manhattan estate planning

ABC TRUST PLANNING – WILL IT BE A BURDEN?

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

NEW LAWS MEANS NEW RISK AND LEGAL OBLIGATIONS

President Obama signed into law the American Taxpayer Relief Act on January 2, 2013 which permanently raised the estate tax exemption and added an inflation index, such that it rises every year to account for inflation. Better still, the same law allows for spousal portability of estate tax exemptions, which this blog recently examined . The amount for 2016 is $5.45 million per person, $10.9 million per couple. This is a significant change from just 2008 when it was $2 million dollars and even as low as $675,000 in 2001 and $1 million in 2003 which was not that high considering that most people pay off their mortgage and probably have substantial retirement assets by the time they of retirement age.

For those amongst us who continue to work because that is part of their identity and not out of necessity, the $1 million threshold could easily be met. With the much larger $5.45 million exemption, less than .3 percent of estates in this country will met that threshold. So for all of those couples and individuals who planned on the much lower threshold your plans were likely well designed, but only under the then lower tax exemption. Now, with the much higher threshold and spousal portability, it is best to reexamine these estate planning documents. If one of the previous tools that you employed to insure lower tax liability was the AB trust also known as a bypass trust or even a family trust, it is likely that this will no longer serve you, your spouse, your estate or your heirs. Very briefly, depending on the size of your estate, it may no longer provide as great of tax relief as it once did and may unduly restrict your spouse by limiting their income, increase accounting costs, impose unneeded legal filing and generally complicate their life with other unforeseen complications that no longer serve their purpose.

IRS ART ADVISORY PANEL

Published on: March 14, 2016 | by Ettinger Law Firm

GOVERNMENT HAS BEST AT HAND – FOR FREE

Whenever a taxpayer submits tax documents that deal with a work of art or of cultural significance that is valued at least $50,000, according to the taxpayer’s own estimate, the IRS goes through a process by which it independently evaluates the items. The IRS has on hand the very best of the best when it evaluates art and cultural items. More specifically, it has the Art Advisory Panel of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, which is composed of the very best of the best when it comes to art evaluation. Better still, at least from the perspective of the IRS, they are volunteers and only reimbursed for travel and related costs.

It is relatively easy to understand that they would evaluate paintings, such as Degas, Monet and Van Gogh or photographs from the likes of Matthew Brady, Edward Curtis or Dorothea Lange. But things such as collections of samurai swords, vases and other decorative items from Tang era China, and even doll collections also are considered. The panel may not have a very important sounding name, but they do wield considerable influence over particular tax cases. Any time a work of art worth more than $50,000 changes hand, is donated to charity or gifted, the government wants to know the true value of the property.

WHAT HAPPENS IF MY HEIRS OR BENEFICIARIES PASS AWAY AT THE SAME TIME AS ME?

Published on: March 4, 2016 | by Ettinger Law Firm

MODERN PROBLEM WITH ANCIENT ROOTS

New York is one of approximately 19 states, along with the District of Columbia and the Virgin Islands to specifically adopt the Uniform Simultaneous Death Act in some significant form or another. The law was drafted in 1940 and amended through the decades, last time in 1993. It was written by the Uniform Law Commission in an effort to provide uniformity and the accompanying benefits that uniformity provide across the 50 plus jurisdictions that exist in these United States. Of course each state is free to adopt the uniform act in its entirety, part of the law or just use it as a template to base a similar but different law on it.

New York adopted the Uniform Simultaneous Death Act, at least in part, early on in the early 1940s. By 1944 at least 24 states and the then Territory of Hawaii also adopted the Uniform Simultaneous Death Act. It was designed in large part to address the issue of when two or more people pass away in a common disaster, with no meaningful difference in the order of death. For example, if both father and son or husband and wife both pass away in a tragic automobile accident. Such tragedies were much more commonplace in previous decades with the rapid and significant increase in medical technology. Not surprisingly reports of how the law was resolve such legal technicalities goes back centuries, to at least 1784. Even ancient Roman law had presumptions in place to deal with such tragedies.

INHERITING A ROTH IRA ACCOUNT

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

ROTH IRA ACCOUNTS ARE FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT

This blog explored the topic of inheriting an individual retirement account (IRA) in a previous blog. It is necessary to explore the topic of inheriting a Roth IRA, as a Roth IRA is fundamentally different from a traditional IRA. Some of the differences between a Roth IRA and a traditional IRA:

Taxing event – The money going into a Roth IRA is taxed prior to going into the account, while a traditional IRA is generally deposited as pre-taxed income and only taxed after withdrawal from the IRA.

LET GO OF MY INHERITANCE – INTERFERENCE WITH AN EXPECTANCY

Published on: January 6, 2016 | by Ettinger Law Firm

WRONGFUL INTERFERENCE WITH WILL

It is known by many different names, depending on the state and the era. Most recently it made its appearance in news headlines with the name – intentional interference with expected inheritance, sometimes even shortened it IIEI. The United States Supreme Court referred to it as “a widely recognized” cause of action and as the “tort of interference with a gift or inheritance” in the Anna Nicole Smith case. Marshall v. Marshall, 547 U.S. 293, 296 (2006). The matter has surfaced in the news over at least the last century, most famously (perhaps infamously) in the Father Divine case in New York, in 1949. Latham v. Father Divine, 299 N.Y. 22 (1949).

The American Law Institute published the The Restatement of Torts (Second) of Torts in 1979. That was the first time that the tort, known by many names, was formally recognized as such. Prior to this, the principal and concept was recognized but only in the most egregious of circumstances. There are several seminal cases that speak to the larger concept, one of which was the New York case dealing with Father Divine case noted above.

Power of Attorney Should Complement Your Will

Published on: October 23, 2015 | by Ettinger Law Firm

Making the decisions about your estate plan can be a daunting task. We are faced with a plethora of uncertainties and questions about our future and what to do about our “stuff.” There are a few documents that a client should consider executing with an attorney to protect their estate. One document called a Power of Attorney, that often complements a Will, can be overlooked by a client.

Understanding the Legal Document

A Power of Attorney typically comes in three fashions: a General Power of Attorney, a Specific Power of Attorney, and a Durable Power of Attorney. The distinctions are subtle, but extremely important. A General Power of Attorney allows a client to give authority to someone else to make decisions on anything that the client herself could make, such as financial and/or property decisions. The client is known as the “Principal” and the person that the client gives the power to is known as the “Agent.” In a very simple way, the Agent acts on behalf of the Principal in certain capacities, such as writing a check or selling a property.

Using Beneficiaries as Part of Your Estate Plan – Part II: Considerations

Published on: October 13, 2015 | by Ettinger Law Firm

An earlier post on this blog provided an overview of using beneficiary designations as part of your estate plan. Recall that beneficiary designations are a way to transfer property automatically upon the death of the asset owner outside of the probate process. This post is part II of that discussion, and include some of the pros and cons of using beneficiary designations, as well as a few special considerations related to certain forms of beneficiary designations.

Pros and Cons of Using Beneficiary Designations

Beneficiary designations can be a simple and effective mechanism to transfer your property in much the same a will or trust distributes your property. The advantages of beneficiary designations include the ease in which it can be set up and the speed and in which the beneficiary receives the asset. Also, the owner of the asset has flexibility to designate any of combination of shares to any number of primary and contingent beneficiaries. Beneficiaries may be individuals, trusts, charities, or the property owner’s own estate by way of its personal representative.

Establishing a Charitable Trust as Part of Your Estate Plan

Published on: September 25, 2015 | by Ettinger Law Firm

Trusts can be used as a useful tool in your estate plan to accomplish a variety of goals. One example is establishing a split-interest charitable trust. These charitable trusts are an irrevocable trust established for a charitable purpose of your choosing, while at the same time featuring a benefit to a non-charitable trust beneficiary. In addition to tax benefits received under federal law, charitable trusts offer the person establishing the trust, also known as the “settlor,” a controlled process to effectuate their gift to a selected charity. Examples of charitable trusts include a charitable remainder annuity trust (CRAT), charitable remainder unitrust (CRUT), and a charitable lead trust (CLT).

CRATs, CRUTs, AND CLTs

Establishing a charitable remainder annuity trust includes the transfer of property to a trust that first distributes a fixed annuitized portion of the trust property to non-charitable trust beneficiaries, followed by a distribution of the remainder to the tax-exempt charity selected by the settlor. Similar to the charitable remainder annuity trust, a charitable remainder unitrust also includes the transfer of property to a trust that first distributes an annuitized portion of the trust property to non-charitable trust beneficiaries, followed by a distribution of the remainder to the tax-exempt trust beneficiary; however, the amount of the annuity fluctuates with the value of the trust assets. A charitable lead trust differs from the charitable remainder annuity trust and charitable remainder unitrust in that the settlor will designate that the charitable beneficiary will first received a distribution of trust assets at least annually for a set period of time, after which the non-charitable trust beneficiary will receive the remainder of trust property. Each of these three split-interest charitable trusts offer dual benefit to a designated charitable purpose and the settlor’s non-charitable trust beneficiary.

Issues to Consider When Giving an Early Inheritance

Published on: September 22, 2015 | by Ettinger Law Firm

You have saved and invested throughout your life to build enough wealth to fund your retirement. You have worked with your estate planning attorney to establish an estate plan to leave behind assets to your loved ones to share after you pass away. However, like many individuals, you are now considering giving your children or beneficiaries their inheritance before your death. There are many advantages to giving an early inheritance, but also some important considerations.

Advantages to Giving an Early Inheritance

Providing an early advance could provide your children with some needed financial help. Whether your children are experiencing financial difficulty, starting a new business venture, or are planning a big purchase, such as a house or getting married, providing them an early gift may be of greater value now than after your death.