Wealth Law Blog : Oregon Asset Protection Lawyers & Attorneys : Samuels Yoelin Kantor Seymour & Spinrad Law Firm : OR Estate Planning, Fiduciary Litigation

In my experience, one of the most common areas of confusion in wealth and estate planning is beneficiary designations and their importance in many key areas.

Many important assets in an individual’s portfolio often pass at that person’s death by beneficiary designation and not by that person’s will or trust. Common examples of these types of assets include life insurance, retirement plans, individual retirement accounts (IRAs), and annuities. For many, these assets represent a significant portion of their overall assets, yet the beneficiary designations for these assets are sometimes not carefully considered.

Above all, it is very important to recognize that your will or revocable living trust does not control or “override” the beneficiary designations. For example, a parent’s will may direct assets to a trust for minor children if both parents are deceased. If the parent’s life insurance designation names the children directly, then the life insurance proceeds will “miss” the trust entirely, thus potentially requiring a conservatorship for the proceeds until the children reach age 18. While the children may legally be adults at age 18, they may not have sufficient maturity and experience to properly manage large sums of money (think expensive red sports cars here). The better approach would have been for the life insurance beneficiary designation to name the children’s trust as the beneficiary under the life insurance policy upon the death of the surviving parent. 

It’s also very important that you understand the tax consequences of your beneficiary designations. For example, if you designate your spouse as your beneficiary under your IRA, your spouse will be able to take advantage of a tax-free rollover of the IRA account into his or her own IRA. On the other hand, if a beneficiary other than a spouse is designated, then the beneficiary will have to take mandatory distributions from the IRA, which in turn will be subject to income taxes. In addition, while the estate tax is in currently in flux, assets passing by beneficiary designation are generally subject to the estate tax in the same manner as any other asset.

The best approach is to carefully consider and integrate beneficiary designations as part of a well-designated estate plan.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

On January 1, 2010, the federal estate tax was repealed for one year (2010) unless and until Congress decides to change the law. We don’t know how long the repeal will last, but the fact that the federal estate tax has been repealed for some part of 2010 complicates estate planning for everyone.

Several members of Congress have indicated that these complications will be resolved quickly, but I remain skeptical. Currently, there are four possible outcomes:

• First, Congress quickly enacts an extension of the 2009 law ($3.5 million exemption and full basis step-up) retroactively. How many times have we seen Congress act quickly when the Democrats and the Republicans are so polarized?
   
• Second, Congress passes a permanent extension of the 2009 law, but makes it prospective only. This is the bill that was passed in the House, but 60 Senators have to agree. If it is prospective only, gap legislation will also have to be passed to cover the period when repeal was in effect.     

• Third, Congress enacts a more permanent reform with a higher exemption amount, and it will likely be prospective only. Some senators would like to raise the exemption to $5 million and add some other changes to permanent legislation. Other senators would prefer the next option of the return to the $1 million exemption. At this point neither side has the 60 votes necessary. The longer Congress takes to pass a reform bill, the more likely it will not be retroactive.
  
• Fourth, Congress does nothing and the $1 million exemption returns in 2011.  Unfortunately, political and fund raising motives may result in this outcome.

In the meantime, taking advantage of the estate tax and generation skipping tax repeal will be an important planning opportunity for high net-worth individuals and their advisers. Accountants, attorneys and financial advisors will need to learn the details of the new modified carry-over basis rules since they are applicable to all estates. 

This truly is a mess.  Hopefully, Congress will act responsibly to clean it up.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Since the passage of the Economic Growth and Tax Relief and Reconciliation Act in 2001, clients and practitioners have been waiting for years for Congress to determine what happens to estate taxes after 2009. The Republicans hoped to completely repeal the estate tax. The Democrats wanted to keep the estate tax but raise the amount that is exempt from estate tax. 

On December 3, 2009, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the Permanent Estate Tax Relief for Families, Farmers, and Small Businesses Act of 2009 a/k/a HR 4154. (For a copy of HR 4154 click here),  which is their vision for federal estate tax reform. What does HR 4154 do?

• HR 4154 makes the federal estate tax exemption of $3.5 million permanent, however, there are no inflation adjustments;
• The zero estate tax for 2010 is repealed;
• The basis step-up provisions which have traditionally been part of the federal estate tax law have been reinstated for 2010; and 
• The estate tax rate is made permanent at 45%.

The House vote to approve the bill was 225 to 200. No Republicans supported the bill. Speculation continues that any estate tax reform legislation that occurs within the next few weeks will ultimately apply to 2010 only, and the more permanent issues will be decided next year. The stage now turns to the Senate, and it is expected to pass its own version of estate tax reform.
 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

One of the most surprising revelations that many of my clients experience is the fact that estate/inheritance taxes will be due upon their death, unless they do some planning.  These clients have been convinced that estate/inheritance taxes only affect the rich, and since they do not perceive themselves as rich, they have nothing to worry about.

What these clients don't realize, until our initial meeting, is what all is included in their taxable estate.  The asset most often left out is proceeds from life insurance.  If you have a million dollar life insurance policy, and you also have other assets, you will pay inheritance tax in Oregon, which has only a $1 million exclusion.

The second asset most often forgotten is retirement plans.  These amounts are not only included in your taxable estate, and therefore subject to the estate tax, but they are also, without proper planning, potentially subject to income taxes.

The third asset that people seem to forget when calculating their taxable estate is equity in their real property.  This one may seem more surprising than the others, but it happens quite frequently.

Fourth, there are assets that client's have received from their parent's estate planning, such as family limited partnership interests, that they tend to forget about.

For those who don't relish the idea of paying more taxes than is required (and I have yet to meet someone who does),  I recommend having a long discussion with your estate planning attorney about what is included, and what the estate tax exemptions are currently (see earlier posts about changes in the federal estate tax exemption).

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

In the August 7, 2009, BNA Daily Tax Report, it was noted that Rep. Brady has proposed a permanent repeal of the estate tax.  Do you remember that old Saturday morning cartoon, I'm Just a Bill?  Well, this bill is going to continue to sit on Capitol Hill and will never become law.  You heard it here first.

So, what is to become of the repeal of the estate tax?  Most of those in the know seem to say that we are going to stay with the current $3.5 million exemption.  They are probably right.  However, I think it is dangerous to count on that happening.  Let me spell out for you a less probable, but possible scenario.

 Under current law, in 2010, the estate tax essentially goes away.  Then, in 2011, it comes back with a vengeance, at a $1 million exemption (thank you Senator Bird).  When this process was set up eight years ago, it was thought that there was no way a tax increase would be allowed, so the repeal would go on, regardless of the Bird Rule.  However, now we are in an economic crisis, and the government needs money. 

Many believe that the congressional leadership don't want to see 2010 with the unlimited exemption, so we can expect finality this year.  It is possible, however, that the they will just punt this year.  With health care taking up the entire agenda lately, the congressional leadership could just extend the $3.5 million exemption for one year while they consider the matter.  They would likely get broad suppport for this extension.  Then, next year, they could decide that Bush's plan was best after all, and just let the Bird Rule apply.  We would be back at a $1 million exemption without a vote for a tax increase.

You may be thinking the congressional leadership wouldn't risk this because it affects too many of the voters, but keep two things in mind.  First, because of the recession, less people would be affected as less people will have taxable estates.  And second, the government needs money to finance the change America voted for.

Now, I agree this is not the most probable scenario.  But, it is at least possible, and because it is at least possible, we should consider it in our estate tax planning. 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks