Articles Tagged with manhattan trust lawyer

STATE SPECIFIC PROTECTIONS

        The current aggregate value of retirement assets in America is roughly $21 trillion, with individual retirement accounts (IRAs) amounting to the largest single investment asset.  While many, if not most, types of retirement assets and accounts are protected against creditors, the IRA is not necessarily one of them.  The various protections for IRA are dependent on the amount, how long ago you put the money into your account and the state or jurisdiction you live in.  Employer sponsored plans are covered by protections found in federal law, so it is much easier to talk about what protections exist for such plans.  The Employer Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) created a large host of protections for employees, including protections against creditors, except when the creditor is the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) or a spouse or former spouse for debt incurred through domestic relations.  

The protections found under ERISA have expanded over time through both Congressional action and judicial interpretation of the law.  ERISA plans must provide periodic updates to the employees, information about the plan features, creates fiduciary responsibilities for the plan administrators as well as things such as an appeal process for certain decisions that the employee disagrees with.  One large collective group of accounts that are not protected, however, are IRAs.  IRAs, as the name implies, are owned by an individual and thus do not fall under the protections of ERISA.  Most protections for IRAs are found in state law.  

ORDER OF PAYMENT

It should not be a surprise to anyone that when someone passes away, their estate must pay for all legally binding outstanding debt owed by the decedent just prior to passing. New York as well as just about every other jurisdiction has laws that address how the estate puts creditors on notice that they must file a claim, but how the creditor must go about making a claim and getting paid from the estate. As in other areas of the law, there is an order and priority to the claims that can be paid. The administrator has a fiduciary obligation to the heirs to distribute the estate to the terms of the will. That fiduciary obligation also extends to creditors of the estate. The payment of expenses, ensuring that all disbursements are properly documented and all taxes and fees are paid are core responsibilities of the estate administrator.

To do this, the estate administrator must first understand what assets the deceased owned, the value of those assets, which in and of itself costs money. When an estate is insolvent, the creditors will surely examine every expenditure by the administrator to determine if they acted appropriately. On the other side of the ledger, the administrator must determine if the claims are valid or overpriced and inflated. The estate administrator has an obligation to dispute all claims, except properly owed, legally enforceable obligations. Since the final accounting by the estate administrator presupposes that all parties are already involved in litigation and there is a Court already scrutinizing all credits and debits, the likelihood that a party will enforce their rights, or, more specifically, object to the final accounting, is all the much greater. The balancing act that the estate administrator must engage in can be a complicated endeavor.

LEGALLY DELICATE AREA OF THE LAW

This blog explored the topic of gun trusts in the past and it is high time to reexamine the matter in some more detail. While it is probably true that most people with a fairly sizable gun collection are hunters and gun enthusiasts, that is certainly not the only class of firearm collectors. History buffs and historical reenactors collect also amass a large collection of firearms. They often loan these items to museums or traveling exhibits rather than use them for hunting or skeet or target shooting.

Many times these rifles hold a lot of sentimental value as it may have been through the Battle of the Bulge or Iwo Jima or have some similar family value. Possessing a firearm, whether it is a historical piece from the Revolutionary War or a hunting rifle, can be a federal as well as a state felony if the transfer is not properly documented or held by a certain class of individuals. In either event, however, the government creates laws regulating the transfer and ownership of firearms. New York has the New York Secure Ammunition and Firearms Enforcement Act (NY SAFE Act), while the federal government has the US Gun Control Act as well as the National Firearms Act, which is actually part of the tax code.

529 ACCOUNTS

Estate planning is the legal strategy by which one generation transfers wealth to the next, which involves an the use of various trusts and/or a will or even transferring money or items to corporations in an effort to legally and ethically reduce tax liability. One of the easiest ways to insure that your children, grandchildren or loved ones who have not yet graduated from high school have a much easier ride in life is to have them graduate from college.

College graduates almost uniformly enjoy a longer life, better health, live in safer neighborhoods and make more money than those who did not graduate from college. There is a hitch, however, in that college is an extremely expensive undertaking. College graduates can be saddled with debt that can follow them for decades. As such, if you can find a way for them to go to college and graduate with no debt or at least minimal debt, you will ensure that you transferred more wealth to them than even the average wealthy parent can leave via traditional estate planning. Many people are aware of 529 plans, which allows for deposits into an account, wherein the money grows tax free and is non-taxable when withdrawn if used for educational costs.

THE PROBLEM AND THE LAWS RESPONSE

Sometimes when a person creates a trust they do not know all of the material facts, indeed cannot know all of the material facts regarding what is in the beneficiary’s best interest. Perhaps the trust expressly states that the beneficiaries cannot receive payment from the trust until they reaches 25. What happens if one of the beneficiaries is diagnosed with a medical condition with treatment that is not covered by his/her health insurance? Surely it would seem appropriate to allow the trustee or the beneficiaries to modify the terms of the trust. Situations such as these have always been an issue since the creation of trusts and Courts have dealt with this issue, with reported opinions going back centuries. One famous case that allowed for the beneficiaries to reform or modify a trust, Saunders v. Vautier, came out of England in 1841.

The principles outlined in the case helped to dictate the common law throughout Anglo-American law, namely that as long as the beneficiaries are all of the age of majority and not under legal disability a Court should allow a party to modify the terms of a trust. But unfortunately life is so much more complicated than that. Look at the tragedy of Bobbi Kristina Houston. Following Whitney Houston’s passing, her daughter (Bobbi) stood to inherit her estate in stages with the first disbursement of approximately eight million dollars at the age of 21. Bobbi’s grandmother Cissy Houston and aunt Marion Houston both sought to reform the terms of the trust granting Bobby Houston such sums, arguing that she, the beneficiary, would be at heightened and unacceptable risk of undue influence of third parties. When there is an allegation of undue influence, it is often the case that the trustor or settlor is alleged to have been under undue influence, not the beneficiary that may fall prey to undue influence. The need to reform a trust may have more mundane reasons such as mistake. Take the not uncommon example of a trust created in a will, called a testamentary trust, of a husband and wife, who, other than their names and other identifying information, have identical wills. At the signing of the wills by the parties, they mistakenly sign each other’s will and not their own.

An intentionally defective grantor trust is an extremely effective tool that accomplishes multiple objectives. First, it helps to minimize gift or transfer tax liability that a person may have to pay if the asset passed through normal probate process or it were gifted to the intended recipient. Second, it helps to step up the cost basis, which can be extremely valuable if the asset grew in value and then stabilized. It is often an effective tool for a small business owner who seeks to pass his/her business on to children or grandchildren. It is even more fitting if the same small business grew in size but then stabilized in value.

But, the question has to be asked. What’s with the reference “defective” in its name? It certainly is not a name conducive to marketing its rather impressive abilities. The term does not refer to something being broken (or busted).  The term defective has a simple explanation, it is defective as to income tax liability. To state it in the inverse may help to explain it better; the trust is effective for estate tax purposes. In other words, the trust does not eliminate all taxes in that the grantor still pays the income taxes generated by the asset that is the corpus of the trust, but it does eliminate estate tax liability. Furthermore, it is a “grantor trust”, as defined at 26 U.S.C. § 675, meaning that it satisfies the legal definition of a grantor trust.

WHAT ABOUT GIFT TAX LIABILITY?

IRREVOCABLE TRUSTS COSTS AND BENEFITS

Trusts are valuable estate planning devices that allow for the transmission of wealth with lower tax liability. When proper estate management is picked, they also allow for the creation of future income, potentially allowing for the life of the trust in perpetuity. Trusts also allow for the beneficiaries to benefit from the income of the corpus of the trust, yet insure that their creditors cannot obtain the income producing assets itself. The same also applies for a financially irresponsible beneficiary, in that it provides income but prevents the financially irresponsible beneficiary from squandering the income producing asset. One of the most popular types of trusts is the irrevocable trust. As with anything in life, there are upsides and downsides; one of the downsides to an irrevocable trust is that in most circumstances, and, more particularly, most states, an irrevocable trust is usually irrevocable. Unwinding an irrevocable trust when it no longer functions as it should, due to, for example, a major change in the estate and gift tax law is possible but must be done correctly, whereby the assets from the trust may be transferred or gifted to the beneficiaries or the settlor if still alive.

WHY TO MODIFY OR REVOKE?

Intellectual property is an umbrella term that includes several different specific areas of the law.  Trademark law, patent law, copyright laws and trade secret laws are all examples of intellectual property laws.  The constitution guarantees that the federal government has exclusive jurisdiction over patent and copyright laws.  Patent and copyright laws are designed to “promote the progress of science and useful arts.”  

COPYRIGHTS, OWNERSHIP, HEIRS AND ESTATE PLANNING

Copyrights created after 1978 are generally good for the life of the author plus 70 years.  When written for a corporation, so called work for hire copyrights, the copyright is valid for 95 after first publication date to 120 years after the work is created.  To pass a copyright on to heirs, you must be careful to do it the right way.  If a painter passes a painting on to an heir the right to control the copyright of that painting does not necessarily follow.  The painter will have only passed on the original painting.  To pass a copyright, the trust, will or other document must specifically mention that the copyright to the painting passes to the heir.  It is entirely possible for a painter to pass the original work to a friend or partner but pass the copyright on to another person.  

Contact Information