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

Surprise, surprise! Congress still has not come up with an answer to the lingering estate and generation-skipping transfer (GST) tax question for individuals who die this year. And, with the lack of a step-up in basis, some heirs will face higher combined estate and income tax costs for deaths occurring this year rather than in 2009. What a topsy-turvy world we live in.

There is still a possibility that Congress will retroactively reinstate the estate and GST taxes to the beginning of the year, but as each day goes by, this gets more and more unlikely. Even if the House could get their act together, I would be surprised to see anything come out of the Senate Finance Committee.

Apart from tax uncertainty, the continuing inaction could also pose a problem for individuals with wills using formula clauses. These clauses work well when the estate tax is in force but they may produce unintended consequences when there is no estate tax. Action may need to be taken if it becomes clear that Congress will not be addressing the situation.

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On January 1, 2010, the federal estate tax was repealed for one year (2010) unless and until Congress decides to change the law. We don’t know how long the repeal will last, but the fact that the federal estate tax has been repealed for some part of 2010 complicates estate planning for everyone.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

Effective September 28, 2009, a new bill passed by the 2009 Oregon legislature imposes a new tax on what a legislative staff summary refers to as a “specified group of health insurers.” In particular, the new law assesses a 1% tax upon the gross amount of premiums earned by health insurance providers. The stated purpose of the new tax is to provide health insurance to low income children – a commendable objective.

As the popularity of insurance companies is probably not high, most people might not have a great deal of sympathy for the plight of the newly taxed. However, the tax has already begun to “trickle down” to the rest of us. I've recently read a copy of a letter from a CEO of a major Oregon health insurance provider to a customer. Noting the new tax’s impending effective date, the letter pleasantly informs the small business insurance customer that “your premium rates will be adjusted to reflect the new 1 percent tax.”

However, the “trickle” does not stop with the small business. The owner of that business will now need to make a difficult decision as to whether to raise prices, absorb the cost, cut costs of other employee benefits, or pass the additional costs on to employees. You get the idea – the tax lands upon small businesses and their employees at a time when many such businesses are stretched to the breaking point (assuming they’ve made it this far in the recession).

Is this really the intended consequence of the new policy? I welcome your comments and questions.
 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Recently, UBS announced that it had agreed to release the names of 4,450 of its account holders to the IRS. This is unsettling news for taxpayers with undisclosed foreign accounts. However, the IRS currently has a Voluntary Disclosure Program to encourage tax payers with unreported foreign accounts, unfiled tax returns, under reported income or frivolous tax deductions to participate and avoid further penalties and criminal prosecution. 

• Taxpayers must apply to the IRS before the IRS contacts the taxpayer. 
• On August 25, 2009, the IRS announced that UBS account holders would be eligible until the IRS received the information. Apparently, UBS is notifying its account holders before turning the names over. See IRS Voluntary Disclosure: Questions and Answers

This is crunch time!  UBS account holders are not the only taxpayers with unreported foreign accounts who should be concerned. The disclosure program is about to terminate. 

• Taxpayers have only until September 23, 2009 to participate in the program. 
• Voluntary disclosure will allow a taxpayer to avoid criminal prosecution and the assessment of significant IRS penalties. A taxpayer will still have to pay the income taxes, accrued interest and some penalties.  
• Taxpayers only have one opportunity to make a submission, and failure to qualify for the program, depending on the facts, may lead to criminal prosecution.

If you are interested in a confidential discussion with an attorney about this important opportunity, you may call us at 503-226-2966.

• 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

Recently, the Oregon Legislature passed a tax amnesty program with the hope of raising $16.2 million in additional revenue. (See Revenue Impact of Proposed Legislation (pdf)) The amnesty applies to corporate income and excise tax, personal income tax, inheritance tax, and transit district (self-employment) taxes. Any Oregon taxpayer with any of these underreported taxes or unfiled tax returns for any period prior to January 1, 2008 will be eligible to apply. (For a copy of the bill see SB880-B (pdf))

• Short time period: The tax amnesty program is only open for 50 days, beginning on October 1, 2009 and closing on November 19, 2009.
• Minimal Benefit: The only benefits being offered are the waiver of one half of the interest and all penalties. Not much of an incentive.
• No Taxes Waived: All the taxes due and the reduced interest must either be paid in full within 60 days of the application or be paid under an installment plan on or before May 31, 2011. Failure to complete an installment plan voids the amnesty benefits.
• Gotcha Penalty: Anyone who is eligible for this program, but fails to apply will be subject to an additional 25% penalty. This penalty can apply to tax adjustments discovered after November 19, 2009. Also any taxpayer who has received a notice of delinquency or notice of assessment from the Oregon Department of Revenue for any year that would be eligible for the amnesty program cannot participate.

This program is a "cruel joke" because:

• The amnesty program is only open for 50 days.
• The amnesty offer is minimal. There is no provision to compromise taxes.
• Anyone who is currently delinquent with Oregon taxes is probably not eligible.
• An eligible taxpayer who chooses not participate will have an additional 25% penalty added on.
• If there is a tax adjustment after the amnesty program has closed it is possible that the additional penalty can be assessed even though the tax payer was not aware of additional tax liability during the 50 day election period.

In conclusion it is hard to see that this program will help either the state of Oregon or its taxpayers.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks