Articles Posted in Trusts

New York inheritance planning involves passing on values as well as assets. No matter how large the family estate, most parents think long and hard about how their inheritance will affect the lives of their children. For many there are no easy answers to questions like how new wealth will affect their children’s independence or how much wealth is the appropriate balance between proper inheritance and philanthropy.

As a story last week in the Belleville News Democrat explained, many parents are taking steps to share important information about the meaning of money as part of their inheritance plan. Most families strive to pass on the right amount of money so that children are provided for but still maintain the incentive to work, strive, and succeed.

One hardworking family, including a 60-year old retired teacher and 62-year old real estate broker, explained how they have worked with their now 30-year old daughter on financial matters, noting “We really want to encourage her to develop a personal financial plan, a personal philosophy, and become really familiar with the types of investments.” The family admits that frankness and early discussions about these issues is important. Children should know what to expect and parents should not be afraid to share their concerns with their loved one.

Some are worried that their loved ones may be unprepared to handle the estate that they receive. Those families often face issues with asset planning for spendthrift children. They are aware that their children are poor at handling money or inexperienced with such matters. Many options exist for parents in those situations. For example, trusts are perfect tools to ensure that a child has access to reasonable assets but is unable to abuse the overall value of the estate. In these situations a designated “trustee” manages the actual estate with rules about what the child receives and when they receive it.
Continue reading

Perhaps no New York estate planning effort has received more attention over the past few years than that of well-known New York hotelier Leona Helmsley. Upon her death in 2007 a scramble ensued to determine what would happen with her estate, estimated to be worth billions. As a post yesterday at Financial Planning explains, the subsequent way in which her assets were divided imparts lessons for all local residents, regardless of the size of their estate.

Mrs. Helmsley’s wishes captured the public attention when it was revealed that the she left $12 million to care for her dog, Trouble, and created a charitable trust worth billions to be spent primarily for the care and welfare of dogs. Mrs. Helmsley’s wishes were placed in a “mission statement” where she explained that she desired the trustees to use their discretion to disperse funds first for the care of dogs and only secondly for “other charitable activities as the Trustees shall determine.”

But there were concerns about the legal effect of the intentions placed in the statement. For one thing, the statement gave the trustees discretion to spend the resources. On top of that, the statement was never incorporated into her will or other trust documents.

As a result, the trustees have been given the power by local judges to essentially disperse the charitable trust funds in any way they wish. So far the trustees have donated $450 million to charity; of that amount only $100,000 has been given to dog-related efforts. That constitutes less than one fiftieth of one percent–hardly an amount which would indicate dog welfare as the main priority suggested in Mrs. Helmsley’s mission statement. Several animal charities sued to force a larger share of the trust given to animal efforts, but their legal efforts have been unsuccessful.

The overarching goal of all New York estate plans is to ensure that an individual’s specific wishes are carried out when they won’t be around. However, without a clear, consistent plan a judge usually decides what happens to an estate, regardless of one’s actual wishes. Even when some planning is done, as in this case, confusion may remain unless those planning documents are updated and integrated so that there remains no ambiguity about how to handle affairs.
Continue reading

Virtually all local families have much to gain from taking the time to conduct proper New York estate planning. However, for some the need to ensure that future finances are in order and loved ones are secure indefinitely is a particularly strong necessity. Families who have children with special needs, like autism, must give careful thought to how their vulnerable children will have the resources that they need no matter what the future holds.

Yesterday the Sacramento Bee profiled one young family that is taking steps to ensure that their four children–including three with signs of autism–will be financially secure in the future. Considering many forms of autism make communication and basic social interaction a challenge for these children, their dependence on loved ones will often last a lifetime. There remain millions of families in this situation as an average of one child out of every 110 suffers from autism.

Paying for medical expenses alone is often a challenge for these families. While the average American usually spends about $317,000 in direct medical costs in a lifetime, individuals with autism often pay roughly twice that amount, nearly $630,000. Of course that does not even account for non-medical expenses, including basic needs like clothing, food, education, transportation, entertainment, and countless other costs. Thinking about these details is overwhelming for some, but it is important to remember that it is manageable. One of the first steps is to contact a New York estate planning lawyer to learn what options are available to you.

One possible choice that can be explained to you is the creation of a special needs trust. Depending on your family’s financial situation, this option may allow you to pass on more of your assets to your child without risking the loss of government benefits like Supplemental Security Income (SSI), Medicaid, or state residential programs. However, even if the trust is created there are risks of government benefit reductions depending on how the trustees make payments.
Continue reading

Many seniors know that they need to get in touch with a New York elder law attorney to help update and handle matters related to their estate. Yet much of the actual work that those lawyers do is shrouded in mystery to the average community member. Some believe that it all has to do with filling in the blanks of certain legal forms. That often leads to the assumption that all elder law attorneys are capable of doing essentially the same quality of work. Nothing could be further from the truth.

It is imperative that all planners ensure that they work with experienced New York estate planning lawyers to avoid common pitfalls in the process. Only the best practitioners in this area are aware of all options available to a client to best protect their assets and ensure that their wishes are carried out. The law changes often at both the federal and state level–it is your attorney’s job to know those changes and advise you on its potential impact on your situation.

Besides keeping abreast of updates in the law, your attorney must also have the practical skills to explain to you how certain future events may affect the estate. Careful planning and strategizing is important in these matters. For example, there may be no easy answers when it comes to how many assets to place in a wife’s name or trust to offset a husband’s IRA assets. There is a tendency among some attorneys to place too many assets with a wife, while ignoring the practical reality that the husband’s life expectancy is lower. This mistake may then results in no estate tax savings. Only the most experienced attorneys would be capable of understanding these possibilities and ensuring that you have all the options on the table when making your plan.
Continue reading

by Michael Ettinger, Esq.

