Trusts and Estates Wills and Probate Tax Saving Strategies Medicaid

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

Money is always at the top (or near it) of lists describing issues that most commonly bring stress into our lives. It’s cliche to say that “money is the root of all evil,” but its obvious that dealing with financial issues is a common concern for families of all shapes, sizes, and even income levels. There is so much different advice out there about what you should be doing or could be doing as it relates to money matters that it is hard to distinguish between the useful and the fluff.

One such story posted in Yahoo Finance this week offers a somewhat helpful distillation of seven basic concepts that can be used for those of all income levels and at different life stages. They are referred to as “paradigms” of financial health. The entire list is worth browsing, but a few of the items on the list include:

***If you are a couple with two incomes, you can pay for “essentials” with only one spouse’s income. Those essentials are things like the mortgage, insurance, child care , and similar items that cannot be cut easily. Essentially this is one way to check whether you may be living above your means. It is an easy shortcut to figure out if you can survive in the event of a lost job or other emergency.

One of the biggest names and personalities in recent New York City history passed away in early February: Ed Koch. Koch has a wide-ranging career, most notable for his three terms as New York City mayor. The mayor emeritus apparently died with healthy bank accounts, as a recent Forbes article suggests that his estate is valued at about $10 million. Apparently most of the wealth was accumulated after he left office in the late 1980s. A high-profile name, Koch made money giving speeches, writing books, appearing and the radio and television.

As usually happens after a celebrity passing, many have asked how Koch’s fortune might be distributed. Court documents recently filed in the matter shed light on how it all might shake out–offering yet another example of the need for community members to be vigilant about their affairs to protect against large tax obligations.

According to reports, Koch left most of his fortune to various relatives along with some charities. He made specific cash distinctions to certain relatives (i.e $500,000 to sister and husband, $100,000 to sister in law, etc.), and left the “residuary estate” (everything remaining after specific gifts) to three nephews.

Sunshine is often the best medicine–particularly when it comes to worries about quality of care and value of public services. When community members are able to easily find out information which explains how much services cost, error rates, and similar details, then efficiency and overall quality will likely improve. That is the idea behind a new “Sunshine Week” project that is being unrolled this week by state officials. As discussed in Business Journal story, the initiative is spearheaded by Governor Cuomo’s office in order to raise awareness of the value of open government.

The project is actually a series of unveilings, all focused on providing data in easily understood formats for residents. Conveniently, the data is all available of a new website: The New York Open Data Portal.

The goal is comprehensive, intending to provide a single location for community members to obtain information about virtually every area of government services, from county-based crime statistics to recommended fishing and river locations. Some aspects of the project may be valuable to area senior citizens and their families. For example, you can view a spreadsheet that lists the specific expenditures from the Office of Aging based on fiscal year and county.

As with all aspects of estate planning, one of the biggest mistakes that families continue to make is assuming that they will “just know” how to handle certain issues when the time comes. That includes figuring out how to divide assets, handle long-term care, and otherwise make complex end-of-life decisions. There is no need to go through any complex legal planning, the thinking goes, because our family is different or our issues are not complex.

Countless feuds, legal battles, and prolonged disputes began with that mindset. The bottom line is that it is never smart to leave any of these issues to chance. The stress and emotion tied into the decisions can make mountains out of molehills and split up even the most tight-knit family. Planning ahead and leaving no room for doubt is not only to ensure that your own wishes are fulfilled but to spare family members the struggle of deciding on their own.

Personal Example

As most know, the March 1st “sequester” cut deadline came and went without much serious action by policymakers to avert the automatic cuts. This was not unexpected considering policymakers have been very far off on goals for a compromise and because the $85 billion in first year cuts will not necessarily take effect immediately. The real layoffs and consequences that might be felt by most community members will roll out slowly throughout the year, stalling the public outrage and pushing off the political pressure that might force an ultimate budget agreement.

It is important to clarify that while Medicaid cuts were not part of the sequester, potential changes to Medicaid are very much part of potential compromise that could be reached in the coming weeks and months. For that reason, it is important for all local families who rely in any way on New York Medicaid (or who expect to in the future) to understand how potential changes may alter their options.

