Articles Posted in Wills

Many New York families have vacation homes. While the reference often conjures up images of the super-wealthy wintering in palacial estates, the truth is that owning a second piece of real estate in a favorite location is not only for the elite. Middle class families who prudently save often decide to purchase a second home for investment purposes.

Considering the frequency of these homes, it is important for families to be aware of some financial and estate planning issues that they may create. A Forbes story from last week provides a helpful introduction into the topic.

Unfortunately, the use and future ownership of these homes is often cause for confusion, misunderstanding , and argument. For one thing, parents and children often have different ideas about the property. Is it meant to be a family keepsake that is passed down through the generations as a meeting place and memory maker? Or is it simply an investment item that can be sold if necessary without much thought? Often different family members have different levels of attached to these homes. One sibling may hold the location dear and never dream of getting rid of it while another may have few memories of the home and not wish to hold onto the property if it does not make financial sense.

The State recently reported on another “will contest” involving a well-known South Carolina family. The story is an example of a very common estate planning problem, disagreement between adult children and a second (or third) spouse.

The basics of the family situation are well known. The patriarch, former University of South Carolina football coach Jim Carlen, had three children with his first wife, Sharon. In the early 1980s, Carlen divorced Sharon and married his second wife, Meredith. Carlen and Meredith had one child together. While specific details are sparse, it seems that Meredith and the Carlen children from the first marriage may not have had the best relationship. Tension of this sort is quite common among all families with parents who re-marry following divorce or death.

In Carlen’s case, the children are claiming that the man’s second wife exercised undue influence on him in his waning years, taking advantage of his dementia. Carlen apparently wrote a series of wills (among other estate planning documents). The first, in 1970, left his assets to his wife and children. All subsequent wills were similar, with the children left substantial property.

How should you decide who you should name as beneficiaries in your estate planning documents? For many, the answer is not too complicated: leave it all to the children. However, just because that model is the most common form of passing on assets does not mean that there are not others who you might like to leave something. For many, designating beneficiaries in a will and trust documents is an important way to re-iterate their values, morals, and interests one final time. After all, estate planning is about legacy-building.

Charitable contributions are common, as New Yorkers seek to help out their favorite causes one final time. Similarly, many residents decide to leave assets to political causes. The total amount donated to political parties and candidates this way is actually quite substantial. However, because of campaign finance laws, there are some additional complications when making these bequests.

Political Beneficiaries

Last week we discussed the recently unearthed will of former Sopranos star James Gandolfini. The document was filed with a Manhattan court late last month, with the actor’s assets being left to a wide range of people including his two children, wife, sisters, and several friends. Those earlier reports noted that Gandolfini’s assets including life insurance, real estate in Italy, and more. All told he allegedly had more than $70 million in assets.

With fortunes of that size, estate taxes are obviously an immediate concern. There are both federal and state taxes that apply to inheritances. The rates for each are different and they take effect at different income levels. Federal estate taxes apply to non-exempt assets over $5.25 million with a top rate of 40%. Alternatively, New York’s separate tax kicks in at assets over $1 million with rates between 5% and 16%.

Considering there are two levels of taxation and rates that are not trivial, it is critical to account for these potential taxes in an estate plans. Attorneys working on these issues for local residents must be intimately aware of all legal options to guard against the largest tax bills.

Last month many in the entertainment world were shocked and saddened by the sudden death of New Yorker James Gandolfini at the age of 51. His passing from an apparent heart attack is a somber reminder that none of us know for sure what the future holds.

This week reports were released discussing some of the estate details. Gandolfini’s will was made public and filed with a court in Manhattan. Wills are public documents when filed with the court. The only way to keep these matters private is by using trusts and other devices which transfer property automatically without the need to go through the probate process–Gandolfini did make some arrangements outside of the will that are not known publicly.

Gandolfini Will

If you read a bit about estate planning you may come across the term “Per Stirpes.” It is an awkward phrase to say, and there is little reason to use it outside the context of inheritance planning. It comes up when one lays out their inheritance designations, perhaps with a phrase like, “Fifty percent of the estate to Bob and Tom per stirpes.” Similarly, it may be written as “by representation.” This usually refers to the same thing.

So what is it? The short answer: Per Stirpes is Latin for “by the roots.” But that translation doesn’t help much. What it means in estate planning terms is that if the beneficiary dies then their descendants will get their share of the estate.

For example, say that the estate is worth $100,000. Per the terms of the will 50% of the estate should be split between Bob and Tom, with each getting $25,000. But what if Tom is not alive when he is set to receive that inheritance? Does Bob get his share instead? If the will stated that Bob and Tom were to receive their share on a per stirpes basis then the answer is No. Bob would not get the extra share. Instead, that share would go to Tom’s descendants–his own children. If Tom had one child, that child would get $25,000. If he had two children, then those children would split the $25,000.

The New York Times shared a story late last week on developments in the settling of the estate of copper heiress Huguette Clark. It is a reminder of the sensitive nature of estate planning, particularly for those with wealth, and the lengths that all involved parties may go to influence one’s decisions regarding inheritance.

As many know, Ms. Clark was very reclusive, living the final two decades of her life at the Beth Israel Medical Center, even though for most of that time she did not actually need hospital care. According to new reports (and allegations from family members), almost as soon as she arrived the hospital engaged in a complex campaign to receive donations from the heiress. Apparently the facility had administrative officials sent to her frequently to build trust. After some time the officials, including the hospital’s CEO allegedly, began talking with her about creating a will. All of this was after officials researched the family history in the hopes of making a more personalized connection with Ms. Clark. It goes without saying that this sort of treatment is not provided to all patients at the facility.

All of this is only recently being made public as part of a high-profile legal challenge filed by some of Clark’s relatives angling for a larger share of her $300 million estate. The legal challenges began almost immediately after her death in 2011, and they are still raging. A trial in the matter is scheduled for September.

Earlier this month we discussed the unique estate issues connected to the murder of a wealthy investor named Raveesh Kumra. Mr. Kumra was murdered during a robbery late last year. It has since been learned that the suspects include several men with connections to alleged prostitutes with whom Kumra apparently was connected. It is a tragic situations all the way around, and the man’s family was understandably blindsided by the situation.

Making matters worse, a significant battle over Kumra’s estate has been waged by various parties since the death. It is an example of the unique court challenges that often result when comprehensive estate planning is not conducted and all possible issues are not analyzed as part of that plan.

Out-of-Wedlock Children

Virtually every month now has multiple awareness labels attached to them as advocates for various causes seek to raise public support for different causes. For example, this month is known in some international circles as “Leave a Legacy” month. Considering that many New Yorkers continue to delay estate planning and otherwise put off getting long-term affairs in order, this is certainly an awareness campaign that we can get behind.

In fact, some advocates are using a New York example as a reminder. We discussed the case last week of a man who apparently left his $40 million estate to no one, meaning that the funds will be end up in the state coffers. While most do not leave behind estates of that size, failing to create a will or designate how to allocate assets is far too common.

Estate Planning is About Your Legacy

Forbes recently reported on a unique case that illustrates what happens when one fails to conduct any NY estate planning and does not have close heirs to take an inheritance via default intestacy rules.

The article explained how a man named Roman Blum died in January of this year. A former real estate developer, Mr. Blum was worth about $40 million at the time of his passing. He was 97. Remarkably, for one with such wealth, Blum did not have any estate planning conducted–no use of trusts or even a will to designate final wishes and property distribution.

When one dies without a will special rules apply which include a ranking list of possible inheritors. In New York, for example, an estate is usually split between a spouse and children (with a special $50,000 addition to the spouse). If there are no children, then everything goes to the spouse. If there is no surviving spouse, then everything goes to the children. If one has no spouse or children, then everything goes to parents, and absent living parents, siblings.

Contact Information