Elder law estate planning

SPECIAL NEEDS, THIRD PARTY AND SELF SETTLED TRUSTS – WHATS WITH ALL THE NAMES?

Published on: February 17, 2016 | by Ettinger Law Firm

LEGAL DISTINCTIONS THAT MATTER

When a person applies for Medicaid eligibility there are many pitfalls that an unsuspecting or unsophisticated applicant can run afoul of. To help them retain the benefit of certain monies that they would normally have access to third parties or the applicant themselves can create a special needs trust to help keep the public benefits and still benefit from the money in the trust. The various different trusts have different legal requirements that must be met to qualify as that type of trusts.

Moreover, different trusts accomplish different goals and yet other types of trusts exist that have nothing to do with Medicaid or other public entitlement program eligibility but help to reduce tax liability. Some trusts accomplish two tasks, such as a third party special needs trusts, which allow seniors to live a relatively modest and respectable life and qualify for Medicaid at the same time. While other types of trusts only satisfy just one legal goal, such as a grantor retained annuity trust, which allows a person to make a gift of an asset that will likely appreciate rather quickly, but incur no gift tax liability. Finally, there are other types of trusts that outlive their utility, such as pooled trusts.

PLANNING FOR YOUR SPECIAL NEEDS LOVED ONES

Published on: February 15, 2016 | by Ettinger Law Firm

CREATE A GLOBAL PLAN TO GO INTO EFFECT TODAY

If you are a parent, stepparent, grandparent or caretaker of a special needs child you need to prepare for the day when you are no longer able to physically and financially care for your special needs loved one. While it is not suggested that you stop caring for the special needs loved one today, there is no better time than to start your planning than now and to actually try it out, so as to cure any unanticipated issues now while you still have the mental, emotional and financial wherewithal. First on the list of priorities is to find a standby guardian who can step in and care for your loved one without complication, so as to insure a seamless transition. Better still is to have two caretakers who can assume responsibility for the day to day needs of your special needs loved one. This blog has discussed the wisdom and utility of a standby guardian.

While it is essential for you to discuss these plans with any standby guardian and alternate standby guardian, as any legal responsibility to assume guardianship requires the consent of the standby guardian, it is always best to discuss these decisions with your loved one. Many autistic children do not deal with change very well. As such, having the standby guardian come in to run the show and do what you do on a daily basis is best. The same applies for any alternate standby guardian. It would also be best to discreetly disclose your financial planning, income and expenses with the standby guardian as well as any alternate. Any monies coming in from public agencies or even benevolent societies as well as a review of key service providers would be necessary for the standby guardian to understand if you become incapacitated, disabled or otherwise unable to provide the same level of care that you currently provide for your special needs loved one.

VETERANS ADMINISTRATION PENSIONS – AID AND ATTENDANCE PENSION

Published on: January 29, 2016 | by Ettinger Law Firm

The Veterans Administration has a program that allows for a large subset of the veterans population to qualify for certain benefits that pay for costs associated with caring for a veteran or their spouse. This Aid and Attendance pension may be in addition to any pension that the service member and/or their spouse may already receive. The Housebound pension also covers certain costs associated the care and attendance to the veteran or their spouse when they are primarily confined to their residence. While a veteran or their spouse may already receive a pension, as well as these additional benefits, one cannot receive both the Aid and Attendance benefits as well as the Housebound benefits. It is important to note at the outset the difference between a pension and compensation.

Compensation is a sum of money that the veteran receives, tax free, for disabilities that the veteran suffered in relation to their time as a service member. The compensation is meant to make up for any loss of income due to the disability. A Pension is meant to provide additional monies to low income or disabled veterans who served during a period of war, or in a war zone. Both of these benefits are distinct from a military retirement. The benefits under these Veterans Administration programs have been in existence for over 60 years, yet many Veterans Administration officials and Veterans Administration attorneys were unaware of these benefits until recently.

WHAT IS COVERED

FILE AND SUSPEND STRATEGY IS NO MORE – NEED TO REASSESS PLANS

Published on: January 26, 2016 | by Ettinger Law Firm

For over a decade it was sound and perfectly legal advice for financial advisors and elder law practitioners to advise their married clients to file and suspend their social security benefits, thereby maximizing their financial returns. The basic advice was to advise a married couple to have the spouse who earned more through his/her lifetime to file for social security benefits at the full retirement age. After the higher earning spouse filed, the lower earning spouse would automatically be eligible for spousal benefits and would therefore file for spousal benefits. Once the lower earning spouse started to receive benefits, he/she would get a higher monthly benefit amount as the lower earning spouse would piggyback on the higher earnings of their spouse.

At that time, the higher earning spouse would suspend their benefits and work, thereby increasing their social security benefits even more, so that way when they hit the maximum benefit age now set at 70 they would have a higher monthly benefit amount. When the higher earning spouse hit the maximum benefit age, they would have maxed out their social security earnings and have already benefitted from a spouse who collected social security benefits in the meantime. It all comes down to dollars and cents. Someone has to crunch the numbers to determine if it made sense for the couple to do it, although for the majority of couples it did make sense.

The question also had to be asked, when was the optimum time? Again, someone had to crunch the numbers to find the sweet spot. There was even a second strategy for those whom it did not make sense to do so. The second approach was for both spouses to file a “restricted application”, whereby each spouse would only receive their spousal benefits. This let them increase their own earnings, so that way when they reach seventy, they have maximized their social security benefits. In either event, the couple would be able to benefit from an additional several thousands of dollars.

MORE ON ELDER ABUSE – FEDERAL GOVERNMENT RESPONSE

Published on: January 22, 2016 | by Ettinger Law Firm

Throughout the twentieth century, the Federal government took various legal steps to positively impact the lives of senior citizens, the disabled and the elderly in general. Throughout the 1930s a variety of retirement and pension programs were enacted, most significantly social security. 1952 saw the funding for social services programs targeted for the elderly and senior citizen population. The 1960s saw a number of progressive social legislation enacted, with 1965 as a particularly important year, with the implementation of Medicare as well as the Older Americans Act. The 1970s followed with many funding programs expanding the legislative enactments of the 1960s. For example, 1972 saw the funding for a national nutritional program for the elderly, which is known today as meals on wheels, while in 1973 Congress funded grants for local senior community centers.

OLDER AMERICANS ACT

For purposes of the prevention and coordination of the national response to elder abuse, the Older Americans Act, is perhaps the most significant and comprehensive federal law to deal with elder abuse. Currently the Department of Health and Human Services, Administration on Aging manages the various programs flowing from the Older Americans Act. It ensures that each state has a sufficiently strong adult protective services program and a Long Term Care Ombudsman Program, which acts as a voice for residents of long term care facilities in the jurisdiction. These programs are necessary for the state to receive funding from the federal government.

BANKRUPTCY AND MEDICARE – A FRAUDULENT TRANSFER IS A FRAUDULENT TRANSFER

Published on: January 16, 2016 | by Ettinger Law Firm

The Eastern District of Virginia Bankruptcy Court issued an opinion on a case with a unique factual scenario almost three years ago, on February 6, 2013 in the case of In Re Woodworth, (Bankr. E.D. Va., No. 11-11051-BFK, Feb. 6, 2013). The case is important because it speaks to the larger issue of fraudulent intent and how even when a trust settlor relies on a seemingly befitting and authoritative disclaimer against fraudulent conveyances, a Court can still find fraud. It also speaks to the vital need to consult with competent counsel for all major financial decisions, to insure that those decisions do not impact eligibility for medicaid or other government programs.

The case centered on a woman’s attempt, and seeming initial success, at what the Court characterized as medicaid fraud. The case involved the debtor, Holly Woodworth and her mother, Dorothy Lee Stutesman. Assuming that the facts of the opinion are accurate, it seems that Ms. Stutesman was rather poor in her money management skills. Ms. Stutesman first entrusted her husband to manage her finances and then her daughter, Ms. Woodworth, after her husband passed away. Most specifically, she first invested a very large sum of money, at least $143,000, with Merrill Lynch, although she used Ms. Woodworth’s social security number to open and listed her as the account owner. Both Ms. Woodworth and Ms. Stutesman both testified under oath that this arrangement was to protect the money from those who would prey on Ms. Stutesman’s lack of financial ability. Most importantly, Ms. Stutesman added that in addition to her desire to protect the money from potential scammers, she did not want assets in her name, in order to be eligible for Medicaid and other public benefits, if and when she should need them. In 2010, after the hit to the stock market, the parties created a trust.

The Bankruptcy Court found the language of the engagement letter that came along with the creation of the trust noteworthy and for good reason. Most specifically, the engagement letter stated that the trust “avoids creditors claims of fraudulent conveyance and civil conspiracy to divest yourself of valuable assets, and avoids IRS trigger for a taxable transaction.” Id. At 3. Both parties recognized that the money in the Merrill Lynch account and then trust was Ms. Stutesman’s. Ms. Woodworth filed bankruptcy due to events and factors unrelated to the trust, although she claimed that she only held title to the funds in the trust but no equitable interest.

ABLE ACCOUNT LAW CHANGES BROADENING PROTECTIONS FOR SPECIAL NEEDS PLANNING

Published on: January 12, 2016 | by Ettinger Law Firm

On December 19, 2014 President Obama signed into law a number of tax and financial measures to extend certain tax benefits. More specifically, the legislation enacted the Achieving a Better Life Experience (ABLE) Act of 2013, which amends section 529(e) of the United States Tax Code, to allow for tax-free savings accounts for individuals with disabilities. Almost a year later, almost to the day, both the Federal government and New York state both acted to expand the coverage under the ABLE Act. Prior to the most recent change, ABLE accounts had to be located in the same jurisdiction as the beneficiary.

