New York Estate Planning Lawyer Blog

Our New York estate planning attorneys have decades of experience helping local families following the death of a loved one. We have come to appreciate the role that we play in this difficult time via the estate administration and probate settlement process. Financial uncertainty is the last thing that families need when struggling with emotions after losing a loved one.

A recent New York Life Foundation survey of local residents who had lost a spouse confirmed the vital role that New York estate planning plays in many lives. As reported yesterday in Life Health Pro, nearly sixty percent of survey respondents admitted that "losing my spouse has significantly impacted our standard of living." More than half of survey respondents explained that they were not financially prepared at the time that they lost their spouse. For those widows and widowers who still had children living with them at the time of the loss, the financial struggles were even more severe.

The report found that "nearly everything involving money--either on their own behalf or on behalf of their children--was harder following the loss." These money troubles were especially pronounced among families that had lost a spouse young or had failed to conduct any estate planning. For example, two out of three spouses agreed that it was much harder to save money following the loss. Sixty percent admitted that they had trouble managing household finances after the loss, with few able to find any available resources to spend even modest sums on themselves. For families with children, the consequences of these money troubles can be long-lasting. Over sixty percent of parents said that it was virtually impossible to save for their children's college education following the death. Nearly half had the same problem in paying for affordable health care.

Many surveyed said that the situation would have been better had some consultation been done before the loved ones' passing. Nearly two out of three survey respondents admitted that they did not have financial planning advice at the time of the death, and virtually all of them agreed that they would have been better off had they sought professional advice. Among the one third of survey respondent who did have the help of professionals with long-term financial planning, the vast majority of them found the aid help to be "very helpful." They explained that the helpfulness came in two forms: actual assistance with finances and basic emotional support while interacting with the family at the difficult time.

See Our Related Blog Posts:

Estate Planning May Be A Family Decision

Adult Children Often Remind Senior Parents of Estate Planning Importance

Local residents usually take the time to craft a New York estate plan because they wish to prepare for disability, save estate taxes, and avoid the probate process. In most cases these goals are best met through the use of a living trust. The trend over the past several decades is for middle class families to craft trusts instead of wills for their inheritance planning. As our New York elder law estate planning attorney Bonnie Kraham explained in an article published this week in the Times Herald-Record, unlike wills, trusts are private documents that do not need to be filed with the Surrogate's Court. No costly, stressful, time-consuming probate process needs to be undertaken upon one's death when a trust is used.

Instead of court involvement, a trust is usually administered by a successor trustee. Upon the death of the original trustee (the individual who created the trust), the successor trustee must inform the beneficiaries of the situation, gather and invest the grantor's assets, notify creditors, pay taxes, and distribute assets per the trust provisions.

Attorney Kraham notes that the trustee who administers the trust has a variety of other obligations. They must remain loyal to all beneficiaries, including the contingent beneficiaries--acting impartially between them at all times. Also, the trustee must ensure that trust property produces income. Therefore it is incumbent upon the trustee not to keep large amounts in non-interest bearing accounts or allow a home to sit vacant. At the same time, all investments must be prudent, and a sound overall investment strategy must be employed. This typically requires diversification which balances both income production and investment safety. Other trustee duties include the filing of tax returns, distribution of trust income, handling of expenses, and the maintenance of proper records.

For many individual trustees, the requirements of the role are quite complex and time-consuming. In addition, the emotion involved in the death of a loved one often results in the reappearance of family conflicts at the very time when an estate must be settled. It is often difficult for individual trustees who are relatives or close personal friends to prevent the turmoil from affecting the proper administration of the trust. That is why professional trustees are often chosen; they are trained in these matters and can ensure that everything is handled properly. Banks, lawyers, and trust companies often serve in this role. For decades our New York estate planning lawyers have helped many local families in this very capacity.

See Our Related Blog Posts:

Many Challenges Face Estate Executors

Many Middle Class Families in New York Use Trusts in Estate Plan

One of our New York estate planning attorneys, Bonnie Kraham, Esq., recently authored an article that shares information on the increasing use of trusts in the estate plan of many local middle class families. The story was published in this weekend's Times Herald-Record, and explains the various types of trusts that residents can use and the way that each holds and transfers property. Unfortunately, there remains a misconception among some local community members that creating a New York trust is a project only for the wealthy. That is not the case. As attorney Kraham notes, there has been a "living trust revolution" over the past few decades where many middle class families have discovered the ways in which these legal entities can be used to avoid probate, save taxes, and protect assets.

