about whether they are legally protected with an estate plan that works to protect them and minimize taxes when you were gone.

Estate Planning 2013: Now What? A Must Read For Everyone.

Read Full Post »

Supreme_Court

Supreme Court Decision on DOMA Impacts Tax Rules for Same Sex Couples

Federal tax rules for same-sex couples have recently been issued in response to the Supreme Court decision in Windsor, No. 12-307 (U.S. 6/26/13). This landmark case invalidated a key provision of the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act (“DOMA”) and resulted in major changes in the tax landscape for many same-sex partners.

These new tax rules were laid out in I.R. 2013-72  on August 29, 2013 and Revenue Ruling 2013-17 on September 16, 2013 and are effective on that date.  (Note that taxpayers who wish to rely on the terms of this Revenue Ruling for earlier periods may choose to do so, as long as the statute of limitations for the earlier period has not expired. More on this below.)

Although there are still some unresolved issues, the following will lay out many of the basic federal income tax rules for same-sex married couples:

  1. State of Celebration Rule:  Same-sex couples that are legally married in jurisdictions that recognize their marriages are treated as married for federal tax purposes.
    • The rule applies even if this couple is currently living in a jurisdiction that does not recognize same-sex marriage.  The IRS states that this is consistent with its long-standing position (Rev. Rul. 58-66) that for federal tax purposes the IRS will recognize marriages based on the law of the state in where consummated and will disregard later changes in domicile.
    • For example, a same-sex couple validly married in New York will still be treated as married when they move to Pennsylvania.
  2. Married:  Being married is any same-sex marriage legally entered into in one of the 50 states, the District of Columbia, a U.S. territory or a foreign country.
  3. Domestic Partnerships:  Registered domestic partnerships, civil unions or similar formal relationships are not considered legal marriages.
  4. Married For All Purposes Under Federal Law:  Under the ruling, legally married same-sex couples are treated as married for all federal tax purposes, including income and gift and estate taxes.
  5. Federal Income Tax Benefits For Married Same-Sex Couples:  Married same-sex couples can now enjoy the tax benefits associated with  being treated as married for all federal tax provisions, including but not limited to:
    • Filing status
    • Claiming personal and dependency exemptions
    • Taking the standard deduction
    • Employee benefits
    • Contributing to an IRA
    • Claiming the earned income tax credit
    • Claiming the child tax credit.
  6. Married Filing Jointly or Married Filing Separately Only Option After September 16, 2013:  After September 16, 2013, legally married same-sex couples generally must file their 2013 federal income tax return using either the married filing jointly or married filing separately filing status.
  7. Two High Income Family:  In some cases, especially where both spouses are high wage earners this may result in greater taxes than under earlier law.
  8. Civil Unions In Certain States May End Up Paying Less Taxes:  Civil unions or domestic partnerships that can still file singly or as head of household may end up in better tax shape in certain situations.
  9. Prior Year Tax Refund Possibility: Individuals who were in same-sex marriages may, but are not required to, file original or amended returns choosing married filing jointly for federal tax purposes for one or more earlier tax years still open under the statute of limitations.
  10. Statute of Limitations For Refunds:  Generally, the statute of limitations for filing a refund claim is three years from the filing date of the return or two years from the date of the tax payment, whichever is later.
    • As a result, refund claims can still be filed for tax years 2010, 2011 and 2012.
    • Special Situations: For example, agreements with the IRS to keep open the statute of limitations for tax years 2009 and earlier will allow taxpayers to file refund claims for such open years .
    • For how to file an amended return please read Amending Tax Returns with the IRS.
  11. Protective Claim: When the right to a refund is contingent and may not be determined until after the time period for amending returns expires, a taxpayer can file a protective claim for refund. The claim is often based on current litigation (constitutionality); expected changes in tax law; and other changes in legislation or regulations. A protective claim preserves the right to claim a refund until resolution of the matter.
    • Example:  Pennsylvania same-sex couples not considered married under current rules may want to file protective claims for any year where the statute of limitations period is ending.
  12. Fringe Benefits: Employees who purchased same-sex spouse health insurance coverage from their employers or other fringe benefits on an after-tax basis may treat the amounts paid for that coverage as pre-tax and excludable from income.
    • The IRS now provides a mechanism to pursue for filing refund claims under Notice 2013-61.  The notice provides two streamlined administrative procedures for making adjustments or claiming refunds.
  13. IRS Further Guidance: The IRS will be issuing further guidance on cafeteria plans and on how qualified retirement plans and other tax-favored arrangements should treat same-sex spouses for periods before September 16, 2013.
  14. State Taxes: State tax return filing status is still controlled by state law.  If same-sex marriages are not legal in their state then they cannot file as married.  This is the case even though the marriage took place in a state where same-sex marriages are recognized.
  15. Estate Planning:  Review estate plans to take advantage of the federal estate and gift tax breaks now given same-sex marriages. For insights into estate planning please read Estate Planning 2013: Now What? A Must Read for Everyone
  16. Estate Tax Refunds: Additionally, claims for refunds of any estate taxes paid on deceased spouses that are still open under the statute of limitations should also be carefully examined.
    • Taxpayers who wish to file a refund claim for gift or estate taxes should file Form 843, Claim for Refund and Request for Abatement.

