King & Wood, P.A.

Benefit Controlled Trust May Be Answer to Protecting Legacy

“Life is messy sometimes. Divorce, bankruptcies and lawsuits happen. They can potentially wipe out the inheritance you’ve carefully set aside for your loved ones. However, there are many trust options to help keep life from ruining your legacy.”

When beneficiaries receive their inheritance in their own names, a legacy becomes vulnerable to creditors, lawsuits, divorce and a second estate tax when they die. Complicating matters further, if the heir receives means-tested government benefits, their benefits may be lost if they receive a direct inheritance.

There is a solution, explains the article “What a Beneficiary Controlled Trust Can Do to Protect Your Legacy After You Are Gone” from Kiplinger. Having each beneficiary’s inheritance go into their own Beneficiary Controlled Trust can protect your legacy. Properly created and funded, the beneficiary may control, use and enjoy their inheritance with less risk than outright ownership. A Beneficiary Controlled Trust protects loved ones from the ups and downs of life. Divorce, lawsuits, creditor claims, bankruptcy are all unpleasant, but they do happen.

A Spendthrift Trust is used for beneficiaries who cannot be trusted to make good financial decisions, or who have people in their lives who can’t be trusted. It’s like a spigot on a garden hose. The trustee decides when the beneficiary should receive access to assets, how much and when.

In a Beneficiary Controlled Trust, the beneficiary can also be the controlling trustee. The beneficiary has the same level of control as they would with outright ownership. They can make investment decisions. Assets, including real property or investment accounts, are owned by the trust.

After inheritance, the primary beneficiary has the ability to alter the level of control or protection, if they are concerned about upcoming risks. If the risk is particularly strong, for example, a contentious divorce, the primary beneficiary may resign as a trustee and appoint a trusted family member or professional to act as a trustee.

Another trust is a HEMS trust, one limited to providing distributions for the beneficiary’s Health, Education, Maintenance and Support. HEMS trusts are used to avoid estate tax. However, in some states, certain creditors, including divorcing spouses or health care providers, are permitted to pierce the trust and access assets.

If the primary beneficiary of a Beneficiary Controlled Trust wishes to enhance asset protection, they can appoint an independent trustee who serves as the distribution trustee. They may make distributions to the beneficiary at their discretion, which can provide another level of protection. The beneficiary may not wish to giver such broad discretion to an Independent Trustee, as in the case of Brittney Spears. This can be minimized by giving the primary beneficiary the right to remove and replace the Independent Trustee. The beneficiary won’t have direct control over the distributions, but they decide who will manage the trust. The person may not be a related party or subordinate person.

Taxes should always be a consideration when creating trusts. Your estate planning attorney should review goals, concerns, and your unique situation to determine which type of trust works best for you and your family.

Reference: Kiplinger (Sep. 13, 2021) “What a Beneficiary Controlled Trust Can Do to Protect Your Legacy After You Are Gone”

Michael Jackson Estate’s Big Win against IRS in Tax Court

“A ruling that Michael Jackson’s image and likeness at the time of his death were worth about $157 million less than the IRS estimated warns the agency not to look too far down the road, when assessing the value of a celebrity’s estate.”

Estate planning lawyers agree: the recent victory of Michael Jackson’s estate in U.S. Tax Court is a clear signal that the IRS should be more cautious when assessing the value of an estate’s assets. In the article from Bloomberg Tax, “Michael Jackson Estate’s Tax Win a Warning to Aggressive IRS,” one attorney says it is reasonable to think that the court reacted negatively to the IRS’ being overly aggressive.

It’s also possible that the IRS’ memory of the pop star’s pre-death fame was based on Jackson’s post-death popularity.

The dispute, which began in 2013, attracted wide attention and exposed a big disparity in how the IRS and the Jackson estate valued the pop star’s image and likeness, which was only one part of his estate. While the estate looked at current income and revenue, the IRS took a far more opportunistic approach, eyeing the income from future shows and merchandise.

The $157 million difference came down to the IRS’s inclusion of revenue streams that the Tax Court concluded were not foreseeable at the time of the entertainer’s death. Revenues from the Cirque du Soleil show, a movie and branded merchandise were created only after Michael Jackson died.

When Jackson died in 2009, there had been severe damage to his image, including allegations of sexual abuse of children and eccentric behavior. He was cleared of charges, but the damage to his image took a toll on his popularity. His notoriety undercut the value of his name and likeness while he was alive.

The sole expert witness offered by the IRS was problematic as well. He was found to have lied multiple times and refused to answer questions directly through his testimony, which the Tax Court did not like.