All trusts begin with a written agreement, and each includes at least three necessary parties. These include a "grantor" who creates the trust, "trustee" who manages the assets, and "beneficiaries" who use the trust assets. For example, the three roles may be filled when a senior couple creates a trust (grantors) to be managed by their lawyer (trustee) to provide for the couple's children (beneficiaries). The three roles need not be filled by different individuals, however. Often a grantor will also act as beneficiary, so that they can still use those assets while they are alive. Following the written agreement which establishes the trust, assets are transferred into the entity by way of "retitling." This involves changing the name on accounts, mutual funds, and stock certificates to the name of the trust, and transferring title to property to the trust.

The two main types of trusts are testamentary and living. Testamentary trusts are created only after an individual's death pursuant to their will, while living trusts are created while a grantor is still alive. Living trusts are an increasingly common way for many families to transfer assets at death. Among other benefits, a living trust can help families avoid probate, saving time and expense in closing the estate.

Usually these trusts are revocable, meaning that they can be dissolved at any time. However, a few special types of trusts are irrevocable. For example, when a local family wants to protect assets from future nursing home costs they may create a New York Medicaid Asset Protection Trust. These irrevocable trusts have special rules that apply to how trust property can be used and transferred. Some legislative changes have recently been proposed which may limit the effectiveness of these special trusts to save assets from long-term care costs. Therefore, it remains ever important to consult an experienced elder law estate planning attorney to understand what options are available and prudent in your particular case.

See Our Related Blog Posts:

New York Medicaid Planning Attorney Shares Information on Medicaid Application Process

New York Estate Planning Attorney Shares Common Estate Planning Mistakes

Local residents visit our New York estate planning attorneys for professional assistance to protect and pass on their assets. Many also expect guidance identifying the items that should be considered an asset and included in the planning. Most area families need to consider things beyond homes, cars, investment portfolios, and similar items when creating their New York estate plan.

For example, what happens to frequent flier miles and rewards upon an individual's death? Many residents spend years and thousands of dollars in airfare racking up mileages and benefits in airline sponsored loyalty programs. A recent article in Payments News explained how many fliers spend time accumulating these "miles" and rewards only to leave them unused at their death. Some reports indicate that as many as 3.5 trillion miles currently remain unused in these programs. Interestingly, each airline has a different policy in place regarding transferability of loyalty benefits at death. American Airlines specifically allows accumulated mileage credit to be transferred to a person named in a court-approved will or estate plan. Other carriers, such as United Airlines, require that a beneficiary be named with the program, a fee be paid, and require an executor to contact the airline before miles can be transferred.

Another asset which one may wish to leave behind is the option to purchase valuable season tickets. Area residents often spend years waiting for the opportunity to become a season-ticket holder for their favorite teams. A post this weekend at The Faculty Lounge recently discussed this topic. Most teams have policies in place that allow an individual's decedents to gain the right to purchase. However, it is important to closely examine the team policy related to ticket transferability to understand what issues might arise. For example, there may be conflict over who gains the right if several children share in ones' assets. Many team policies indicate that there will be no transferability if several individuals share in the right and do not agree on a single transferee. Some teams also expressly prohibit a non-relative from receiving the right to purchase the tickets.

Loyalty reward points and season tickets are just two of an array of assets that an individual may need to consider in their estate plan. Credit card reward points often present the same issues as airline loyalty programs. Many online efforts--like blogs--are becoming important spaces that some may want to leave to others. Also, our New York estate planning attorneys understand the important of passing on values. That is why we often help clients create "ethical wills" which help residents pass on morals and principles gained over a lifetime.

See Our Related Blog Posts:

Planning For Your Digital Life After Death

Instructions Should Help Family Find the Information They Need

Proper New York estate planning has ramifications beyond the lives of the planners themselves. Whole families are impacted by these decisions. The far reaching consequences mean that it is often appropriate for concerned family members--like adult children--to remind parents of the value in proper estate preparations.

An article yesterday in the Monterey County Herald discussed the role that adult children often have in encouraging their parents to adequately create and update estate plans. A concerned daughter had contacted the paper to ask for help working with her parents through the process, because she noted that "their estate is a mess." Apparently several years ago the woman's parents contacted a small firm with only one office seeking help to create a living trust. The trust was created and then forgotten about. Several years later the family wanted to update the plan. However, the employee who created that trust had left town without leaving any contact information. The senior couple eventually gave up trying to contact the man and have resigned themselves to being satisfied with the outdated documents.

The couple's daughter explained that, like many area residents, her parents did not like to discuss the issue. The adult child knew that her parents' most valuable real estate holding was not in the trust and she was completely unaware if they had valid wills, list of assets, life insurance, or burial insurance.

Expectedly, the daughter was strongly encouraged to have her parents get in touch with a new, competent estate planning professional to update the plan. It was explained how it was imperative that the parents trust, will, and medical directives be in place and reflect the couples' current assets and wishes. The failure of valuable assets to be included in the trust would lead to unnecessary and costly probate.

These issues are often tough for many parents to discuss with their children. That is why it is sometimes necessary for children and other loved ones to take time to ask about estate planning matters and provide encouragement to ensure that the task is not ignored. The protection of important assets, security of long-term care plans, and necessity of clear medical directives affect everyone in a family.

Continue reading "Adult Children Often Remind Senior Parents of Estate Planning Importance" »

A common provision in wills and trusts, where one of the couple in a second marriage owns the marital home, goes something like this "My surviving spouse shall have the right to reside in the home for so long as he/she desires, provided he/she pays all taxes and insurance premiums thereon and shall maintain the premises in good order and repair. Upon his/her vacating the premises, the same shall be sold and the net sale proceeds distributed to my children in equal shares, per stirpes."

Sounds fair, doesn't it? After all, the surviving husband or wife gets to live in the house as long as they like, rent-free, subject only to payment of the carrying charges. In practice, however, the plan carries a significant defect. It puts the surviving spouse in a "Catch 22". If they find the house is too large, too difficult or too expensive to maintain they have the choice to leave, but then face the prospect of a significant expense to purchase another residence out of their own funds or, in the alternative, the cost of rental which may add thousands of dollars in monthly outlay.

For this reason, we recommend that the surviving spouse gets not only the use and enjoyment of the home for life, but also the use and enjoyment of the proceeds of sale of the home for life, to either purchase a smaller home or condo or use the income from the sale of the home to pay for a rental apartment. In our view, the children of the previous marriage lose nothing. The surviving spouse could have lived in the house for life so why not give him or her the flexibility to trade down as they get older? If there are excess sale proceeds, these can be invested to provide additional income to the surviving spouse. The co-trustee, perhaps the attorney as previously suggested in these pages, makes sure the funds stay intact for the deceased spouse's children after the second spouse dies.

A word of warning about leaving the house to the spouse for life. The trust or, if there is no trust, the children themselves, remain responsible for major repairs such as a new boiler or a new roof. As such, leaving a home in trust for the lifetime of the surviving spouse in a second marriage may end up a burden to your children. Good planning by a New York elder law estate planning attorney will consider whether the home should be sold within a fixed period, perhaps between two and five years from the date of death, to avoid this problem.

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.

They had a great deal of confidence in the lawyer, especially since he had won an award as one of the top lawyers in the locality.

Regrettably, while the attorney prepared a fine estate plan, he was not an elder law attorney and took no steps to protect the couples' assets back in 2006, when they were well into their eighties.

Had the lawyer been knowledgeable in elder law, which unfortunately so many estate planning attorneys are not, he would have set up a Medicaid Asset Protection Trust (MAPT) and started the five year "look back" period running. It is now February, 2011, five years later. Had the MAPT been set up when it should have, in February 2006, instead of the revocable living trust, all of Dad's assets would now be protected and he would be eligible for Medicaid benefits to pay for the cost of his nursing home care.

Instead, the couple will only save half the assets by using the "gift and loan" strategy developed by elder law attorneys to save half the assets on the nursing home doorstep when the client has failed to set up the MAPT. The technique is also call "half a loaf" planning after the old expression.

Nevertheless, the "nice" lawyer ended up costing the family $300,000.00 and it is not the first time we have seen it happen. Indeed, it is the reason your writer published "Ettinger on Elder Law Estate Planning", available on Amazon.com. We believe that clients need a new york "elder law estate planning" attorney and not just an "estate planning" attorney so mistakes like this no longer happen to good people.

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.