These are just some of the tax and financial implications in this area.  Same-sex couples affected by these changes should explore estate planning, retirement planning, employee benefits, and social security implications with their estate planning attorney, accountant and financial adviser team.

Stay tuned because this area will continue to evolve and change.

As required by United States Treasury Regulations, you should be aware that this communication is not intended by the sender to be used, and it cannot be used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties under United States federal tax laws.

Disclaimer: This Alert has been prepared and published for informational purposes only and is not offered, nor should be construed, as legal advice. For more information, please see the firm’s full disclaimer.

Read Full Post »

Family Business Transfers

Pennsylvania Inheritance Tax Break For Family Businesses

Pennsylvania has just created a new tax break for transfers of businesses to certain family members.  This new inheritance tax law applies to estates of some one who dies on or after July 1, 2013.

Qualification For Inheritance Tax Exemption:

To qualify for this Qualified Family Owned Business exemption under new Section 9111(t), the following criteria must be met:

  • Type of Organization that qualifies can be either:
    • A proprietorship or
    • Entity

    engaged in a trade or business;

  • The entity or proprietorship had a Net Book Value of Less Than $5,000,000 at the date of death;
  • The entity or proprietorship had been in existence for 5 years at the date of death;
  • The entity or proprietorship had less than 50 employees at the date of death;
  • The entity or proprietorship must be wholly owned by the decedent and other qualified family members (defined as qualified transferees as defined below).
  • The transfer of ownership must be to qualified transferee in most cases individual family members under Section 9111(t)(5).  A “qualified transferee” is the decedent’s spouse, lineal descendent, sibling (and the sibling’s lineal descendants) and ancestors (and the ancestor’s siblings). The exemption is lost if the business does not continue to be owned by a “qualified transferee” for seven years after the death of the decedent;
  • Where the transfer of an interest into an entity took place within one year prior to death, such transfer must have been the result of a legitimate business purpose;
  • Family Ownership after death must continue for 7 years.  If this period of ownership is not met then inheritance taxes will have to be paid when ownership ceases. This is the so-called recapture tax and must be reported if this ownership period is not met.  Important Compliance Point: This requires annual certification to the Department of Revenue that the family-owned business interest qualifies for the exemption, as well as notification to the Department of Revenue within 30 days of any failure to qualify;
  • Any expenses or debts related to or incurred in connection with this exemption are not allowed under new Section 9130 (5).

Entities Engaged In Investment Activities Do Not Qualify For This New Exemption:

This tax break is not available to entities with a principal purpose of “management of investments or income producing assets” held by such entity.  Section 9111(t)(5). The principal purpose of an entity cannot be simply managing its own investments.

Estate Planning Implications:

A cursory look at the new law appears to show that transfers to trusts would not be eligible for exemption.  Those attempting to do estate planning where they own an active business in Pennsylvania may have a very difficult choice to make.  They can either give the business outright to children to save inheritance taxes or they must give up this exemption if  family issues, financial reasons or federal estate tax considerations dictate the use of trusts.  For more insights into these estate planning implications please read Estate Planning 2013: Now What? A Must Read For Everyone.

Final Thoughts:

Since this law is so new and some of its terms may not be fully understood or defined, more guidance will probably be forthcoming from the Pennsylvania Department of Revenue.  Stay tuned.

Read Full Post »

How Do I Create An Estate Plan Combining All of These Assets?

How Do I Create An Integrated Estate Plan?

We now know what the federal estate tax laws will be this year and in the future.  Our federal government has stated that these estate tax rules are now permanent after a decade of uncertainty.  (A cynic may say that these federal tax laws are permanent until our federal government says they are not!). Anyway, here are some of the more important federal estate tax law changes made on December 31, 2012 along with some related estate planning strategies:

  • The federal estate and gift tax exemption is now permanently (there is that word again) $5,000,000, with annual inflation adjustments.  These inflation adjustments generate exemptions of $5,120,000 in 2012 and $5,250,000 in 2013.
    • A husband and a wife each have this exemption, so a family can transfer $10,500,000 free of federal estate taxes in 2013. These very generous tax exemptions will allow the opportunity to transfer large amounts of wealth during lifetime or at death free of federal taxes.
    • Planning Point:  Taxpayers who used their full $5,120,000 exemption in 2012 can now make more gifts of $130,000 in 2013.
    • Planning Point:  With inflation adjustments each year, taxpayers can continue to transfer more each year.
    • Important Shift in Focus To State Inheritance Taxes:  Understand that we are only talking about federal estate and gift taxes and that these large exemptions are only applicable at the federal level. With these large federal exemptions, for most people, estate tax planning now will focus more on minimizing state inheritance taxes. For example, Pennsylvania does not follow the federal exemption rules and taxes almost all assets owned by a decedent.  To learn more about Pennsylvania inheritance tax rules see Pennsylvania Inheritance Tax: The Basics.
  • Once assets are above the exemption threshold the estate tax rate is 40%.  This results in a very heavy tax bite and is a real concern for anyone above the threshold.  The following taxpayers may end up above the threshold:
    • A taxpayer or a surviving spouse with assets above the exemption threshold or
    • A family (husband and wife) that has accumulated wealth above the $10,500,000 threshold, or
    • A taxpayer that has made lifetime gifts that have exhausted or substantially depleted their exemption.  See the following Example 1.
  • The tax law changes have once again unified the exemption for lifetime gifts and transfers at death.  So, if you use your exemption during your lifetime it is not available when you die.
    • Example 1:  Generous John, gave away his shares of stock of his business corporation valued at $5,000,000 to his son in 2012.  He uses his $5,000,000 exemption to transfer such shares free of gift tax.
    • Example 1A: Generous John dies in 2013 with other assets of $1,250,000 that make up his taxable estate. In 2013, he has a remaining exemption of $250,000 (2013 exemption of $5,250,000 less the $5,000.000 of his exemption used in 2012). Generous John has a taxable estate of $1,000,000 which results in a $400,000 in federal estate tax liability.
  • Portability is now permanent.  Portability allows for the exemption that was not used by the first spouse to die to be used by the surviving spouse.  In theory, this provision protects those who have failed to plan or for those who have made errors in estate planning.
    • Important Planning Point:  Portability should be looked at as a fallback position where there was no estate planning done.
      • Employing traditional estate planning techniques may prove more advantageous and in some cases is essential in crafting a well conceived estate plan. For example, in most situations the combined use of a unified credit and a marital deduction trust (or the use of a disclaimer trust mechanism) would result in better tax outcome than relying on portability.
      • In second marriages, it is often imperative to use  a certain form of marital deduction called a Qualified Terminable Interest Property (QTIP) trust, to provide for both the surviving spouse and children of a first marriage.