The case may increase interest in changing estate tax laws, given the difficulty of valuing speculative assets based on what was reasonably foreseeable at the time of a person’s death. It may be better to take a “wait and see” approach, rather than guessing at what the person might be worth in the near and distant future.

That approach might put some estates in limbo for years, forcing executors to retain assets during that time. When beneficiaries want to receive their inheritance immediately, this could present problems for executors.

One advisor says that a rational approach would be for estates to exclude likenesses or the ability to exploit a name and image, and then have distributed assets taxed after death at ordinary income rates.

For celebrities and those with a high value estate, expect more scrutiny from the IRS. The IRS is looking for revenue, and any high-profile assets will attract attention.

Non-celebrities should take heed as well. The IRS is looking for revenue, and an estate plan with strong tax planning will protect families from onerous federal and state estate taxes.

Reference: Bloomberg Tax (May 5, 2021) “Michael Jackson Estate’s Tax Win a Warning to Aggressive IRS”

Can a Charity Be a Beneficiary of an Estate?

“Ever since a group of philanthropists created the Giving Pledge in 2010, taxpayers have expressed greater interest in potential estate planning strategies that would allow them to leave a significant portion of their assets to charity upon their death.”

The interest in charitable giving increased in 2020 for two reasons. One was a dramatic increase in need as a result of the COVID pandemic, reports The Tax Advisor’s article “Charitable income tax deductions for trusts and estates.” The other was more pragmatic from a tax planning perspective. The CARES Act increased the amounts of charitable contributions that may be deducted from taxes by individuals and corporations.

What if a person wishes to make a donation from the assets that are held in trust? Is that still an income tax deduction? It depends.

The rules for donations from trusts are substantially different than those for charitable contribution deductions for individuals and corporations. The IRS code allows an estate or nongrantor trust to make a deduction which, if pursuant to the terms of the governing instrument, is paid for a purpose specified in Section 170(c). For trusts created on or before October 9, 1969, the IRS code expands the scope of the deduction to allow for a deduction of the gross income set aside permanently for charitable purposes.

If the trust or estate allows for payments to be made for charity, then donations from a trust are allowed and may be tax deductions. Otherwise, they cannot be deducted.

If the trust or estate allows distributions for charity, the type of asset contributed and how it was acquired by the trust or estate determines whether a tax deduction for a charitable donation is permitted. Here are some basic rules, but every situation is different and requires the guidance of an experienced estate planning attorney.

Cash donations. A trust or estate making cash donations may deduct to the extent of the lesser of the taxable income for the year or the amount of the contribution.

Noncash assets purchased by the trust/estate: If the trust or estate purchased marketable securities with income, the cost basis of the asset is considered the amount contributed from gross income. The trust or estate cannot avoid recognizing capital gain on a noncash asset that is donated, while also deducting the full value of the asset contributed. The trust or estate’s deduction is limited to the asset’s cost basis.

Noncash assets contributed to the trust/estate: If the trust or estate acquired an asset it wants to donate to charity as part of the funding of the fiduciary arrangement, no charity deduction is permitted. The asset that is part of the trust or estate’s corpus, the principal of the estate, is not gross income.

The order of charitable deductions, compared to distribution deductions, can cause a great deal of complexity in tax planning and reporting. Required distributions to noncharitable beneficiaries must be accounted for first, and the charitable deduction is not taken into account in calculating distributable net income. The recipients of the distributions do not get the benefit of the deduction. The trust or the estate does.

Charitable distributions are considered next, which may offset any remaining taxable income. Last are discretionary distributions to noncharitable beneficiaries, so these beneficiaries may receive the largest benefit from any charitable deduction.

If the trust claims a charitable deduction, it must file form 1041A for the relevant tax year, unless it meets any of the exceptions noted in the instructions in the form.

These are complex estate and tax matters, requiring the guidance of an experienced estate planning attorney for optimal results.

Reference: The Tax Advisor (March 1, 2021) “Charitable income tax deductions for trusts and estates”

Should Inherited Money Be Equally Split Between Family Members

“When you’re planning to divide your estate unequally, explain the reasons to your heirs, and remember: They might be hurt anyway.”

Leaving an equal amount to adult children works for many families, but equal is not always equitable. In those cases, leaving different amounts to heirs can lead to irreparable breaks within the family. A recent article titled “The Unequal Inheritance: It Can Work, or It Can ‘Destroy Relationships’” from The New York Times examines the problem and some of the solutions. There are times, however, when even the fairest of decisions doesn’t heal the “Mom always liked you best” hurt, imagined or otherwise.

Unequal inheritances can trigger sibling fighting after a parent dies, some of which end up in court, especially if one child thinks that a parent was being overly influenced by the sibling who ended up with the bigger inheritance.

Parents need to explain their decision to each child, individually and as a group, or even seek mediation. Many estate planning attorneys encourage a family meeting, where everyone is in a neutral location, to discuss the parent’s wishes and estate plan. In some cases, the children understand when one of the siblings is disabled or has a lower earning potential.

Another reason for unequal inheritances is to balance things out when one child received significant support that others did not need. Equalization of gifts can be documented in an estate plan, as heirs may need to be reminded of the parent’s generosity at an earlier date. If this isn’t addressed, the siblings who received less help during the parent’s lifetime may resent their decision to give equally.

What about the caregiving child? Some parents decide to give extra to the adult child who became their primary caregiver. That usually takes the shape of the family home, a larger cash distribution or life insurance proceeds. However, siblings don’t always agree on how this is handled. Some will see the child’s decision to care for their parents as manipulative.

Blended families with stepchildren run into complications often. The growth in stepfamilies is a big part of why Americans 50 and older left their children unequal bequests, which more than doubled from 16 percent in 1995 to 35 percent in 2010, as reported in a study from the National Bureau of Economic Research.

At the same time, the study also found that the longer the relationship, the more likely the parent would leave stepchildren inheritances equal to that of a biological or adopted child.

Even when parents intend to split the estate equally, failing to plan for taxes can leave children with different inheritances. This happens when parents leave different types of assets to different heirs.

If a parent left a $500,000 IRA to one child and a $500,000 taxable brokerage account to another, the child who received the IRA will pay federal income taxes up to 37 percent on every withdrawal, which now must be done within ten years of the death of the parent. The child with the brokerage account would have to pay a long-term capital gains tax of up to 20 percent, when an appreciated asset was sold.

Generally speaking, IRA and other tax deferred accounts should have all children as equal beneficiaries. These accounts are usually outside of the probate estate. A house may be left in a trust or the will, with directions for the house to be sold and all assets divided equally.

There is no way around it—inheritances are seen as a proxy for love, and any unequal distribution will be felt as such, even by the most rational of people. Speak with your estate planning attorney to learn how to avoid these scenarios and consider holding a family meeting to make sure your intentions and the reasons behind your intentions are made clear to all concerned.

Reference: The New York Times (Feb. 19, 2021) “The Unequal Inheritance: It Can Work, or It Can ‘Destroy Relationships’”

 

Should You Name a Trust as an IRA Beneficiary?

“For obvious reasons, including control, privacy, asset protection, etc., many clients are interested in putting assets into a trust. For many retirees, their IRA is among their biggest assets. It’s only natural to want to put the IRA into a trust.”
An IRA may not be placed into a trust while the account owner is alive. An IRA also may not be owned by more than one person. The IRA owner can name a trust as a beneficiary of an IRA. Just because you can do this, does not mean it is a good idea, says the article “Naming Your Trust as an IRA Beneficiary” from The Press of Atlantic City. The IRA owner could also take all of the funds and deposit them into a trust, but that would be another bad idea. Why? It is because all of the funds withdrawn would be subject to income tax.
Therefore, why would anyone want to name a trust as the beneficiary for an IRA?
· If you want an heir, like a second spouse, to inherit the income but not the balance of the principal after you have died. This is done so the second spouse cannot name their children as the beneficiary, instead of the original account owner’s children.
· If you are concerned with the ability of heirs to manage your IRA funds wisely, a trust can be the beneficiary and you can set the terms with which the heirs can have access to the funds.
· Minor children cannot be direct beneficiaries of an IRA, and a disabled child may become ineligible for government benefits, if he or she receives an inheritance directly.
· If you want your IRA funds to be inherited by grandchildren instead of children, a trust is the way to go.
· If creditor protection is a concern under the laws of your state, a trust would keep the IRA funds from being tapped by claims of creditors.
Here is why you would NOT want to name a trust as the beneficiary of your IRA:
· There are no tax benefits to having the trust inherit your IRA.
· Trusts have expenses. Trustee fees and tax rates on funds left inside the trust, but not in the IRA, may be substantially higher than personal income tax rates, depending on the beneficiary.
· The trust will have to keep going long after your own death. That means tax returns must be filed, fees paid, and the trustee must maintain the trust.
· Some companies that hold IRAs do not allow trusts to be beneficiaries of IRAs. Before you get into figuring out if this is the right route for you, find out first if your custodian will permit it.
There are many other facts to consider before deciding to name a trust as the beneficiary of an IRA. Speak with your estate planning attorney to see if it is a suitable solution for you and your family.
Reference: The Press of Atlantic City (February 13, 2020) “Naming Your Trust as an IRA Beneficiary”