Articles Posted in Estate Planning

One of the most common concerns that parents have when creating an estate plan in New York is worrying about passing on too much wealth to children who cannot properly handle it. After a lifetime of hard work, ingenuity, and prudent planning, the last thing many families want is to see a child obtain an inheritance and then lose it. One need only check newspapers headlines to see celebrity examples of younger individuals with too much money whose lives take a turn for their worst as they fail to handle their wealth carefully.

A Wall Street Journal article last week discussed this issue in the context of the now seemingly permanent federal estate tax rates. Per the “fiscal cliff” agreement, the estate tax law will allow each individual to shield up to $5.25 million. For a couple, that allows $10.5 million to be given to others tax-free.

While this is good news for those who have this much wealth to pass along, it does raise some questions for families. Is your child–no matter what age–prepared to handle an inheritance of this size? Will it be lost to creditors? Taken by a spouse? WIll the money change the child’s motivation or long-term goals?

Our estate planning attorneys often help New Yorkers create trusts that are used to pass on assets to charities. When structured properly, gifts to favorited causes is both a great way to give back and a smart financial move to save on taxes and ensure that your long-term inheritance wishes are met.

A Charitable Remainder Trust, for example, is sometimes a prudent estate planning tool. This is particularly useful for those with assets that have significantly appreciated who wish to save on taxes while generating an income stream on something that will eventually go to charity. Essentially, this works by creating a trust that is managed by the charity to which the asset will go. The trustee (the charity) then pays you a portion of the income generated by the trust for so many years or the rest of your life. Upon your passing the charity retains the principal.

These trusts have many benefits. They can take assets out of one’s estate for estate tax purposes. Also, income tax deductions can be taken on the fair market value of the interest that remains in the trust. By using appreciated assets, the capital gains tax can also be avoided.

Yesterday marked the official federal holiday chosen to honor civil rights hero Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. It also happened to be Inauguration Day for President Barack Obama. In a unique twist, the President chose to be sworn in on the Bible that was read by Dr. King on the day that he gave his “I Have a Dream” speech in Washington D.C. It is a stirring reminder of the connections that echo throughout history.

As we often point out, in the world of estate planning and elder law, history is also a great guide to understanding what should or should not be done to help prepare yourself and your family for whatever the future might hold. Dr. King himself was taken far too soon, dying in 1968 at the age of thirty nine as a result of an assassin’s bullet. Because he passed away so suddenly–and relatively young–he had not conducted much estate planning at all.

The King Estate

Drafting a will can be a delicate process, because various legal requirements must be met before the document will have any legal effect. Cases abound of wills which were thrown out because they did not conform to the technical requirements. Ensuring that everything will be done pursuant to legal rules is one key reason to have the aid of an estate planning attorney.

Beyond that, when planning professionals are not involved in these matters, there is a far greater chance that fraudulent and illegal practices might be undertaken. When money is on the line, sometimes the worst characteristics in everyone seeps out. For one thing, it is not uncommon for entire wills to be forged, and when outside observers to the planning are few and far between, those forgeries sometimes even work.

Forged Will

The Daily Jeffersonian published a story recently on the bizarre details of a case involving a lottery winner’s apparent murder and the subsequent estate battle. Like the plot of a Hollywood crime drama, the tale includes a mysterious death, a series of hidden family feuds, and considerable money on the line. While quite dramatic, it is a vivid example of the difference that common sense estate planning can make in the aftermath of a death.

Money & Murder

The case centers of the estate of Urooj Khan who immigrated from India in 1989 and established several successful businesses. In 2010 he hit a jackpot and won a state lottery; his actual take-home from the winnings were about $425,000. According to reports, he planned on using the windfall to pay off his mortgage, expand his business, and donate a sizeable sum to a local children’s hospital.

Timing is of critical importance with estate planning matters. Obviously, a plan must be in place early enough to be of use before one falls ill or suffers from mental issues. For example, creating a will or trust may be impossible after one suffers a stroke or succumbs to serious effects of Alzheimers. This is why we continue to encourage residents to make plans early and consistently update them.