      • Where assets are expected to appreciate in value over time, use of a by-pass or unified credit trust would offer a better result than relying on portability.
    • There are some very important limitations and concerns with using portability, especially in second marriages or where the surviving spouse remarried.  These issues are more fully explored in my article entitled Estate Planning Mistakes: 5 Not So Easy Pieces.
    • Portability Does Not Save the GST Exemption:   The new tax act provides that the Generation-Skipping Transfer (GST) tax exemption also remains at the same level as the gift and estate tax exemption ($5,000,000, adjusted for inflation). The GST tax, which is in addition to the federal estate tax, is imposed on amounts transferred (by gift or at death) to grandchildren or others more than one generation below the decedent.  The important point here is that “portability” does not apply to the generation skipping transfer (GST) tax rules. Where grandchildren and future generations are part of an estate plan, portability will not save the unused GST tax exemption of the first spouse to die.  In such cases, using something called a “dynasty” or GST exempt trust is the better course of action.
      • Caveat:   In situations where there the estate size is large and there are many generations who are going to share the estate, failure to understand and use the more traditional dynasty trust could result in a very expensive and disastrous mistake.
  • Annual Donee Exclusion:  Although not part of the tax law changes, this traditional estate and gift tax planning tool allows for annual tax-free gifts of $14,000 in 2013 (up from $13,000 in 2012 as a result of the annual inflation adjustment).  As a result, taxpayers can now give up to $14,000 to as many people as they wish each year and not use up their unified credit or pay a gift tax.
    • Important Note:  Only gifts that qualify as “present interest” gifts are eligible for the annual donee exclusion.
    • Planning Point:  If you are married, your spouse can join you and, together, you can give up to $28,000 per person per year.
    • Planning Point:  This exclusion is in addition to the $5,250,000 estate tax exclusion and can be combined with such exclusion.  For more insight into how to combine these exclusions as well as the lack of marketability and minority interest discounts please read Gifting Shares of Stock In A Bad Economy.
  • Capital Gains and Basis Implications:  Lifetime Gifts versus Transfers At Death:  Although not an estate tax rule, under the new federal tax rules, capital gains on appreciated assets will now be taxed at a 20% rate for taxpayers with income above certain thresholds.  Capital gains below these thresholds will be taxed at the previous 15% rate.  These rules bear heavily in the estate tax planning context especially where recipients receive lifetime gifts versus gifts received at death.
    • Important Tax Basis Rule:  Taxpayers who receive appreciated property by a lifetime gift take a carryover basis, while beneficiaries who receive assets at the decedent’s death get a step up in basis to the date of death value of such assets received.
    • Tax Disaster for the Uninformed, Do It Yourself Estate Planners:  Many times elderly people transfer real estate to children during their lifetime in trying to avoid probate.  For a recipient of such lifetime gift, a disastrous income tax result awaits the uninformed taxpayer as illustrated by the following Example 2.
    • Example 2:  Sam Senior is very sick and wants to avoid probate.  He transfers by quit-claim deed his real estate to his son, Sad Son.  Sam Senior bought his house in the 1970s for $17,000 and made improvements over time of $23,000.  As a result his adjusted basis is $40,000.  The house is now worth $540,000.
      • Sam Senior transfers the house to Sad Son in 2012.  Sad Son takes a carryover basis for the house of $40,000. Sad Son sells the house for $540,000 shortly afterwards and has a capital gain of $500,000 which he surprisingly and sadly finds out will cost him $100,000 (20% x $500,000) in federal taxes alone.  His accountant tells him there will also be state income taxes on this gain. Since he is a Pennsylvania resident, he will pay an extra $15,350 in Pennsylvania income taxes.
      • Alternate Universe:  Sam Senior consults with his tax/estate attorney who drafts a will that transfers the house to son at death. Sad (who now legally changes his name to Happy), has a basis of $540,000 upon his receipt of the house from the estate.  Happy, now sells the house and has zero, yes, zero capital gain (Sale Price, $540,000 less basis of $540,000 = 0)!
        • Note, state inheritance taxes may be applicable in certain states.  For example, in Pennsylvania there would be a 4.5% inheritance tax on the real estate, but this is a lot smaller cost than the capital gains that results from taking a carryover in basis via a lifetime gift.