The reason wife is limited to health, maintenance and support is that, if she had the right to take whatever she wanted at any time for any reason, the IRS would say that she had complete control of the funds and would then seek to tax those funds in her estate. The access for health, maintenance and support, however, is sufficiently broad so as not to cause a problem for her. She may also continue to buy, sell and trade assets in the husband's trust. This trust continues for her lifetime and pays out to the heirs at her death along with her own trust.

Husband's social security number died with him so his trust took out a trust tax identification number when he died and reported as a separate taxpayer during her lifetime. It is not includable in her estate. Indeed, what has happened is that husband's trust was settled on his death and left to his heirs, but subject to wife's lifetime use and enjoyment of the trust assets.

The benefit of the disclaimer is that it allows the wife to decide (or the husband if wife dies first) how much to leave in the deceased spouse's trust based on her age, health and the tax laws at that future time. Formerly, attorneys would simply do their best to split the assets between the two trusts and simply say whatever was in the deceased spouse's trust remained there for the surviving spouse's lifetime. This yielded some unfortunate results.

Let's say husband's trust had over one million dollars but the tax exempt amount was one million even (as it currently is in New York State). Formerly, wife would be required to pay tens of thousands of dollars in estate tax based on the amount over one million. With the disclaimer trust, wife may take the excess over one million out of his trust for herself and claim the unlimited marital deduction which avoids estate tax on assets left to a spouse. Perhaps her estate will be under one million dollars and no taxes will ever have to be paid on that money, she may spend it down under one million during her lifetime or the exemption may be raised during her lifetime. In any event, worst case scenario is that taxes on those monies are deferred until after she dies and, in the meantime, she has the use and enjoyment of monies that would have formerly gone to the government.

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.

Then came 2010, the year of no Federal estate tax. This saved, amongst others, the late George Steinbrenner's family an estimated 500 million dollars in estate tax and probably allowed the Steinbrenners to keep ownership of the New York Yankees in the family as well.

The predictions of the majority of pundits, of a fix occurring in 2010 with retroactive application to January 1 of this year, have not panned out. Instead, over the past summer, one poll of attorneys, accountants and trust officers found that 68% believe that nothing will happen in 2010 to remedy the estate tax problem with one wag adding "nothing is what they do best".

Some commentators feel that each party now has a stake in the reversion to the one million dollar exemption. For the Democrats, they say, it is a "revenue raiser" without a tax increase. For the Republicans, they say, it is both a campaign issue and a significant fund raising issue.

The latest news from thehill.com is that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) will bring the issue up this month with a possible package hitting the floor in late September. Nevertheless, one sticking point unlikely to be resolved are the opposing forces of those in favor of extending Bush era tax cuts for income earners over $250,000, on the basis that this group tends to prop up solely needed consumer spending, versus Obama's campaign pledge to raise tax rates for families earning over $250,000.

With the added tumult of the run up to the mid-term elections, it is difficult to see how issues as polarizing as income and estate taxes, unresolved for nine years, will suddenly be settled.

With a 55% Federal estate tax looming, now is the time to be talking to your estate planning lawyer. If you are married, you may double the one million dollar exemption by splitting your estate with your spouse into two estates, preferably using trusts to avoid having to probate the estate twice. Keep in mind that your estate consists of all of your assets, including any life insurance that you own. On a two million dollar estate, your tax savings for planning ahead would amount to $550,000. This type of estate planning must occur before the first spouse dies to maximize the amount that may be sheltered.

by Michael Ettinger, Esq.

"Elder Law Estate Planning" is a niche area of the law which combines the features of elder law and estate planning that pertain most to the needs of the middle class.

Estate planning was originally for the wealthy few. Middle class families did not consider themselves as having "estates" to plan. During the Reagan years (1980-1988), a great economic expansion occurred, raising the asset level of the middle class into the realm of estate planning. With middle class people suddenly exposed to "estate taxes", the need arose for estate planning, to reduce or eliminate those taxes. A few years later, in 1991, the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP) published "A Consumer Report on Probate" which concluded that probate was a process to be avoided, in all but the most exceptional cases. This marked the beginning of the end of traditional will planning and started the "living trust revolution". AARP recommended that families start using trusts rather than wills, to avoid probate and save their beneficiaries tens of thousands of dollars in the estate settlement process.

Since then, millions of people have set up trusts to:

• Save time and money in settling the estate

• Avoid legal guardianship if they become disabled

• Avoid having their personal and financial matters made public

• Reduce the chance of a "will contest"

• Keep control in their family and out of the court system

At about the same time as living trust planning became popular, the field of elder law emerged to help people navigate the increased complexity of state Medicaid rules and regulations, the soaring costs of nursing home stays, and the fact that people were living considerably longer.

Historically, estate planning was handled primarily by "white shoe" law firms in the deep canyons of downtown Manhattan, while elder law planning emerged out of the Department of Social Services. State employees began to take their expertise in Medicaid rules and regulations into the private sector.

To this day, these two fields continue to grow independently of each other, sometimes to the detriment of the clients lawyers are meant to serve. Estate planning lawyers mostly see estates averaging from the low hundreds of thousands to about two million dollars. Families with estates under one million dollars often cannot afford long-term care insurance. They may now or later need a Medicaid Asset Protection Trust (MAPT) to protect their estates from being depleted in the event a nursing home is required. Since the estate planning attorney is often unfamiliar with elder law, the client never gets the MAPT they need, and the estate plan to avoid probate proves useless when a nursing home stay ends up consuming all of the assets.

For the couple with over one million dollars in assets, estate planning is essential to reduce or eliminate estate taxes. In this case, they should split their assets into two trusts, thereby creating two estates, and doubling the exemption from one million to two million dollars. Still, this couple, while they may be able to afford long-term care insurance, may find one or both of them uninsurable due to health reasons. Perhaps what they really need are two MAPT's, not just to save estate taxes but to also protect the assets from nursing home costs, but they never get them because the estate planning lawyer is not experienced or trained in drafting these documents.

What happens when the estate planning client actually becomes disabled and needs long-term care? They, or the family, often consult with the estate planning lawyer who prepared their plan, but who may be unable to help them, due to his or her unfamiliarity with state Medicaid rules. Many families lose assets that might have been saved. Unknown to the estate planning attorney, elder law attorneys have developed numerous techniques to protect hard won assets, even when the nursing home is imminent, such as "spousal refusal" and the "gift and loan" strategy.

On the other side of the coin, what happens when the older single or couple meets with an elder law attorney instead of an estate planning attorney? These clients are usually sixty-five or over, and are looking for asset protection. The elder law attorney knows how to create a MAPT and often recommends them. However, on the estate planning side of matters, the elder law attorney may miss the need to set up two trusts for the couple to avoid the estate tax. He or she may have little knowledge about estate planning for second marriages, a growing segment of the population, or using Inheritance Trusts to keep the assets in the blood and protect the inheritance from children's divorces, lawsuits, and creditors.

While some of the family's needs may be met, such as asset protection, other needs are left unserved, often because the clients are unaware that these two fields of law complement and overlap one another. In other words, they may get what they want but
not necessarily what they need. These oversights are often visited on the heirs.

Your writer made the conscious decision twenty years ago to develop expertise in these two fields of law simultaneously. This has proven to be invaluable to thousands of families. Clients who originally came in for estate planning services later became elder law clients, converting their revocable living trust estate plans into MAPT's as they got older, or through the use of Medicaid planning services to protect assets when the need for nursing home care actually arose.

Looking back on our experiences in over ten thousand cases at Ettinger Law Firm, we conclude that we have assisted in the creation of a new niche, "Elder Law Estate Planning".

We define this area of law as:

• Getting your assets to your heirs, with the least amount of taxes and legal fees possible

• Keeping those assets in the blood for your grandchildren and, in the meantime, protecting those assets from your children's divorces, lawsuits, and creditors

• Protecting your assets from the costs of long-term care and qualifying for government benefits available to pay for care

While estate planning involves tools for well-to-do families, with acronyms like GRITS, GRATS, and GRUTS, and where elder law serves the diverse needs of our growing senior population, including the less fortunate, through Medicaid, Medicare and Social Security, "Elder Law Estate Planning" addresses the concerns of the vast majority in the middle.

by Michael Ettinger, Esq.

Recently, a couple came in to see me. They were people of means, having accumulated an estate in excess of two million dollars. Sadly, the husband, a fine gentleman, had contracted an incurable form of cancer. They knew it was time for a review of their estate planning documents.

The couple had two sons, both in their fifties. One was an established professional, the other a successful entrepreneur.

The client produced their current will, written nine years earlier. Since their estate was over one million dollars, the will contained a "credit-shelter" or "bypass" trust. This means that, upon the death of the first spouse, the deceased spouse's assets would be held in a trust for the surviving spouse. This technique allows the surviving spouse to have the use and enjoyment of those assets without having them includable in her estate. On her death, husband's assets pass to the children, thus taking advantage of his one million dollar exemption.

I read the trust. The I read it again. I could not believe what I was reading. The will set up the credit shelter trust for the wife, with the Bank as trustee. This technique is sometimes used by attorneys to ingratiate themselves with the Bank. It is often not in the best interests of the client, since one or both of the sons could have been chosen as trustee thus saving the Bank's fees of approximately 1% of the trust annually, plus other fees as will be shown below.

But that was not the unusual part. The will also set up trusts for the sons, with the Bank as trustees FOR THEIR LIFETIMES, giving the Bank the following authority:

"The Trustee is granted the further absolute discretion to determine when, how, and whether to make any distribution of principal, the amount to be distributed, the specific purpose for making any distribution, and whether any distribution is advisable."

The Bank was also given authority to collect its fees as trustee "without offset or reduction for any other fees or other compensation paid to it or any other "affiliated entity" including fees or other compensation paid by any mutual fund or other investment vehicle agent. "Such compensation may be made without court approval." This means that the Bank, in control of the assets, would also collect fees as the investment advisor, effectively a "double-dip" and specifically excludes court scrutiny of the arrangement. There was no provision to change the trustee.

So, what happened under the trusts for the sons when they died. The assets were then put into trusts for the grandchildren with the Bank as trustee all over again! The Bank was also given control of the assets over the grandchildren's lifetimes with the following "suggestion":

"The Trustee may consider distributing: one fifth (1/5) of the trust estate upon the grandchild's attaining the age of thirty (30) years; three-eighths (3/8) of the trust estate upon attaining the age of thirty-five (35) years; and the balance of the trust estate upon the grandchild's attaining the age of forty (40) years. Nothing set forth herein shall be construed as providing a grandchild with the authority to require any distribution to be made from the trust at such ages" (emphasis added).

The client was appalled. They had no idea whatsoever these draconian provisions were in their documents. In our experience, most people do not know or understand what is in their estate planning documents.

Given the circumstances of the husband's health, within the week we had replaced all of the documents with trusts controlled by the family alone, much to their relief. There was a great deal of satisfaction on their part knowing that had the husband died without having the plan reviewed, they would have been stuck with the Bank, irrevocably, forever. All's well that ends well.

By Michael Ettinger, Esq.

Reflecting on this comment made to us by a client recently, the following thoughts came to mind. What do we actually do at Ettinger Law Firm?

All we do is save our clients a lot of time, many thousands of dollars and the not so petty annoyances they might otherwise have in settling their family's affairs on the death of a loved one. We help them reduce or eliminate taxes on the estate so that more passes down to help their children and grandchildren. These days, we also protect the inheritances our clients leave so that it is not lost should the heirs get sued or divorced and, better yet, we assure them that their wishes will carry on for decades after they are gone, by passing the inheritance on to their grandchildren one day. Should disability occur, our clients have had their assets protected years earlier through asset protection planning. For many who come to us in their hour of need, without preparation, we take on the burden of helping them through the Medicaid maze and help them save and protect much more of their assets than they ever thought possible.

On the planning side, we talk to our clients about their hopes and dreams, despairs and disappointments. Then we craft a plan to reflect the client's life and lifestyle, taking into great consideration the needs and feelings of the heirs and how it will be received. We are thoughtful to avoid unintentionally hurting loved ones and creating rifts between them with well intentioned, but ultimately misguided, gifts and bequests.

Yet none of the above good works were what the client was referring to with her causal remark that "you give lawyers a good name". We also hold three to four seminars for the public each week where we invite hundreds of people to dinner at our expense and explain all they need to know about elder law and estate planning, providing professionally prepared materials for them to take home and study. We maintain a 150 page website for their further research and review, together with an online video seminar to watch if they wish.

Then we invite every person, regardless of their means, to come into our offices and spend up to an hour with us, free of charge, where we share the vast knowledge, experience and insights we have gleaned in over twenty years of exclusive practice in this area. We also analyze and critique their current planning, letting them know where they stand, what to do and why.

Finally, we advise countless people each day, week, month and year that they do not need our services, that they are fine for the time being with the plan they have and can afford to wait, when they would be better off doing their planning with another firm, and then refer them to one with more expertise in solving their particular issues. For clients who do need us, we search for ways to achieve their goals with the least expense possible.

Clients see that we derive as much satisfaction from telling them that they are fine, that they do not require our services, as we do when our services are needed. Clients see that we are just happy that they took the time to come in to see us. And when clients see that we are on their side, that our true purpose is to serve them without regard to ourselves, then they say "you give lawyers a good name".

by Michael Ettinger, Esq.

Previously we wrote about the lawyer as co-trustee in the second marriage setting. The main concern there was to protect the share and the interests of the deceased spouse and their family. This was a situation ideally suited for the lawyer as trustee due to inadequate protection if one of the surviving spouse's children acts as co-trustee, and the inevitable conflict that arises if one of the deceased spouse's children acts as co-trustee.

For singles and couples without children, the lawyer as co-trustee fulfills an entirely different function. In the couples setting, we are really referring to the issues that arise after the first spouse dies. From an estate planning point of view, couples without children ultimately have the same issues as singles.

So whether you are single now or eventually become one your key issue is not planning for death, not who you are leaving it to and certainly not having a will. Your key issue is planning for disability. Should you be unable, at some point, to handle your financial and legal affairs due to accident or illness, who will take over? If you don't have a strong plan for disability, which they say eventually happens to about half of all people, you are at considerable risk of having the wrong person or a stranger take over your affairs. In the event of disability, virtually anyone (hospital, doctor, lawyer, social worker, neighbor, relative, friend, etc.) may commence a proceeding to have a legal guardian appointed for you. Once you enter into this bureaucratic process, usually involuntarily, it is exceedingly difficult to extricate yourself and you lose precious control over your affairs. We often say you are only as strong as your back-up plan. If you have set up a living trust, you are in charge now, but the trust says who takes over in the event of disability. You get the person or persons you have chosen, not a court appointed legal guardian, along with the many thousands of dollars in costs that such proceedings entail.

So, who should you choose? Our advice is to choose two people. One a friend or relative who is willing to undertake the responsibility and then the lawyer as co-trustee. The lawyer will see to it that the trust is run properly and that all of your affairs are handled according to law. It takes a considerable amount of the anxiety, pressure and responsibility off of your friend or relative who has so kindly agreed to undertake this task. Further, you have two people signing off on all decisions, and everyone knows what two heads are better than. Not only is the possibility of a mistake being made greatly reduced, but it also eliminates the risk of misappropriation of assets. In some cases, where clients do not have a friend or relative available for this purpose or where they do not want to burden anyone with the responsibility, the lawyer may act as sole trustee.

New York trustee's fees, which only take effect when the trustee is called upon to act, are 1.05% of the first $400,000, .45% of the next $200,000 and .3% of any amounts over $600,000. So, for example, on a one million dollar trust, the trustee's commission would be $6,300.00 per year.

Perhaps the greatest insight your writer has gained in over thirty years of practicing law, is that planning for disability is more important than planning for death. The lawyer as co-trustee may be an invaluable asset to the childless person in the event of disability.

By Michael Ettinger, Esq.

One of the situations that call for the lawyer to recommend himself as trustee is in second marriage planning.

It is a firmly established legal principal that there is no ethical prohibition against the attorney recommending himself to act as a trustee on behalf of a client or client's estate. And for good reason. In many situations the counselor can provide invaluable assistance that no one else is able or willing to provide.

In second marriage planning, we often recommend that the lawyer act as co-trustee on the death of the first spouse. While both are living and competent they naturally run their trust or trusts together. But when one spouse dies, what prevents the other spouse from taking all of the assets and diverting them to their own children? Nothing at all, if they alone are in charge. While most people are honorable, and many are certain their spouse would never do such a thing, strange things often happen later in life. A spouse may become forgetful, delusional or senile or may be influenced, sometimes unduly, by other parties. Not only that, but what are the children of the deceased spouse going to feel when they find out their stepmother is in charge of all of the couple's assets? They are going to imagine the worst case scenario and feel very insecure and possibly even hostile to the surviving spouse. As my esteemed professor of The Law of Trusts said to us over thirty years ago "you would be surprised by how fast the family glue becomes undone."

Now, if you choose one of the deceased spouse's children to act as co-trustee with the surviving spouse what have you done? Created a potential minefield. The biggest issue is the conflict that exists whereby the stepson may be reluctant to spend assets for the surviving spouse, because whatever is spent on her will come out of his ultimate share. Then what if she gets remarried? How will he react to that event? What if it turns out he liked her when his dad was with her, but not so much or not at all afterwards? These things happen, and often.

Here's where the lawyer as trustee may provide an ideal solution. When husband dies, the lawyer steps in as co-trustee with the wife. He helps her invest for her benefit as well as making sure the principal grows to offset inflation, for the benefit of the heirs.

Wife in this case takes care of all her business privately with her lawyer. The trusts cannot be raided. These protections may also be extended for IRA and 401(k) money passing to the spouse through the use of the "IRA Contract" pioneered by Ettinger Law Firm. Surviving spouse agrees ahead of time that she will make an irrevocable designation of both of the couple's children as beneficiaries when the IRA is left to her and further agrees that any withdrawals in excess of the required minimum distribution (RMD) may only be made on the consent of the lawyer.

What about the deceased spouse's children? When the trust terms are read they now feel very secure that the lawyer their father chose will continue on for the stepmother's lifetime, looking after and protecting their share of the assets. They are relieved by the protection that has been set up for them, have no animosity or concern about the stepmother's sole control of the assets and the relationship between the families continues smoothly and may even continue to grow and flourish. All because the lawyer took the time to explain the advantages to the client and was willing to shoulder the responsibility that acting as trustee entails.

A word about trustee's fees. Trustee fees in New York are 1.05% of the first $400,000, .45% of the next $200,000 and .3% of any amounts over $600,000. So, for example, on a one million dollar trust, the trustee's commission would be $6,300.00 per year. These fees take effect only on the death of the first spouse, when the lawyer as trustee is called upon to act.

As you can see, having the lawyer step in for the deceased spouse can help both of the spouse's families avoid a world of trouble after the first spouse dies.

By Michael Ettinger, Esq.

So many clients are advised that they need a will. In fact, will planning is becoming obsolete for persons over sixty for many reasons.

Instead of actually solving problems, wills often create them. First, they must be proven to be valid in a court proceeding, the infamous probate, for estates in New York over $30,000.00. Court proceedings can be expensive, time-consuming and things often go wrong. Also, when the client dies, that will is usually out-of-date, having been created decades before. The executors may be the wrong persons, the beneficiaries or their percentages may be wrong or other changes in the family have not been taken into account.

Notice of the court proceeding must be given to certain relatives who may be difficult or impossible to locate. Complications arise with relatives in foreign countries who may need to go to the American Consulate for notarization or "consularization" of legal documents. If there is a disabled child, the court will appoint a lawyer to represent their interests, including preparing a report to the court, and your estate must pay that attorney's fees.

Proof problems with the will lead to delays that often prevent needed funds getting to surviving spouses or children. It is fairly common for real estate to be tied up, while the probate process drags on, causing potential buyers to be lost. In some cases, stock cannot be sold even though it may be falling in value rapidly. Law firms routinely commence probate proceedings as a courtesy for families who cannot even afford the legal fees to get the matter started. Needless to say, the cost of court proceedings today may be expected to be in the five figure range.

Two other pitfalls of will planning bear mentioning. First, since the will is filed in court, it becomes a public record. Anyone may then go into the courthouse and order a copy of your will to see what you had and who you left it to. Your privacy is out the window. Secondly, since notice must be given to the heirs you may have left out, or left less than they may feel they are entitled to, you run the risk of a will contest if your estate is distributed in anything but equal shares.

When you are in probate court, who is in charge? The judge, not you or your lawyer. Don't suppose that the Judge will always act in your best interests, as the court may have other interests to consider.

Always better to stay out of court, in our opinion. By using a living trust, instead of a will, you avoid probate court and keep control, or at least control rests with those you have chosen, if you die or become disabled. The expenses are so much less without court proceedings that you may easily save tens of thousands of dollars.

The other problem with a will? It only takes effect when you die. Today, about half of all people eventually become disabled. Since the will does not provide for disability, you risk guardianship proceedings. These proceedings occur later in life when someone becomes unable to handle their affairs and does not have an adequate plan set up. In a guardianship, the court will appoint someone to handle your affairs. Not only may it not be the person you would have chosen, it may not even be someone you know. Trusts, which take effect while you are living, are considered a highly effective tool to avoid guardianship proceedings and guarantee that the person or persons you choose will be in charge. This way, you may be certain that your best interests will be looked after.

In short, when someone tells you that you need a will, think again. It may be a living trust that you need instead.