Latest GOP Proposal

It is not easy for many local residents to understand all of the ins and out of the Medicaid program. While Medicaid is a critical tool that provides support for local seniors who need long-term care, it can be a whirlwind of stress, anxiety, and frustration when families attempt to navigate the administrative waters and understand what they need to do to join. Making matters worse is that fact that Medicaid qualification is based on income, and so most families are forced to “spend down” assets before receiving aid. Without proper planning, this means that many families are forced to shed most of their assets just to receive the extra care they need–loosing property and savings built up over a lifetime.

This situation seems particularly damaging for certain families, including those with one healthy spouse and the other in need of care. Fortunately, in those situations the option of “spousal refusal” exists. This essentially allows a healthy spouse to divest property from the other, such that the sick spouse qualifies for care without the healthier spouse losing most everything as well.

Eliminating the Refusal?

It is often argued that estate planning is necessary to prevent family feuding in the aftermath of a passing. Disagreements about “who gets what,” how to handle funeral issues, and other concerns are known to tear friends and family apart. Being explicit about one’s wishes ahead of time–and letting relatives know early on–is the ideal way to avoid surprises and present the best opportunity for disputes to be squelched.

But proper planning does more than prevent feuding after a passing; it can also prevent it before one’s death. That is because disagreements about caring for aging relatives is often a bone of contention. Arguments about who is going to make decisions on their behalf, what type of long-term care will be pursued, and similar concerns can cause ruined relationships just as much as any inheritance dispute. All of this makes it imperative for local community members to visit with an NY estate planning lawyer early on to ensure legal documentation is in place so that there is no uncertainty about how any of these issues are to be decided. Considering the prevalence of cognitive brain issues (i.e. Alzheimer’s and dementia), prudent planning requires these matters be handled as soon as possible.

Celebrity Example

We have frequently discussed the federal law known as the Defense of Marriage Act. Passed in 1996, the law essentially prevents the federal government from recognizing as married same-sex couples who are legally wed in individual states. Of course, New York allows gay couples the right to marry. Under state law, all couples, gay and straight alike, are treated the same. However, while in most cases the federal government defers to state law on legal marriages, that is not so for same-sex couples. To this day they are treated as legal strangers for federal purposes, creating a whole host of complex long-term planning, tax, and government support complications.

New York DOMA Challenge

Over the past few years a few legal challenges have been heard in federal courts arguing that DOMA violates federal constitutional principles. In virtually all of those cases the courts have ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, agreeing that parts of the law are unconstitutional. However, considering the magnitude of the issue, it was almost guaranteed that the decision would ultimately lie with the U.S. Supreme Court.

Many of the changes and new rules associated with health insurance as part of the “Affordable Care Act” (Obamacare) will only take effect over the next year or two. One of those new rules prohibits most health insurance providers from making premium pricing decisions based on one’s gender. However, those rules do not apply to companies that provide long-term care insurance.

Therefore it does not come as a huge surprise that the nation’s largest provider of such insurance–Genworth Financial–announced that they will soon being change rate plans to account for the fact that women are more likely to need paid long-term care. According to a Washington Post story, women seeking such insurance on their own will likely see anywhere from a twenty to forty percent increases in yearly long-term care insurance payments. Importantly, the change will only affect new policyholders, as current members should not be affected. Observers note that other long-term care insurance providers will likely follow suit.

The policy change was made, say the company, because of the fact that over ⅔ of all claims on the insurance are made by women. In order to stabilize prices, the company claims that the premium rates needed to better reflect the risk and ultimate need for long-term care. The increased claims by women are likely a product of the fact that they generally live longer and provide care to their own spouses. Men are far likelier to avoid having to make claims on the insurance because their health declines sooner and their spouse often provides care. Elderly women, however, often come to need support after their spouse has passed, and they do not have the luxury of receiving free care from a relative.

Last year federal legislation was passed affecting elder care issues. In particular, the new law eliminated a floundering attempt to create a national long-term care insurance program. At the same time, the law also called for the creation of a commission to study issues of senior care financing, delivery, and workforce needs. Known as the “Long-Term Care Commission,” the general idea was that the diverse Commission would investigate the issues, create policy proposals, and submit the ideas to Congress to spur possible legislation.

The Status Update

Unfortunately, as a recent Forbes story shares, the Commission is still in dock and there are serious doubts as to whether it will be able to achieve its mission at all. The first issue is that the slate of 15 people to sit on the panel have yet to be decided upon. Apparently the White House has yet to make its three choices, and nothing can be done until the roster is actually complete.

Contact Information