Final Thoughts and Recommendations:

Federal Estate Tax Implications: The federal estate tax law changes provide for some very generous federal estate tax breaks.  For those close to or above the federal estate tax threshold, the discussion above has explored some of the many planning opportunities to save federal estate taxes.  Such taxpayers should not rely on portability and should meet with an estates attorney to plan the proper course of action based on their particular family situation, needs and goals.

Shift In Focus To State Inheritance Tax Matters: Taxpayers below the federal estate tax thresholds also must continue to plan but the tax focus needs to shift to minimizing state inheritance taxes.

Create An Estate Plan That Fits Your Particular Family and Financial Situation:  It is most important to recognize that everyone has a unique situation with various assets, family members and ideas on how their family members are to be provided for and who should be in charge once they are gone.  As a result, all taxpayers still need to set up an estate plan for non-tax issues such as making sure their assets go to their loved ones in the way they wish.  They need to choose the proper people to administer their estates and any trusts they create.

Young Families:  In younger families, determining a proper guardian for their children and setting up trusts for the protection of their assets and a distribution scheme for such children is of paramount importance and has little to do with taxes.  An objective and unbiased assessment of how much life insurance is required is often needed.

Second Marriages:  Many with second marriages face unique challenges.  An estate plan needs to be developed and implemented to meet the diverse needs and goals of such blended families.

Special Needs Trust:  Those with disabled children or those receiving government benefits may need special needs trusts.

Do Not Try This On Your Own:  Get an Experienced Estate Attorney:  Having experienced estate counsel explore these issues and offer various strategies is at the heart of estate planning.  Coordinating probate and non-probate assets into an integrated estate plan is often overlooked and little understood.

Attention To Details and Documentation: Finally, make sure that you have an experienced estate attorney that can create an integrated estate plan.  Such attorney should have the skills to draft appropriate wills, trusts, durable powers of attorney, living wills and other related documents tailored to your specific family and financial needs.

Please feel free to post comments or ask questions.

Liking and sharing this blog with others in cyberspace is always welcomed and appreciated.

As always, do not hesitate to contact me if you want further insight or need my advice or legal assistance.

Copyright © 2013 – Steven J. Fromm & Associates, P.C., 1420 Walnut Street, Suite 300, Philadelphia, PA 19102. All rights reserved.

As required by United States Treasury Regulations, you should be aware that this communication is not intended by the sender to be used, and it cannot be used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties under United States federal tax laws.

Disclaimer: This Alert has been prepared and published for informational purposes only and is not offered, nor should be construed, as legal advice. For more information, please see the firm’s full disclaimer.

Read Full Post »

My_parents

Estate Planning For Elderly Parents

As our older parents age it is harder for them to deal with the financial details of their lives. With the complicated financial products out there and the low-interest rate environment it becomes very difficult for them to make sound financial decisions. In addition, dealing with one’s own mortality can prevent parents from focusing on their estate plan. As many know, if they fail to have a will, trust or overall estate plan, the state will decide who gets their wealth via the laws of intestate succession.

The situation becomes even more acute in those many cases where there are second and sometimes third or more marriages. Most of these couples do not appreciate the problems that can occur for the surviving family members. A Russian Roulette situation can arise for the families depending on who dies first. Planning and careful drafting is almost certainly necessary in these situations to avoid family warfare and large and usually inevitable litigation costs. Couple this with the emotional toll that these situations engender, you can readily see why estate planning is so vital.  (For more on the estate planning process readers should explore Estate Planning Mistakes: 5 Not So Easy Pieces)

The point here is that children need to help their parents in getting their financial and estate plan in order. However, they must tread very carefully to avoid having their parents think they are acting in a self-serving way. Additionally, children should carefully deal with and tell their siblings of such involvement to avoid any later challenges of overreaching, duress, fraud and undue influence.

So how does one talk with their elder parents about these important issues? To get some ideas about how to approach parents on these vital issues please read my article entitled Estate Planning for Elderly Parents: Discussing Finances and Estate Planning with Your Aging Parents

Copyright © 2012 – Steven J. Fromm & Associates, P.C., 1420 Walnut Street, Suite 300, Philadelphia, PA 19102. All rights reserved.

Read Full Post »

In our fast paced world, many retirement plans are drafted and then often neglected.  In extreme cases, plans are put aside without ever being updated.  Some plan sponsors have failed to restate their plans for years or even decades.  For many individuals, retirement plan accounts represent the largest portion of their wealth.  As the following discussion will illustrate, the failure to protect this most valuable and important asset by keeping the retirement plan in full compliance with applicable retirement plan laws could result in some very nasty, costly and unforeseen financial repercussions.

The retirement plan laws have always required that plans be updated for tax law changes.  Before 2003, the IRS allowed plans to be periodically restated for tax law changes that occurred over many years.  This resulted in large, periodic major plan restatements.  However, since 2003 the IRS has required amendments to retirement plans for each new tax law resulting in more frequent “interim amendments.”  [For those of you interested in a more detailed discussion of these required interim amendments since 2003, please go to my questions answered at my Linked-In profile.]  For many plans, the deadlines for many of these plan restatements or interim amendments have now expired.  Current rules provide that plans that have not been redrafted to comply with required prior restatements or interim amendments cease to be qualified as of their applicable deadlines.

In the worst case scenario, the IRS may demand that the plan be retroactively disqualified.  If the IRS is successful in disqualifying the plan, the plan sponsor’s tax deductions for contributions taken in the year of disqualification and in later years would be disallowed.  The taxes owed by the plan sponsor due to the disallowance of previously claimed retirement plan deductions plus applicable interest and penalties could be enormous.  In addition, participants of the plan would have to treat as taxable income the value of their plan account as of the date of such disqualification.  The taxes, interest and penalties to the participants from the date of plan disqualification could be equally exorbitant. This would be a truly disastrous and harsh result for both the employer plan sponsor and participants in the disqualified plan.

However, in most cases, the current policy of the IRS is to impose monetary penalties instead of the more severe penalty of plan disqualification.  Even so, when the IRS raises these failures as the result of an audit the penalties can be quite severe.   Penalties can range from $2,500 to $80,000 depending on the failures involved and the size of the plan.  It is worth noting that in recent years, the IRS has increased its auditing of retirement plans.

 Here is Good News: How to Solve This Looming Problem 

The IRS has a voluntary remedial program called the VCP (voluntary compliance program) to correct these plan document deficiencies.  The IRS position is that retirement plans may be re-qualified only by having the plan sponsor voluntarily come forward before an IRS audit by submitting the newly drafted delinquent restatements and/or interim amendments to the IRS in accordance with some very detailed procedures and documentation pursuant to Revenue Procedure 2008-50.  Once the IRS reviews and hopefully approves the application and the newly drafted required documentation, the plan is deemed to be in full compliance with applicable law and such plan is retroactively tax qualified.

Instead of paying a steep monetary penalty, the VCP submission results in the paying of a filing fee to the IRS.  Sometimes, if the violation is quite limited the filing fee can be as low as $375.  (Remember, you will still need to pay for documentation services associated with plan restatements and interim amendments.  However, these costs would have been incurred in any event to keep your plan in full compliance with the law.)  The important point here is that the use of the VCP program avoids the risk of plan disqualification or the imposition of a large monetary penalty.

 How We Can Help:

Numerous VCP program applications under the applicable Revenue Procedure 2008-50 have been submitted by this office.  This application along with the needed plan restatements and interim amendments must be carefully drafted to ensure efficient negotiations and a successful outcome with the IRS.

The Bottom Line:

Plan sponsors should immediately and voluntarily move to correct plan deficiencies pursuant to the more taxpayer friendly and cheaper VCP program before the IRS audits your plan.  Once the IRS commences an audit, the VCP submission strategy is no longer an option and your plan is exposed to disqualification and/or severe monetary penalties.