Time also factors into matters after a death. Many beneficiaries may face hardship if they are forced to wait months (or even years) to have an estate settled. One of the key benefits of an inheritance plan is to minimize the risk of a long delay between the actual passing on of assets, often focused on avoiding probate and preventing feuding.

Celebrity Example

Only a few days remain in the year, and most financial activity for 2012 has come to a close. However, the end of year action has already brought one of the most active seasons ever. Financial advisors, estate planning attorneys, and others have all seen community members of all different income brackets seek out help understanding how possible legal changes in the new year might affect their own financial health and long-term prospects.

A Forbes story last week explored one of the main reasons for confusion and the seeking out of help: the “give now or pay later” problem. This is an issue that mostly affects those with significant assets who may be affected by gift and estate tax changes. As has been documented exhaustively, Congress is considered what to do with the gift and estate tax. Over the past ten years the tax rate has steadily fallen and the exemption level has risen. In 2010, the estate tax was eliminated altogether. However, what will happen in the new year remains to be seen.

Many different options are on the table–from a permanent elimination of tax (unlikely) to a return to pre-2001 rates. A table from the Tax Policy Center (viewed here) offers a helpful snapshot of the options and how many people would be affected by each. One comparison offers the range of possibilities. If the current rate continues, about 3,800 estates will be affected next year. Those estates would bring in about $12 billion in taxes. Conversely, if the 2001 rates returned then 47,000 estates would be affected and over 300% more tax revenue would be generated.

The political wrangling to avoid the so-called “fiscal cliff” continued this week. Many different issues are all tied up in the negotiations, including income tax rates, defense spending, entitlement spending, and control of the debt limit. However, various reports suggest that the both sides in the political battle–primarily the Obama White House and U.S. House Republican leaders–are now trying to work out some agreement on estate taxes.

Still Wide Disagreement

Most discussion of tax issues and the fiscal cliff affecting upper income Americans revolved around the income tax. There is disagreement about whether current income tax rates for those in the highest bracket should increase slightly or stay the same. Both sides publicly believe that current rate should be extended for middle tax brackets. Because of the focus on income taxes, real negotiation of estate taxes has been pushed to the side. That appears to be changing.

The holiday season is a popular time for charitable giving. It is helpful for those considering gifts–particular sizeable donations–to properly think through all of the tax and legal implications. There are smart ways to make contributions and clumsy ways. As always, an estate planning lawyer or similar professional can explain how any such decision is best carried out.

For example, the Wall Street Journal reported recently on the rise of “donor-advised” funds. The use of these tools is likely spurred by two tax uncertainties in the upcoming year. Will charitable deductions on taxes be limited in the future, counseling toward a large gift this year? Will income tax rates increase next year, counseling toward using the deduction next year instead of this year? It is a somewhat tricky problem, as no one knows for sure what lawmakers might decide.

That is where these donor-advised funds come into play. They are accounts managed by national charities and foundations. The basic idea is that a donor can give the gift this year–locking in a tax deduction–while waiting to actual disperse the funds to the charities as they see fit over time. The funds grow tax-free throughout this period.

Virtually everyone agrees that it is important to invest for retirement, take care of inheritance details, prepare for long-term care, and otherwise plan for the future. But there is a big difference between understanding the value of these tasks and actually taking the time to do it. Considering the financial and political stresses that come with caring for an aging population, figuring out how to motivate community members to do what is necessary to plan for the future is drawing more and more attention.

One new tactic stems from unique psychological research on financial motivation. In previous studies out of Stanford, experts found that one way to spur real action on long-term planning was getting individuals to visualize their future, elderly selves. Interestingly the researchers found the most benefit not when people just imagined themselves in old age but actually saw digitally enhanced images of themselves when they were older. The surprise of seeing their own face in old age was a real spur to stop putting off the necessary planning.

The lead researcher in the Stanford experiment summarized that, “People who see an age-progressed rendering of themselves are more likely to allocate resources to the future.”

Contact Information