A couple came in to see me today for the husband’s 88 year old father who is a nursing home in Florida. They now wish to bring him up to New York to be nearer to the family. He has about $600,000 in assets, including his home.

They told me about the very nice lawyer he has down on the west coast of Florida, who set up a revocable living trust for Dad and for Mom who died last year, in February of 2006, and amended it in March of 2010.

by Michael Ettinger, Esq.

Commonly used in estate planning today, disclaimer trusts allow the surviving spouse great flexibility in optimizing estate tax savings.

Here’s how they work. Each spouse sets up their revocable living trust. Husband and wife are co-trustees of his trust, using his social security number and, similarly, they are both co-trustees of her trust with her social security number. Let’s say husband dies first. His trust says “leave everything to my wife except that, whatever she disclaims, i.e. refuses to take, will remain in my trust. The disclaimer is a legal document that lists the assets disclaimed and their value. Wife remains as trustee on husband’s trust after he dies and may use the funds in his trust for her health, maintenance and support. She may also remove 5% of the trust every year for any reason or $5,000, whichever is greater.

by Peter Lennington, Esq.

This post by American Association of Trust, Elder Law and Estate member, attorney Peter Lennington, examines the unique planning requirements of families with children, grandchildren or other family members with special needs including the establishment of Special Needs Trusts.

COSTLY MISTAKE #1: Disinheriting the child.

Pioneered by Ettinger Law Firm, the IRA Contract solves a technical problem that arises when a spouse in a second marriage wishes to leave their IRA, or other qualified plan, to the husband or wife but also wants the unused funds to go to their children from a previous marriage after the spouse dies.

Many lawyers recommend a trust for this purpose. For example, husband dies and leaves the IRA to a trust which names the wife as beneficiary for her lifetime and, after her death, to his children from the previous marriage. Although leaving an IRA to a trust is perfectly legitimate and solves the problem, it has one major drawback. Since a trust has no “life expectancy” on which the IRS can calculate the required minimum distribution (RMD), when you leave an IRA to a trust, the Service looks through the trust to find the oldest trust beneficiary. They then calculate the RMD based on the life expectancy of that person, usually the second wife. The first issue is that even if the wife is under 70 1/2, the age at which you are required to start withdrawals, she cannot wait until then. Since the IRA was left to a trust, it is not a spousal rollover and does not become the wife’s IRA. As such, she cannot defer taxes until 70 1/2 but must start withdrawing the year following her husband’s death. The larger problem is that the IRS will establish a “term certain” for the payout based on her life expectancy which may be two decades or more less than the husband’s children. In other words, when she dies, his children must continue to withdraw based on her life expectancy, instead of based on their own life expectancies. Two decades or more of deferred taxes on the IRA are lost.

To solve this problem, we prepare a fairly simple contract. Wife agrees, in consideration of husband’s naming her as beneficiary on his IRA, to name husband’s children irrevocably as her beneficiary when the IRA rolls over to her. She also agrees not to take any more than the RMD, except on consent of the attorneys appointed by the husband. This prevents someone perhaps unduly influencing the wife in her later years to simply withdraw all the funds and give them to her children or others.

Wassily Kandinsky, Farbstudie.jpgWith the economy improving, seasoned collectors are now watching the fine art estimates in New York’s upcoming auctions. Collecting art, a passion and hobby for many, is also a way to accumulate and transfer wealth for next generations. The disposition of art, however, should include careful planning with a trusted and experienced New York estate planning attorney.Families often employ the “empty hook” method when it comes to art collections. When a collector dies, heirs quietly take valuable art work out of a home, sometimes claiming what is “theirs” by name tags placed on the objects. This creates an “empty hook.”

There are many potential pitfalls when attempting to avoid the Internal Revenue Service’s various taxes on the purchase, sale and transfer of fine art. The first and most dastardly is the limitless statute of limitations on estate tax fraud or on a taxable gift for which no return was ever filed (Internal Revenue Code Section 6501(c)). Because art never truly “disappears,” one does well to remember that neither does a tax liability. An error of disclosure, e.g. not properly planning to gift art in adherence to IRS rules and regulations, may become a costly legacy to bestow on the next generation. (Tax fraud is not something to pass on.)

Heirs can also be liable for a penalty of 20 percent of the tax due if there is an underreporting of an asset’s value by 50 percent, and a penalty of 40 percent of the tax due if the value of the property is underreported by 75 percent (IRC Section 6662). Failure to report assets at all subjects the owner to a fraud penalty set out in IRC Section 6663. These fines can also raise the transfer cost on an unreported piece of artwork to over 80 percent.

by Michael Ettinger, Esq.

The year 2001 was a space odyssey in more ways than one. It was also the last time we faced Federal estate tax rates as high as 55%, and exempt amounts as low as one million dollars. Nevertheless, this appears to be what we are going to see take effect on 1/1/11, due to the expiration of Bush era tax cuts enacted in 2001. No one would have predicted what has come to pass.

Taking effect on January 1, 2002, The Economic Growth and Tax Recovery Act was to be amended at some point during the next nine years. It was widely expected that something close to the high water exemption of 3.5 million dollars, existing at the end of 2009, would be made permanent. Health care reform, however, dominated the legislative agenda at the end of 2009, pushing estate tax reform to the sidelines. Political bickering then prevented an extension of the 2009 exemption, at least until a solution was found.

Contact Information