Looking forward, you must establish a program with your plan adviser to ensure that your plan is kept in compliance with the laws concerning plan restatements, interim amendments and the changing IRS submission requirements and deadlines.  This will avoid having to deal with all of these problems again in the future.  In fact, the Revenue Procedure requires a disclosure in the VCP application as to what new procedures the plan sponsors will use to avoid this problem in the future.

 Do Not Wait

Do not wait for the IRS to audit your retirement plan as it then will be too late to get the cheaper and less painful VCP deal.  For a free initial consult to assess your retirement plan situation, please do not hesitate to call me, Steven J. Fromm, Esquire at 215-735-2336.  All consultations are confidential and covered by attorney-client privilege.

Copyright © 2009, Steven J. Fromm

Read Full Post »

In the wake of the sad and tragic deaths of Michael Jackson and Farrah Fawcett, we are all reminded how fragile our lives can be and how quickly things can change. The death of these two iconic figures should be a call to many to put their estate plan in order. It should be noted that the reality is that most people die without wills in our country. Some really smart and famous people, Abraham Lincoln, Howard Hughes, and Pablo Picasso, die without taking the time to draft a will.

Many of us procrastinate, minimize our personal need or the legal importance of drafting wills, trusts, living wills, and durable powers of attorney. The complexities of combining and coordinating diverse assets such as individual assets, jointly held assets, retirement plans, life insurance, annuities and business interests seem just too daunting for some. For others, they do not realize the importance of looking at all of their assets from an overall perspective; namely, when all is said and done who ends up with what.  Is the division of assets fair and equitable to all concerned after the payment of taxes, debts and estate administration costs?

For many, Michael Jackson’s untimely death has raised these and many other estate planning issues. At this point, no one knows whether he had a will and/or trust for his kids, or whether his estate plan was up to date. But by looking at his situation (and speculating a bit), some important estate planning considerations for the rest of us can be explored:

Guardianship: It is unclear what provisions Mr. Jackson had in his will (assuming there is a valid will) for his children. The early word from the media is that this will be a messy battle in the courts over the issue of guardianship of his children, even if his will indicated his preference for guardian.  Even if  challenged, the designation of guardian in a will would still be a very significant factor in any court challenge and laying out your wishes is always a prudent thing to do in any event.  The object lesson is clear: Parents with young children clearly should see the need for a will that indicates their choice of guardian for their children.

Trusts: No one knows whether Mr. Jackson had set up trusts for his children. Although it appears that his estate is now insolvent, this situation will probably change with post-mortem sales of his music someday providing assets and wealth for his children (think after-death income of the Elvis Presley estate).  Hopefully, he set up trusts that will protect and manage his assets.  To increase the possibilities of becoming competent adults, perhaps he drafted provisions in his trust in a way that develops their sense of personal initiative and responsibility yet still provides for their basic needs.  Experienced estate planning attorneys explore this type of forward looking planning when it comes to dealing with children and their anticipated needs if parents die prematurely.

Specific Bequests: The media has speculated that a very large asset of his estate (his Beatles song rights) was gifted to Paul McCartney. This generosity may be commendable, but from an estate planning perspective this bequest may raise problems. First, if his estate is in fact insolvent, this bequeathed asset would not be available to his estate to be sold and the proceeds used to pay down estate debts and/or benefit his children. Secondly, generally, bequests like these are often times given in a way that they bear no estate taxes. This could distort how the assets are divided between beneficiaries. The point here is that this bequest may have made sense when the will was originally drafted when Mr. Jackson was wealthy, but this bequest could be quite problematic in the current situation. The lesson here is that an estate plan needs to be looked at periodically as the family needs and financial situations change over time.

Special Needs Trusts: Farrah Fawcett died leaving a son who is in jail with addiction problems. The issues for people with children with special needs is often minimized, overlooked or not fully considered. As her only child, did she leave all of her wealth to her son? Did her will provide that he was to get his inheritance at her death or did she provide for a trust for his benefit? If she established a trust, what kind of provisions and conditions did she make in providing benefits to him? These tough questions arise not only for children with addiction issues, but for children with cognitive impairments, physical disabilities and emotional issues.  In addition, special needs trusts may be required where children are receiving public assistance from state and local governments.