The law also required state laws enabling such savings accounts. If the state did not have such enabling legislation, individuals in that state would not be able to set up such an account. On December 18, 2015, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo signed the New York Achieving a Better Life Experience (NY ABLE) Act allowing for such savings accounts in New York. On the same day that Governor Cuomo signed the NY ABLE Act, President Obama signed another spending bill that contained, among other things, legislative changes to the ABLE Act. More specifically, sections 302 and 303 of the bill allows for changes in what purchases or expenditures are permitted under the ABLE Act and allowed for beneficiaries to have such accounts in jurisdictions different than the one that they live in.

While one might reasonably believe that the NY ABLE Act is now not necessary, it still has much value as it allows for such accounts to exist within the state and thus subject to the various protections afforded under New York law. It would also draw in capital from other jurisdictions that do not have ABLE Act enabling legislation. All of these measures are part of an expansion of the laws that allow for the financial protections for financial and estate planning for those with special needs. Previous to the PATH Act, individuals with special needs who had savings accounts or other assets over a certain amount (generally, $2,000) would possibly be disqualified from certain governmental benefits. Savings in a PATH Act account will not jeopardize these benefits or eligibility for benefits.

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN ABLE ACT ACCOUNTS AND SPECIAL NEEDS TRUSTS

Published on: January 8, 2016 | by Ettinger Law Firm

WHAT IS BEST FIT

Both an ABLE Act account and a special needs trusts try to accomplish essentially the same thing. Both attempt to ensure that a special needs child or person are financially planned for through various legal and financial means so as to enrich the life of the beneficiary. An ABLE Act account as well as a special needs trust also aim to protect the beneficiaries valuable governmental benefits that utilize a means based testing for eligibility purposes. While both products roughly accomplish the same thing, one may be better at accomplishing one thing rather than the other.

TWO DIFFERENT MEANS TO ONE END

CHARITABLE ROLLOVER OF RETIREMENT ACCOUNT DISTRIBUTION NON-TAXABLE DISTRIBUTION FROM IRA

Published on: January 5, 2016 | by Ettinger Law Firm

On December 18, 2015 President Obama signed the Protecting Americans from Tax Hike (PATH) Act, which made permanent, among other things, three rather popular charitable tax incentives were set to expire January 1, 2016. The most important provision of the PATH Act for estate planning purposes is the continued allowance of rollover of individual retirement account distribution. This particular measure came into law in 2006 as part of the Pension Protection Act as a temporary measure. It expired and brought back to life several times over in the last nine years. The measure has shown itself to be a wildly popular measure, with approximately $140 million in charitable donations in the first two years and hundreds of millions going to colleges and universities in the last nine years. It seems likely that with the permanence of the new law, charitable givings will likely increase.

REQUIREMENTS OF CHARITABLE ROLLOVER

There are some important rules that are necessary to satisfy in order to qualify for the tax deduction benefits. They are:

HOW LONG CAN IRS COME AFTER ME? THE SUMNER REDSTONE CASE

Published on: January 2, 2016 | by Ettinger Law Firm

Sumner Redstone is an entertainment business mogul with a majority share ownership of CBS entertainment and Viacom, and through Viacom, BET and Paramount Pictures, all through his majority ownership of his family business, National Amusement, which originally started out in the drive in movie theater business during The Great Depression. In just the last few weeks a case against Mr. Redstone by the IRS presents an oddity in the law, which may make many people shutter. More particularly, the IRS issued a Notice of Deficiency for a taxable event from 1972 – over 40 years later.

The nature of the case revolved around a transfer of shares in National Amusement Corporation in 1972 to separate trusts set up for the grandchildren of the founder, Sumner Redstone’s father Michael Redstone. Sumner set up one trust for his kids while his siblings set up separate trusts for their kids. At the time the transfer of interfamily stock was of a insignificant amount that passing them from personal ownership to a trust did not even require a tax return. One can and should ask about the concept of a statute of limitation.

Apparently, as the case against Mr. Redstone shows, the IRS does not have a statute of limitation for unfiled tax returns. 26 U.S.C. § 6501(c)(1) establishes that when a taxpayer files a fraudulent tax return, (c)(2) otherwise attempts to avoid tax liability, or (c)(3) fails to file a tax return, there is no statute of limitation. Mr. Redstone has an impressive educational pedigree, where he graduated from first in his class from the Boston Latin School and then graduated Harvard in only three years in 1944, which was actually common at the time. After graduation he served as an officer in the United States Army, helping to decode Japanese messages. He attended Georgetown Law School after the war and then received his LL.B. in 1947 from Harvard Law. After working for various governmental departments followed by private practice, Mr. Redstone went to work for the family business, which was booming by then.