Trusts and Estates Wills and Probate Tax Saving Strategies Medicaid

Schedule an in-office, Zoom or phone consultation Here.

Yesterday marked the official federal holiday chosen to honor civil rights hero Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. It also happened to be Inauguration Day for President Barack Obama. In a unique twist, the President chose to be sworn in on the Bible that was read by Dr. King on the day that he gave his “I Have a Dream” speech in Washington D.C. It is a stirring reminder of the connections that echo throughout history.

As we often point out, in the world of estate planning and elder law, history is also a great guide to understanding what should or should not be done to help prepare yourself and your family for whatever the future might hold. Dr. King himself was taken far too soon, dying in 1968 at the age of thirty nine as a result of an assassin’s bullet. Because he passed away so suddenly–and relatively young–he had not conducted much estate planning at all.

The King Estate

The fiscal cliff crisis dominated the last month of 2012. Even though an agreement was reached on New Years Day, the compromise is far from the end of partisan political battles and confusion. Observers are already making predictions about the possible implications of the looming “debt ceiling” fight between the White House and certain members of the Republican caucus which must be resolved in the next month or two. The outcome may have significant impacts on the nation’s long-term stability and the performance of the financial sector.

It is easy to see how New Yorkers thinking about their long-term care planning and retirement might be uneasy about the state of affairs. While some things are simply out of your hands, it is critical not to forget that there are smart ways to plan for retirement regardless of the flux in national politics. A recent Forbes article is worth a look, as it explores five of the best way to protect one’s retirement from the federal government’s “fiscal follies.”

Plan Ahead

The Daily Jeffersonian published a story recently on the bizarre details of a case involving a lottery winner’s apparent murder and the subsequent estate battle. Like the plot of a Hollywood crime drama, the tale includes a mysterious death, a series of hidden family feuds, and considerable money on the line. While quite dramatic, it is a vivid example of the difference that common sense estate planning can make in the aftermath of a death.

Money & Murder

The case centers of the estate of Urooj Khan who immigrated from India in 1989 and established several successful businesses. In 2010 he hit a jackpot and won a state lottery; his actual take-home from the winnings were about $425,000. According to reports, he planned on using the windfall to pay off his mortgage, expand his business, and donate a sizeable sum to a local children’s hospital.

Long-term elder care is one of those tasks that most only think seriously about until it is needed–either for yourself or a loved one. However, as a growing chorus of advocates are sharing, if you wait that long it is probably too late to ensure that the available care is of the best quality and does not break the bank.

To help get your mind thinking about these issues now, the Albany Times Union recently published a report from ElderBranch which shares some basic information about how New York’s elder care system matches up with others across the country. Feel free to view the entire article here.

As many know, New York spends a significant sum of public funds on various programs, including Medicaid, in order to ensure residents have access to the quality services they need, including in old age. How do those significant payments (more than any other state in the country) pay off?

One aspect of the “compromise bill” passed last week to avert the fiscal cliff may eventually have impact on planning for New York long-term care costs. While it does not have any immediate effects for local residents, it is important to discuss as it could lead to proposals down the road to tackle the problem of paying for long-term care. Specifically, a portion of the compromise bill did two things: formally ended the CLASS Act and also created a federal commission to study the issue of financing senior care. Both components are worth discussing more fully.

First, the CLASS Act was a bill passed as part of the comprehensive healthcare law of 2010. The idea was that the measure would create a voluntary, national long-term care insurance program. Our elder law attorneys frequently share information on the merits of long-term care insurance, as it is often the premier way for local residents to ensure they receive high-quality senior care in whatever manner is best for them with minimal disruption of their lives. The major downside, of course, is the costs, which can be prohibitive to many.

Those same cost concerns seem to have been the main problem with the CLASS Act as well. Even though the law was passed in 2010, it had essentially already been abandoned by even its supporters before this formal axing via the fiscal cliff compromise bill. That is mostly because actuaries had determined the program to be far too expensive for most residents to participate anyway.

Timing is of critical importance with estate planning matters. Obviously, a plan must be in place early enough to be of use before one falls ill or suffers from mental issues. For example, creating a will or trust may be impossible after one suffers a stroke or succumbs to serious effects of Alzheimers. This is why we continue to encourage residents to make plans early and consistently update them.

Time also factors into matters after a death. Many beneficiaries may face hardship if they are forced to wait months (or even years) to have an estate settled. One of the key benefits of an inheritance plan is to minimize the risk of a long delay between the actual passing on of assets, often focused on avoiding probate and preventing feuding.

Celebrity Example

Money is always tight. No matter where you fall on the income and asset ladder, no one wants to spend money unnecessarily, including on services that are not sure they need. However, sometimes that reluctance can lead to mistakes which actually cost money down the road. Estate planning–or the lack of it–is the poster child for this situation. Some community members are tempted to try half-measures and “do it yourself” planning instead of actually visiting with a legal professional and ensuring comprehensive security for the long-term.

One of the most common methods of this homemade planning is the use of joint tenancies to transfer property. While a joint tenancy may make sense in certain situations, when used improperly, serious adverse and unintended consequences might result. It is critical to be aware of those risk factors. An article published earlier this month by the Gazette provides a helpful primer of some of those pitfalls.

Act Cautiously

Only a few days remain in the year, and most financial activity for 2012 has come to a close. However, the end of year action has already brought one of the most active seasons ever. Financial advisors, estate planning attorneys, and others have all seen community members of all different income brackets seek out help understanding how possible legal changes in the new year might affect their own financial health and long-term prospects.

A Forbes story last week explored one of the main reasons for confusion and the seeking out of help: the “give now or pay later” problem. This is an issue that mostly affects those with significant assets who may be affected by gift and estate tax changes. As has been documented exhaustively, Congress is considered what to do with the gift and estate tax. Over the past ten years the tax rate has steadily fallen and the exemption level has risen. In 2010, the estate tax was eliminated altogether. However, what will happen in the new year remains to be seen.

Many different options are on the table–from a permanent elimination of tax (unlikely) to a return to pre-2001 rates. A table from the Tax Policy Center (viewed here) offers a helpful snapshot of the options and how many people would be affected by each. One comparison offers the range of possibilities. If the current rate continues, about 3,800 estates will be affected next year. Those estates would bring in about $12 billion in taxes. Conversely, if the 2001 rates returned then 47,000 estates would be affected and over 300% more tax revenue would be generated.

Earlier this week we shared information on the new guide from ElderCare Locator. The brochure (available here) provides helpful tips for all New York families to ensure theft from seniors is stopped. As noted, the problem is widespread, affecting as many as one in ten elderly community members. Unfortunately, there is no easy way to tackle the problem. But it is also worthwhile to be reminded of the basics.

Prevention

Education is the key to stopping senior financial exploitation in its tracks. If all elderly community members are trained in the most common scams and keep a close eye on all financial details, then the chance of theft going unnoticed is drastically reduced. Beyond that, the best way to prevent abuse is by use of third-party support. For example, the AARP provides a wealth of information on various “money managers” who help seniors with day-to-day financial transactions. They may be particularly helpful for those who have just lost a partner. Often one partner in a relationship will handle more of the financial details, if that partner passes away, then the other is often placed in a difficult financial situation without the experience to keep things in order. To learn more about money managers take a look at the AARP website on the subject: www.aarpmmp.org

The political wrangling to avoid the so-called “fiscal cliff” continued this week. Many different issues are all tied up in the negotiations, including income tax rates, defense spending, entitlement spending, and control of the debt limit. However, various reports suggest that the both sides in the political battle–primarily the Obama White House and U.S. House Republican leaders–are now trying to work out some agreement on estate taxes.

Still Wide Disagreement

Most discussion of tax issues and the fiscal cliff affecting upper income Americans revolved around the income tax. There is disagreement about whether current income tax rates for those in the highest bracket should increase slightly or stay the same. Both sides publicly believe that current rate should be extended for middle tax brackets. Because of the focus on income taxes, real negotiation of estate taxes has been pushed to the side. That appears to be changing.

Contact Information