The Bottom Line: Protect your family and protect your hard earned wealth. Spend the time to plan your affairs with an experienced estate planning attorney.  Remember, if you die without a will and trust, your state intestacy laws will control who will get your assets and how they get your assets. When young children are involved, courts generally place the children’s inheritances in trust in accordance with what a judge deems appropriate.  In addition, the judge will determine who will be the trustee of any trust they impose on your children and they will determine who should be the guardian of your children. These and other important considerations should be determined by you and not by a court of law, so do it and do it now so you do not leave problems like the ones Michael Jackson and Farrah Fawcett may have left behind.

© Steven J. Fromm, 2009

Read Full Post »

As with most things in life, when things are bad, there usually is something good that can come out of it.  Our current economic troubles have resulted in many closely held or small businesses being worth far less then they used to be.  This is not a good situation for businesses that are hanging on to survive or have to be sold for various reasons.  However, for people wanting to minimize estate and gift taxes and have been putting off taking a cold hard look at their estate plan, now may be the perfect time to explore the gifting of shares in their businesses.

For example, some businesses have senior family members who own all or most of the shares of the outstanding stock of their corporation.  With the value of the business being down right now, more shares could be gifted to younger family members involved in the business.

Example:  Mr. Senior owns 80% of Deflated, Inc., while his two sons who work in the business own 10% each.  Deflated was worth $3,000,000 in 2007.  By the end of 2008, it was worth $2,500,000.  Mr. Senior talks to tax counsel and after exploring the tax strategies and planning tools discussed below decides to gift 20% of his shares worth $500,000 to each of his sons, leaving him with a 40% stock interest.

The tax advantages are as follows:

1.  The stock gifted to each son was previously worth $600,000. The current market value of such stock to each son is now only $500,000.  If Deflated, Inc. goes back to its value once the economy recovers, then Mr. Senior has just transferred $200,000 ($100,000 to each son) to his sons estate and gift tax free.  At a current marginal estate tax rate of 45%, Mr. Senior’s family can save $90,000 (45%*$200,000).

2.  The gifts to each son are gifts of a minority interest in Deflated, Inc. and such gifts lack marketability due to the limited market for such shares.  Estate and gift tax rules allow discounts for these factors that reduce the value of assets transferred.  (Caveat: There are some legislative proposals being floated in Washington seeking to limit this tax strategy. Stay tuned.) These discounts for minority interests and lack of marketability conservatively can be 25%, sometimes more.   With such discounts the gift of each $500,000 is reduced by $125,000. At a current marginal estate tax rate of 45%, Mr. Senior’s family can save another $112,500 (45%*$250,000).

3.  Outright gifts of stock are eligible for the annual donee exclusion of $13,000.  In addition, Mr. Senior has a spouse who will join in this gift, which will allow for a second $13,000 exclusion.  So the taxable gift to each son is now reduced by $26,000 (Mr. Senior’s annual exclusion of  $13,000 and his spousal joinder of another $13,000).  Additional savings to the family is $23,400 (45%*26,000*2 sons).

4.  If Mr. Senior makes no further gifts and dies with his reduced ownership interest of 40%,  his estate can claim the minority interest and lack of marketability discounts against his remaining shares.  If Mr. Senior dies in 2014, when deflated is worth $4,000,000, his family can take a 25% lack of marketability/minority interest discount, saving his family another $180,000 (45%*$400,000 marketability/minority interest discount[$1,600,000 forty-percent interest*25%]).

Bottom Line:  Mr. Senior can take advantage of the lousy economy, the lack of marketability and minority interest discounts and the annual donee exclusions with a spousal joinder to save his family a tremendous amount of future estate and inheritance taxes.

Caveat:  Remember that this type of planning depends on the particular factual setting of each client.  One difference in the facts can change the outcome.  Also, be aware that state inheritance taxes have not been considered in the above example.  Finally, the above should not be considered as legal advice.  Please consult with tax counsel to discuss your particular factual situation.

Copyright © 2009, Steven J. Fromm.

Read Full Post »

%d bloggers like this: