| Twenty 
                      Questions About Elder PlanningHow to Prepare for a Secure Financial 
                      Future
 By 
                      Peter A. Karl IIIElder 
                    planning is complex and emotional, with issues in the areas 
                    of estate taxes, IRAs and other retirement-based investments, 
                    long-term care insurance (LTCI), and the range of trust instruments 
                    available. Well-informed choices allow individuals to control 
                    their financial circumstances and fund them better than would 
                    otherwise be possible. The financial future of the growing 
                    number of seniors in the United States requires nothing less. 1. 
                      What determines whether an estate plan should encompass 
                      a revocable living trust (RLT) or a last will and testament 
                      (LWT)? Using 
                      an RLT accomplishes “living probate” in which 
                      assets are retitled following the execution of the trust 
                      documentation. An RLT avoids the expense and delay associated 
                      with probate, which is the process of retitling assets from 
                      the name of the decedent to the beneficiaries named in the 
                      LWT. Consider the following when deciding which format to 
                      use: 
                       
                        When an individual owns real estate located in more than 
                        one state, usually an RLT can avoid ancillary or another 
                        probate procedure in the second state. The more varied 
                        and substantial the asset holdings, the more costly the 
                        estate administration will be (it can be completely avoided 
                        with an RLT). 
                        If a will contest by a family member is anticipated, using 
                        an RLT is recommended because it does not provide heirs 
                        an opportunity to dispute the will through the probate 
                        process. The contesting party would have to file a lawsuit 
                        on the basis of contract law, which procedurally is a 
                        more difficult task than contesting an LWT. Additionally, 
                        there is a presumption of validity with respect to a trust; 
                        the person disputing the trust has the burden of rebutting 
                        its validity. 
                        An RLT is not required to be filed in court (unless there 
                        is a rare judicial challenge). Consequently, the trust 
                        and its accompanying assets are not a matter of public 
                        record. A “pour-over” 
                      will is always needed in conjunction with an RLT to address 
                      those assets that have not been previously retitled to the 
                      name of the trust (e.g., an inheritance received immediately 
                      prior to death). 2. 
                      When is an irrevocable living trust (ILT) useful in elder 
                      planning? An 
                      ILT is an alternative to the outright distribution of property 
                      to a beneficiary for reasons such as— 
                       
                        a concern over the windfall nature of an outright transfer 
                        to the beneficiary who (because of age or other circumstances) 
                        warrants asset preservation through entity insulation 
                        and needs to have the future distribution of the ILT assets 
                        controlled; 
                        a transfer of the income tax burden from the creator of 
                        the trust to its beneficiaries age 14 or older (provided 
                        student financial aid implications are reviewed). This 
                        assumes that the ILT is not an accumulation trust but 
                        a conduit one; 
                        freezing the value of assets to save estate and generation-skipping 
                        taxes (e.g., by using a dynasty trust); or 
                        elimination of estate taxation attributable to life insurance 
                        proceeds. 3. 
                      What is the benefit of using a split interest trust (SIT)? The 
                      most widely used SITs (even by individuals in their 70s 
                      and 80s) are the grantor retained annuity trust (GRAT), 
                      the grantor retained unitrust (GRUT), the qualified personal 
                      residence trust (QPRT), and the personal residence trust 
                      (PRT). A SIT 
                      provides benefits to the creators of the trust for a stated 
                      period of time. If the grantor lives beyond the designated 
                      term, none of the assets within the trust are included in 
                      the individual’s estate as long as the trust qualifies 
                      under IRC section 2702. The GRAT stipulates the right to 
                      receive a fixed payment of income, while the amount distributed 
                      by a GRUT is based on a fixed percentage of the trust’s 
                      value, determined annually. The QPRT retains occupancy of 
                      the principal residence for the trust grantor during a stated 
                      term. A second or vacation home can be used within a PRT 
                      with provisions addressing usage, expense sharing, and death 
                      of a beneficiary.  These 
                      irrevocable trusts are sometimes referred to as “marital 
                      deduction substitutes” because the effect of the split 
                      interest provisions is to leverage the unified credit. For 
                      example, they allow a widow to freeze the value of appreciating 
                      property by transferring it at a discount to a SIT. Because 
                      the gift is a future interest, the valuation is based on 
                      the present value of the remainder interest, under the principle 
                      that the longer the term of the donor’s retained interest, 
                      the lower the amount of the gift. This transfer could be 
                      valued at zero if the retained interest equals the value 
                      of the property gifted to the trust.  4. 
                      Why are testamentary trusts useful in elder planning? Using 
                      a testamentary trust within the language of a LWT or RLT 
                      funded with assets after the death of an individual can 
                      provide the following benefits to the designated beneficiaries: 
                       
                      n 
                        Providing for the continuity of ownership and postmortem 
                        control of particular assets, such as shares of a closely 
                        held corporation. 
                        Establishing at the death of the first spouse a unified 
                        credit trust (UCT), which is ineligible for the marital 
                        deduction. The UCT provides income to the surviving spouse 
                        along with principal distributions pursuant to ascertainable 
                        standards under IRC section 2041 (i.e., the health, education, 
                        support, and maintenance of the beneficiary). This arrangement 
                        should be particularly considered when the combined assets 
                        of the two spouses are estimated to exceed the amount 
                        of the unified credit available upon the death of the 
                        second spouse (or if there is concern regarding the status 
                        of the estate tax law after 2010). An additional benefit 
                        is that the trust assets will be sheltered in the event 
                        of a creditor’s claim against the surviving spouse 
                        (such as from a nursing home). 
                        Preventing a premature windfall to a younger beneficiary 
                        by providing a testamentary trust with sprinkling provisions 
                        of income and principal at the sole discretion of the 
                        trustee to a certain age (e.g., age 25). This may also 
                        protect the trust’s income and assets from being 
                        included in the calculation for student financial aid 
                        qualification. 
                        Disbursing income (and optional principal distributions) 
                        to the spouse from a second marriage in order to preserve 
                        assets for the decedent’s children. In this situation, 
                        the need for a waiver should be considered with respect 
                        to the right of election that the surviving spouse would 
                        have against the estate of the deceased spouse. 5. 
                      What tax complications exist in using testamentary trusts? The 
                      highly compressed tax brackets applicable to taxable trusts 
                      should mandate to the document drafter that income be set 
                      aside on behalf of any beneficiary under, for example, age 
                      25, or distributed outright in order to avoid taxation at 
                      the entity level. If 
                      Subchapter S stock will be an estate asset, the testamentary 
                      trust should be drafted to qualify as an eligible shareholder 
                      in order to avoid revocation of the S election after the 
                      two-year grace period afforded to estates. Any 
                      trust (including a testamentary one) that is a beneficiary 
                      of an IRA or a qualified plan must meet certain requirements 
                      in order to qualify the recipients named within the document 
                      as designated beneficiaries. This means that the trust (which 
                      becomes irrevocable as of the IRA owner’s death) lists 
                      all of the beneficiaries as identifiable individuals. In 
                      addition, a copy of the trust instrument must be provided 
                      to the IRA plan administrator. 6. 
                      What benefits are available under Medicare for an individual 
                      residing in a skilled nursing facility (SNF)? Qualification 
                      for Medicare is based on attaining age 65 and being eligible 
                      for Social Security. Part A, which covers inpatient hospital 
                      expenses, is automatic; Part B, for outpatient health-care 
                      expenses, is optional. The latter coverage should be compared 
                      by any nonretiree to a health-care policy being provided 
                      by an employer. Provided that an individual has been hospitalized 
                      for at least three days, Medicare’s Part A will pay 
                      for the first 20 days in an SNF for acute medical or rehabilitation 
                      care. The succeeding 80 days in a SNF will be covered after 
                      payment of a deductible. 7. 
                      What are the rules with respect to the required “spend-down” 
                      of personal assets and income in order to qualify for Medicaid? Medicaid 
                      eligibility is based on an individual’s financial 
                      ability as of the date of application in terms of both income 
                      and assets. New York State allows a single individual in 
                      an SNF to retain $50 in monthly income as a personal needs 
                      allowance, and $3,950 of assets, a lifetime savings allowance. For 
                      married couples, regardless of which spouse has title to 
                      the family assets, New York State permits the noninstitutionalized 
                      spouse (the community spouse) to retain up to $92,760 in 
                      assets in 2004, which is the community spousal resource 
                      allowance (CSRA). In New York, certain assets are exempt, 
                      and allowed to be retained above and beyond the CSRA:  
                       
                        Real estate used as a personal residence by the community 
                        spouse 
                        An automobile 
                        Burial and prepaid funeral funds 
                        A family business 
                        Investment real estate generating less than a 6% net return 
                        on its equity value 
                        Insurance, both whole life (up to $1,500 in cash value) 
                        and term. A community 
                      spouse is able to retain income officially known in New 
                      York State as the community spouse minimum monthly maintenance 
                      needs allowances, which is also called the community spouse 
                      income allowance (CSIA). This CSIA in 2004 is $2,319 monthly 
                      with the expectation by Medicaid that 25% of any income 
                      in excess of this amount will be contributed toward the 
                      institutionalized spouse’s long-term care; the cost 
                      of any health insurance premiums is allowable as an offset 
                      to the monthly gross figure. As a result, a determination 
                      must be made as to whether a person’s income is derived 
                      from the fruits of labor (FOL) or the fruits of capital 
                      (FOC). The former includes pension income; the latter is 
                      earned from investments. FOL income cannot be separated 
                      from the individual and is counted as an available resource. 
                      In contrast, the transfer of the underlying capital (e.g., 
                      stocks or bank accounts) results in the associated FOC income 
                      being shifted to the new payee under the “name on 
                      the check” rule. This calculation will reflect the 
                      extent of income exposure to nursing home and Medicaid claims. 8. 
                      What look-back periods are applicable to the transfer of 
                      assets under Medicaid? When 
                      applying for Medicaid, outright transfers of assets for 
                      inadequate consideration to third parties within the look-back 
                      period of 36 months preceding the application will trigger 
                      an ineligibility period that begins in the month of the 
                      gift. The time period for Medicaid ineligibility (which 
                      can be more or even less than the look-back period of 36 
                      months) is calculated by dividing the average monthly cost 
                      of the regional nursing home care into the amount of the 
                      impermissible transfers that occurred during the look-back 
                      period. For 
                      example, if the monthly regional rate (MRR) for nursing 
                      homes is $5,000 and a $500,000 outright gift occurs during 
                      the 36 months before the Medicaid application, the look-back 
                      is triggered and the ineligibility period for Medicaid is 
                      100 months from the date of transfer (actual 2004 MRRs range 
                      from $9,296 in Long Island to $5,842 in Central New York). 
                      Once this financial snapshot has been taken, assets or transfers 
                      by the community spouse are not considered; resource eligibility 
                      occurs only at the time of application. This would permit, 
                      for example, the sale of the principal residence after Medicaid 
                      qualification, if necessary. The 
                      rules regarding Medicaid and asset transfers (including 
                      spousal impoverishment) do not apply to home health care. 
                      Consequently, transfers can be made immediately prior to 
                      applying for this care, which can provide, if physician 
                      ordered, up to 28 hours per week (and in certain situations 
                      more) as long as the homebound individual is receiving designated 
                      therapy.  9. 
                      What type of trusts can protect family assets? The 
                      creator of a trust can retain the income and life use of 
                      assets contributed to an irrevocable living trust (ILT). 
                      Assets transferred to an ILT are subject to a 60-month look-back 
                      rule under Medicaid. Because of the retained life interest 
                      under IRC section 2036, the trust property will receive 
                      a stepped-up income tax basis upon the death of the creator. The 
                      60-month look-back period applies to assets transferred 
                      to and from any type of trust. An individual with a revocable 
                      grantor trust should first transfer assets from this entity 
                      to her name before making gifts in order to have the shorter 
                      36-month rule apply. With respect to trust disbursements 
                      of income or principal, any creditor “steps in the 
                      shoes” of a beneficiary (i.e., to the extent that 
                      this individual is entitled to receive any benefits, so 
                      would the creditor). The Exhibit 
                      summarizes when income and principal from a trust can be 
                      considered as an available resource for Medicaid. This chart 
                      reflects that the look-back rules are not applicable to 
                      testamentary trusts, although a provision should be included 
                      that no benefits are payable to any beneficiary who otherwise 
                      would qualify for governmental benefits. 10. 
                      What strategies are available for an individual with a “foot 
                      in the door” at a nursing home?While planning should occur years before entering a nursing 
                      home, such individuals do have some options with respect 
                      to available assets (i.e., those exceeding the CSRA and 
                      applicable exemptions; see Question 7):
 
                       
                        The “rule of halves” (or “half a loaf” 
                        strategy) allows an individual to transfer approximately 
                        one-half of available assets above the CSRA (see Question 
                        7) to a third party while using the other half (along 
                        with any income earned during the period) to privately 
                        pay for nursing home care. For example, consider an individual 
                        with $100,000 of available assets about to be confined 
                        to a nursing home in a locale where the MRR is $5,000. 
                        Prior to entering, he transfers $50,000 to family members, 
                        which renders him ineligible (see Question 8) for 10 months, 
                        during which period he privately pays the nursing home 
                        using the retained $50,000 (with eligibility for Medicaid 
                        in month 11). 
                        An alternative to the “rule of halves” should 
                        be considered when available assets are, for example, 
                        in excess of approximately $216,000 for a married couple 
                        in Central New York; the actual amount depends on the 
                        cumulative 36-month MRR (see Question 8). This would be 
                        the retention of assets (along with the income generated 
                        from these during the ensuing 36-month period) sufficient 
                        to privately pay the nursing home over the next three 
                        years. The balance of the assets could be immediately 
                        transferred outright to the children. Structured properly, 
                        there may be tax benefits to the payor-child of the nursing 
                        home costs for the institutionalized parent: a dependency 
                        exemption and a medical expense itemized deduction. The 
                        latter can be obtained provided that the medical nature 
                        can be substantiated by a doctor’s statement, even 
                        if the dependency exemption is unavailable because the 
                        parent had 2003 gross income in excess of $3,050. This 
                        strategy of gifting all assets (except those being used 
                        to privately pay over the 36-month period) results in 
                        none of the transferred property being counted as available 
                        resources if the Medicaid application is made in the thirty-seventh 
                        month following the last transfer. The 60-month look-back 
                        period would apply to transfers to an ILT. An individual 
                        desiring to have an ILT should consider having it established 
                        by a third party, such as an adult child, who has been 
                        previously gifted the property. This reduces the look-back 
                        period by from 60 months to 36 months, although this two-step 
                        transfer also has double–gift tax implications. 
                        Nonexempt assets under Medicaid can be converted to exempt 
                        assets, such as the community spouse buying a larger personal 
                        residence or adding capital improvements. 
                        An immediate annuity that is irrevocable and nonassignable, 
                        having no cash or surrender value (i.e., permitting no 
                        withdrawals of principal) can be purchased. The annuity 
                        contract should provide a monthly income for a period 
                        no longer than the actuarial life expectancy of the annuitant-owner. 
                        In the event the annuitant dies before the end of the 
                        annuity payout period, the policy’s successor beneficiary 
                        would receive the remaining installments. This strategy 
                        can convert a nonexempt excess asset into a revenue stream 
                        that is subject to the more liberal income rules of what 
                        the community spouse can retain under Medicaid. An annuity 
                        with a term exceeding the annuitant’s life expectancy 
                        may beconsidered a transfer affecting Medicaid eligibility.
 
                        Liquid resources should be used to pay off consumer debts 
                        and prepay for burial plots and funeral expenses (including 
                        a family crypt). 
                        Children can be compensated for documented household and 
                        care services as long as the amount is reasonable. An 
                        independent estimate should be obtained before determining 
                        the amount of remuneration, and the family should have 
                        a written agreement with the family members providing 
                        care. 
                        All joint and individual assets that are in the name of 
                        the institutionalized spouse should be transferred to 
                        the community spouse (after which asset protection planning 
                        should be immediately undertaken for the latter individual). 
                        In New York, one can pursue a fair hearing (800-342-3334) 
                        under Medicaid (because of “undue hardship”) 
                        after an initial determination of ineligibility by a Social 
                        Services caseworker. A hearing can address the retention 
                        of assets in excess of the CSRA that are needed to generate 
                        the minimum amount allowable under the CSIA. Similarly, 
                        a spousal refusal of contribution may be successful in 
                        certain circumstances, such as a second marriage in which 
                        assets and income have remained separate between the spouses. These 
                      strategies should be evaluated on a local basis because 
                      their validity will depend upon the latest interpretation. 
                      Reform proposals currently being considered in New York 
                      State would change the look-back period for outright gifts 
                      from 36 to 60 months and calculate this timeframe from entry 
                      into the nursing home (as opposed to when the Medicaid application 
                      is subsequently submitted). 11. 
                      What options exist for long-term care insurance (LTCI)? Several 
                      states, including New York, offer an LTCI partnership option 
                      from the Robert Woods Johnson Foundation that involves three 
                      parties: the insured, the state, and the insurance company. With 
                      an LTCI partnership policy in New York, the insured is required 
                      to purchase a contract having a minimum benefit period of 
                      three years. Upon entering a nursing home, the insurance 
                      company covers expenses pursuant to the contract’s 
                      limitations. If the insured is still in the nursing home 
                      after three years, the state does not require any forfeiture 
                      of family assets, although 25% of income in excess of the 
                      2004 monthly CSIA ($2,319) would be expected as a contribution. 
                      If the individual is single, only $50 per month can be retained. A nonpartnership, 
                      or regular, LTCI policy provides the stated benefit for 
                      the period purchased. Nursing home expenditures incurred 
                      when there is a shortfall or the benefit period expires 
                      will have a required contribution (see Question 7). 12. 
                      What are the relevant considerations when reviewing a LTCI 
                      policy? Besides 
                      the company’s rating, the cost of the policy must 
                      be weighed against the following typical features: 
                       
                        Daily nursing home benefit (compared to the rate in the 
                        individual’s locale) 
                        Number of years over which benefits are payable or the 
                        maximum total benefits 
                        Percentage of the daily benefit that may be used toward 
                        home health care 
                        Initial waiting or elimination period before eligibility 
                        for benefits 
                        Specific coverage for Alzheimer’s and related diseases 
                        Inflation adjustments to the daily benefit (simple or 
                        compound interest calculation) 
                        Discounts for joint spousal policies 
                        Waiver of premium feature. Given 
                      the probabilities of eventual long-term illness among the 
                      elderly, LTCI should be considered by everyone except those 
                      on either extreme of the economic scale (after taking into 
                      consideration the potential asset and income exposure in 
                      the event of one or both spouses being institutionalized). 13. 
                      What elder-planning issues exist with respect to IRAs? An 
                      IRA (along with any pension plan) of a community spouse 
                      is an exempt asset not requiring liquidation toward the 
                      costs of the institutionalized spouse; however, the amount 
                      exempted counts toward the CSRA and, because the account 
                      must be in a periodic pay status in order to qualify for 
                      this exemption, the income will be factored into the calculation 
                      of the CSIA. Retaining 
                      the account owner’s name on the IRA after death in 
                      order to create an “inherited IRA” (stretch 
                      IRA) should be considered. Unlike a surviving spouse, a 
                      nonspouse IRA beneficiary does not qualify for a rollover. 
                      Consequently, the account title for a child beneficiary 
                      needs to reference the deceased IRA owner such as “X 
                      Financial Institution as Custodian for Y, deceased for the 
                      benefit of Z, beneficiary.” This will allow for maximum 
                      deferral, if desired, because annual withdrawals will be 
                      based on the beneficiary’s life expectancy using the 
                      applicable divisor in the uniform tables from the regulations 
                      under IRC section 401(a)(9). Upon this individual’s 
                      death, the deferral can be continued by designating a successor 
                      recipient of the IRA who retains the aforementioned account 
                      titling using the applicable divisor in each successive 
                      year as the deceased beneficiary would have used. An 
                      IRA that has several beneficiaries can be divided into separate 
                      accounts for each individual either during the owner’s 
                      lifetime or by December 31 of the year following death. 
                      This will result in the tax deferral of the payouts based 
                      on each recipient’s life expectancy. Similarly, in 
                      lieu of having one trust with multiple beneficiaries of 
                      various ages, separate trusts qualifying the respective 
                      recipient as a designated beneficiary should be used so 
                      that each individual can defer his allocable share of the 
                      decedent’s IRA over his own life expectancy (instead 
                      of being required to use the oldest recipient’s age). There 
                      must be verification that the withdrawal of an individual’s 
                      Required Minimum Distribution has occurred, particularly 
                      when the individual has a terminal illness. 14. 
                      What are the tax traps in the gifting of assets to third 
                      parties? For 
                      the transfer of an asset, such as an IRA or annuity with 
                      built-in gain that will be recognized upon transfer, the 
                      income tax implications must be reviewed. In every situation 
                      (including lifetime transfers of property to irrevocable 
                      trust and charities), the issue of “liability over 
                      basis” should be reviewed. If the property transferred 
                      has a mortgage with a principal balance in excess of its 
                      adjusted tax basis (ATB), the transfer will result in a 
                      deemed sale to the extent of the difference. Despite 
                      the desire of elder individuals to undertake outright transfers 
                      to their children, transferring property that will result 
                      in a deemed sale requires additional consideration. These 
                      assets (such as appreciating stock) are best retained or 
                      given to charity; assets having a nominal difference between 
                      the FMV and ATB (e.g., cash) are preferred for lifetime 
                      transfers to family members. Appreciated assets that are 
                      retained for subsequent distribution through an estate are 
                      entitled, under current laws, to a stepped-up income tax 
                      basis. The 
                      transfer of a principal residence to children will result 
                      in the resident parents losing the IRC section 121 gain 
                      exclusion and applicable property tax exemptions (such as 
                      New York’s STAR Program). 15. 
                      What problems are associated with having all of a family’s 
                      assets titled jointly by a husband and wife? Having 
                      all of the assets titled jointly between spouses (sometimes 
                      known as the “poor man’s will”) is sometimes 
                      acceptable for smaller estates, but this co-ownership arrangement 
                      does not address circumstances such as the simultaneous 
                      death of a husband and wife. For 
                      individuals potentially facing an eventual estate tax burden, 
                      joint titling does not take advantage of the unified credit 
                      in the estate of the first spouse to die (besides providing 
                      no asset protection to the surviving spouse). In addition, 
                      when established between spouses involved in a second marriage, 
                      these arrangements result in the surviving spouse having 
                      full control of asset disposition at death, which may not 
                      be the intention of both parties while alive. Circumstances 
                      such as these dictate establishing and funding a testamentary 
                      trust, as discussed in Question 4. 16. 
                      How often should the beneficiary designations of nonprobate 
                      assets be reviewed? The 
                      beneficiary designations of all nonprobate assets should 
                      be periodically reviewed in order to update the designations 
                      and evaluate the need for the use of a testamentary trust 
                      for protecting assets. This is particularly appropriate 
                      after the death of the primary beneficiary or following 
                      a divorce. Nonprobate assets include IRAs, life insurance, 
                      annuities, and pension plans for which both the primary 
                      and contingent beneficiaries should be checked for the following 
                      reasons: 
                       
                        The possibility that children could receive outright distributions 
                        that would be a windfall in their minds or that of a student 
                        financial aid department. 
                        The surviving spouse may need asset protection because 
                        of the possibility of subsequent institutionalization 
                        in a nursing home. 
                        Preserving assets for the children of an earlier marriage. 
                        Subjecting a nonprobate asset to probate because the estate 
                        is the contingent beneficiary by default when no secondary 
                        recipient has been designated. 
                        The estate plan may reflect an overqualification for the 
                        marital deduction if the spouse is named as the beneficiary 
                        of the nonprobate assets to the exclusion of using the 
                        unified credit. This premortem determination is preferable 
                        to subsequently using a postmortem disclaimer.  17. 
                      Why should disclaimers be factored into elder-planning recommendations? A qualified 
                      disclaimer or renunciation filed within nine months of an 
                      individual’s death is a refusal to receive assets 
                      left under an LWT or an RLT, as if the disclaiming beneficiary 
                      had predeceased the decedent. This can be a total or partial 
                      election and, to the extent elected, is not deemed a transfer 
                      for tax purposes by the disclaiming party. This individual 
                      is usually the surviving spouse, with the assets then directed 
                      to the next generation of the family in order to prevent 
                      the unified credit from being underused. Alternatively, 
                      the recipient could be a testamentary trust (of which the 
                      spouse is a beneficiary) contained within the language of 
                      an LWT or an RLT, such as a UCT. This document could be 
                      drafted to be a “disclaimer trust,” to take 
                      advantage of the increasing unified credit over the decade 
                      and uncertainty of the estate tax laws after that time. 
                      The UCT, as a testamentary trust, can also protect the assets 
                      that are funded within it from creditors, such as a nursing 
                      home. In 
                      addition to being used for property subject to probate, 
                      a disclaimer can be filed against nonprobate assets, including 
                      real estate held as joint tenants or life insurance proceeds; 
                      assets that would have been received under intestacy (i.e., 
                      in the absence of the decedent leaving a will) can also 
                      be disclaimed. It should be noted, however, that a disclaimer 
                      by a surviving spouse could be deemed an impermissible transfer 
                      if this individual submits an application for Medicaid within 
                      36 months of the renunciation. Similarly, a spouse receiving 
                      Medicaid benefits may be required to file a spousal right 
                      of election against the estate of the deceased spouse whose 
                      testamentary plan directs all of the assets to the children. 18. 
                      What elder-planning considerations are applicable to life 
                      insurance? Life 
                      insurance can be used as a capital-shifting device as long 
                      as underwriting standards do not make the cost prohibitive. 
                      For example, when a taxpayer is receiving taxable distributions 
                      from an IRA, a portion of the withdrawals could be put toward 
                      life insurance premiums (such as for a second-to-die contract) 
                      owned by a third party or an ILT. The result is that the 
                      proceeds, when received, are not taxable for income or estate 
                      purposes and act as a kind of wealth replacement device 
                      (for the taxes incurred by the estate attributable to the 
                      IRA). This strategy is also applicable to distributions 
                      from any other tax-deferred account, such as an annuity 
                      or a 401(k) plan, in light of the substantial dilution in 
                      value due to eventual taxes. The result, with certain substantial 
                      account accumulations, is that only 25 cents of every IRA 
                      dollar would remain for the nonspousal beneficiaries after 
                      the payment of the associated estate and income taxes. For 
                      example, a widower who is over age 70As will be obligated 
                      to commence required minimum distributions (RMD) from his 
                      IRA. If these RMD proceeds are not needed for daily cash 
                      flow, these annual distributions, after taxes, could be 
                      applied toward premiums for a life insurance policy (owned 
                      by an ILT or his adult children) with guaranteed level premiums 
                      until death. For 
                      a widower or widow, the ownership of an insurance policy 
                      should follow the beneficiary designation (or be in the 
                      name of an ILT if there is a need for the proceeds to be 
                      held in trust because of the recipient’s age or marital 
                      situation). This will remove the death benefit from the 
                      taxable estate of the decedent. If this is not accomplished 
                      when the policy is applied for and issued, any subsequent 
                      transfer is subject to the “in contemplation of death” 
                      rule, which results in the inclusion of the death benefit 
                      in the taxable estate during the three years following the 
                      change of ownership. Even 
                      when a spouse is the beneficiary of an insurance policy, 
                      a life insurance trust should be considered, subject to 
                      the three-year contemplation of death rule. This is a form 
                      of ILT in order to “carve out” the face value 
                      from any estate taxation while not using any of the unified 
                      credit. In addition, the ILT can control the disposition 
                      of the proceeds following the death of the insured. A determination 
                      should be made as to whether or not an IRC section 1035 
                      rollover is appropriate. A tax-free exchange of one whole 
                      life insurance policy for another (or one annuity for another) 
                      may be beneficial if the product is producing a low rate 
                      of return. Alternatively, an older universal life insurance 
                      (ULI) policy may be imploding as a result of unrealistic 
                      interest-rate assumptions made at the time the policy was 
                      issued. Last, an IRC section 1035 rollover of a policy’s 
                      accumulated cash values to a different policy could, where 
                      the need might now exist, provide additional insurance protection 
                      with a higher face value as a result of a lower allocation 
                      to the investment portion of the policy. In 
                      a distressed financial situation involving an individual 
                      whose life expectancy is less than 15 years (due to age 
                      or illness), a predeath appraisal of the contract might 
                      be warranted to determine if a sale by the policy-owner 
                      or insured is appropriate. The premortem life settlement 
                      proceeds will not be taxed to the extent of the owner’s 
                      cost basis (i.e., accumulated premiums paid to date); there 
                      would be ordinary income to the extent of the difference 
                      between the cost basis and the cash surrender value. For 
                      example, if a term life policy having a face value of $500,000 
                      is sold for $300,000 and $50,000 in premiums has been paid 
                      to date, the first $50,000 would be tax-free and $250,000 
                      would be taxed as capital gains. This strategy would be 
                      appropriate only in unique circumstances, because the transaction 
                      converts what would have been a nontaxable event at the 
                      time of death to a taxable event in the present. 19. 
                      Why is a family limited partnership beneficial? A family 
                      limited partnership (FLP) is the only type of legal entity 
                      in which individuals can hold a superminority interest (e.g., 
                      the elder parents as general partners with a 2% interest) 
                      while having supermajority control (98% interest held by 
                      the children) over the limited partners. This entity can 
                      be useful in certain situations: 
                       
                        It can reduce the value of the estate through the use 
                        of valuation discounts as a result of the principle that 
                        the sum of the FLP interests is less than the value of 
                        the underlying assets held by the entity because of a 
                        lack of control, marketability, and liquidity of the ownership 
                        units. As a result, the Medicaid ineligibility period 
                        (per the calculation in Question 8) may be reduced by 
                        discounting this entity’s underlying assets. 
                        Where there are asset protection concerns of the younger 
                        generation due to potential divorce or lawsuits, any creditor 
                        would be required to obtain a charging order in order 
                        to obtain benefits from the attachment of the limited 
                        partner’s interest. Property that is retitled to 
                        the FLP will also have its accompanying income and other 
                        distributions controlled by the general partners, the 
                        parents. 
                        When out-of-state real property is held by the FLP, the 
                        FLP may eliminate future probate costs (and possible nonresident 
                        estate taxation) because the real estate will be converted 
                        to intangible personal property. Cash 
                        flow emanating from the underlying assets (and the accompanying 
                        income tax burden) can be shifted to the younger generation. Taxpayers 
                      should be aware of the IRS’ negative stance on FLPs, 
                      as demonstrated by its decision in the recent case Strangi 
                      v. IRS (TC-Memo 2003-145). (Additional information 
                      regarding the use of FLPs can be found “Twenty Questions 
                      on Selection of a Legal Entity,” The CPA Journal, 
                      August 1999, and “Twenty Questions on Protecting Business 
                      and Family Assets,” The CPA Journal, February 
                      2000.) 20. 
                      What strategies can be considered nearly universal in elder 
                      planning? A life 
                      estate arrangement for a personal residence is preferable 
                      to an outright transfer or bargain sale to family members. 
                      The elder parents retain the lifetime use of the property 
                      and the children receive the remainder interest. The use 
                      of a life estate generally preserves the availability of 
                      the existing real property tax exemptions and a portion 
                      of the principal residence gain exclusion under IRC section 
                      121. The life estate strategy also currently provides a 
                      stepped-up income tax basis of the residence to the remaindermen 
                      at the death of the life tenants. This strategy prevents 
                      any portion of the remainder interest from being factored 
                      into Medicaid consideration after the 36-month look-back 
                      period has elapsed. Parents 
                      who anticipate family battles regarding disposition of personal 
                      property with sentimental value should draft a letter of 
                      instruction to the attorney, the executor, or the successor 
                      trustee of an RLT, that names the recipients of specific 
                      property. The 
                      LWT or RLT of an elder client’s parents should be 
                      reviewed when an anticipated inheritance must be factored 
                      into the estate plan by determining whether these assets 
                      should be subsequently partially or totally disclaimed. 
                      Alternatively, the parents’ documents can be revised 
                      to provide the benefits in trust in a sprinkling format 
                      for their children or grandchildren (after reviewing any 
                      generation-skipping tax implications) in order to protect 
                      these family assets from creditors or estate taxation. A qualified 
                      terminable interest property trust (QTIP) should be used 
                      when the assets of the decedent are placed into a testamentary 
                      trust for the benefit of a surviving (second) spouse while 
                      preserving the underlying principal for the children. Besides 
                      providing mandatory life income (or use of the QTIP trust’s 
                      assets), an optional provision can be included for the distribution 
                      of principal at the trustee’s discretion under an 
                      ascertainable standard (the health, education, support, 
                      and maintenance of the beneficiary). An important consideration 
                      is the choice of the QTIP trustee in order to avoid conflicts 
                      between the surviving spouse and the stepchildren. Using 
                      an independent and professional trustee, either as the sole 
                      fiduciary or in the role of a third co-trustee in addition 
                      to one from each family, may be necessary. Also, a spousal 
                      waiver of the right of election should be executed at the 
                      time the LWT or RLT is signed. Addressing 
                      the valuation and method of payment for the family business 
                      prior to the death of the parents is extremely important, 
                      especially when there are other children not involved in 
                      the enterprise. Consideration 
                      should be given to using an IRC section 1031 exchange or 
                      a CRT to increase the cash flow generated from the real 
                      estate portion of the taxpayer’s investment portfolio 
                      (see “Twenty Questions About Deferred Realty Exchanges 
                      Under IRC Section 1031,” The CPA Journal, 
                      May 2003). Alternatively, any C corporation (facing significant 
                      gain from the asset sale of its underlying business, real 
                      estate, or marketable securities such as in the case of 
                      a personal holding company) could use a “hybrid bailout” 
                      strategy. This involves an asset sale to a third-party buyer 
                      and a subsequently executed stock purchase agreement with 
                      a second corporate entity (such as one in the asset recovery 
                      business having substantial accumulated losses) seeking 
                      to buy a corporation at a premium that has gain to be recognized. Because 
                      some retirees are undertaking a more active role in managing 
                      their investments, there may be an interest in converting 
                      an IRA to a self-directed account that would be permitted 
                      to buy and sell (under its tax-free umbrella) such nontraditional 
                      holdings as private mortgages and investment real estate. For 
                      nonresident taxpayers retaining realty in New York, consideration 
                      should be given to using an entity (other than a C corporation) 
                      as the titleholder for the real estate in order to determine 
                      whether potential income and estate tax savings are available. 
                      This conversion results in the real estate being treated 
                      as intangible personal property (i.e., the associated ownership 
                      interest in the entity) for the nonresident. This distinction 
                      is important because the real property will be deemed located 
                      in the state where the real estate is located, while intangible 
                      personal property is treated as being located in the state 
                      in which the owner is a resident. The 
                      5% capital gain rate can be utilized by any family member 
                      whose ordinary income tax bracket does not exceed 15% (i.e., 
                      2003 taxable income under $28,400 for single filers, $56,800 
                      for joint filers). Consequently, consideration could be 
                      given to gifting an asset (or partial interest) to a child 
                      or grandchild over age 13 (after taking into consideration 
                      student financial aid implications). Second, for every $2 
                      of earned income in excess of $11,640, Social Security recipients 
                      under age 65 will see their 2004 benefits reduced by $1. 
                      Last, Social Security recipients of any age should be aware 
                      of the income level at which the percentage of benefits 
                      included in taxable income increases from 50% to 85%: $34,000 
                      for single taxpayers and $44,000 for joint filers in 2003. Realize 
                      that as elderly individuals advance in age, they become 
                      more susceptible to con artists, particularly those representing 
                      charities. An annual publication from the New York State 
                      Attorney General’s Office (www.oag.state.ny.us) 
                      titled “Pennies for Charities” outlines the 
                      portion of every dollar being directed to charitable organizations 
                      in New York State. Additional information concerning many 
                      charities is available online at www.guidestar.org. While 
                      the federal estate tax burden is being reduced over the 
                      decade, taxpayers in states such as New York must be mindful 
                      of the potential for state taxes being assessed for estates 
                      over $1 million as a result of the recent change to the 
                      state death tax credit under IRC section 2011. For example, 
                      in 2004 and 2005, for a taxable estate of $1,500,000 there 
                      would be no federal estate taxes but a New York State assessment 
                      of $64,400. Besides 
                      the execution of a durable Power of Attorney, one should 
                      also consider adding language to a separate Health Care 
                      Proxy that would allow the health care agent to receive 
                      private medical information that might otherwise be unavailable 
                      under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability 
                      Act (HIPAA).  Peter 
                    A. Karl III, JD, CPA, is a partner with the law firm 
                    of Paravati, Karl, Green & DeBella in Utica, N.Y., and 
                    a professor of law and taxation at the State University of 
                    New York—Institute of Technology (Utica-Rome). He is 
                    also the author of www.1031exchangetax.com.
 
 |